Wolfshanze wrote:
dennisthebadger wrote:
seems really odd to me. If the whole "cyber bunny" concept was infringing on anything....
The cyber bunny from the game killerbunnies doens't seem to have much in common with the one from king of tokyo.
really weird..
The cyber bunny from the game killerbunnies doens't seem to have much in common with the one from king of tokyo.
really weird..
It's not weird at all... copyright infringement is copyright infringement. Yes, King of Tokyo has to change Cyberbunny because Killer Bunnies existed first, and they copyrighted the name "Cyberbunny". What the character in-game LOOKS like has nothing to do with the copyright infringement, "stealing" the name and/or the likeness is all that is required (either/or, not both).
Imagine if I made a game, sold a ton on Amazon, and one of the characters names in the game was "Mickey Mouse", but it looked nothing like Disney's Mickey Mouse... do you think Disney wouldn't come after me for copyright infringement?
It doesn't have to look like the original to bring a lawsuit... the name is enough... and that's what happened here... ergo, we now have Cyberkitten (which i'll bet you is now copyrighted).
Possibly a false analogy because the name "Mickey Mouse" is actually a name and not as generic as the description "cyber bunny".
Image there was a game that used a creature called "pink dragon" and they copyrighted it.... would nobody ever be able to name another creature "pink dragon"?