unfitfinlay

That was the beginning of the end for my Kevin Smith fandom. He'd made it incredibly clear that he wanted to do proper, grown up movies - it was even acknowledged in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back- but Jersey Girl was a massive failure so he went straight backwards. You can tell his heart isn't in Clerks 2 at all. I liked Jersey Girl too. It was nowhere near as bad as folk made out. The actual end of my fandom was when I started following him on Twitter. I'm sure he's still a decent guy in real life but he comes across terribly on there. His rants about critics, in particular, were just embarrassing. Especially now when he's quite happy to slag Cop Out off himself.

Pretty much. It's basically unlimited access to thousands of their comics, dating back to the old 50s horror comics, with the newest releases on a delay. There IS a limit on how much you can have downloaded at one time but I've never really noticed it. It's cheap too. I was paying around £6 to £8 a month depending on the exchange rate. They always seem to have offers when there's a movie or TV show out as well. I got an annual membership for £55 as part of their promotion for Spider-Verse. That probably paid for itself this week alone. It's interesting reading the old stuff back. In one of the earliest Fantastic Four comics, they had them break the fourth wall to go "The Invisible Girl isn't rubbish! We're not killing her off! Stop writing in about it!" I really want them to upload the crazy Captain America propaganda stuff from the 50s but I can't imagine that they ever will.

I've been working my way through old X-Men comics on Marvel Unlimited. Professor Xavier is just the fucking worst character. He'll disappear for ages, leaving the team to their own devices, and then he'll come back just to fuck shit up. He's basically a McMahon, making decisions on a whim, and expecting everyone else to adapt. I'm just past the point where he's added Rogue to the team, despite everyone else's objections, despite not knowing if he can trust her and despite her not even ASKING to join. It's a pure "I'm Professor Xavier DAMMIT!" power play. He's the worst thing in an otherwise brilliant series. Marvel Unlimited is so great though. It's a real shame DC doesn't have anything similar.

No, I get that. My point is that it's very hard to argue that WWE "created" the Cody Rhodes" name in any way, shape or form. It's not like they were sitting in a booking meeting trying to work out who should play the character of Dusty Rhodes' son, and then went "Oh shit! We've got his actual son in developmental! What a coincidence!". They took the son of Dusty Rhodes and brought him in as the son of Dusty Rhodes. It's similar to Warrior's lawsuit. He won because he could prove that the Ultimate Warrior character wasn't an original creation. At the very least, I'd argue that he's got a strong fair use claim considering his Dad created the name and is the sole reason that it has any value. That's very easily proven. Off the subject slightly, I remember reading a story in an old Observer about a wrestler who sent in tapes of him performing as "The Repo Man". The WWF liked the gimmick, but hated the guy so trademarked it and sent him a cease and desist. Poor guy must've been gutted when Darsow started using it. He does, in theory, but he'd almost certainly need to fight WWE in court, which would cost a fortune and a shit load of time and effort. Maybe the Khan's will take on the case if AEW gets off the ground, though I doubt it.

Not if WWE wanted to stop them, no. It's like the Dudleys registering trademarks for stuff like "Brother Ray Deadly". It's too close to their WWE gimmick. Of course then you get shit like "U-Gene" or "Goldustin" which WWE could've stopped but obviously couldn't be arsed with.. If you are claiming ownership of something then you need to have something specific to claim ownership of, and it needs to be unique enough it doesn't infringe on anyone else's intellectual property. You can't just take two names that you don't own, stick them together and then claim it as your own. You also don't immediately own something just because you say you do. I could apply to trademark "Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson" right now. I'm fairly confident that I would lose any subsequent lawsuits however. You get the right to use your Dad's fictional surname if your Dad created it, never sold it to anybody, and no one else in your family has any objection to it. WWE isn't claiming to own the Rhodes name after all - Brandi is using it. They aren't claiming to own "Cody" either. They are only claiming the magic combination of "Cody Rhodes", which is ludicrous. Especially since, if what Carbomb said is true, he's been using that name legally since he was 17. I don't know if it's been mentioned before on here but Dustin registered both "Dustin Rhodes" and "The Natural, Dustin Rhodes" in December. I'm not going to go all "HE'S JUMPING TO AEW!" but it does seem like really odd timing.

Nope. They could argue that "Ben Rhodes" was a unique character. Same as if Charlotte left, they could stop her being "Charlotte" or "Charlotte Flair" but they couldn't (or shouldn't) be able to stop her being "Ashley Flair". I realise you mean Owens. And, no, that's not my logic at all. What I am saying is that there are no unique characteristics of the "Cody Rhodes" character that WWE can claim to have developed or own. All they did was stick the surname his Dad established for decades, and which they acknowledge that they don't own and which will always be associated with him, onto his legitimate first name. By your logic, I could register "Aurora-Rose McMahon-Helmsley" for use in wrestling right now and prevent her from ever using that name in WWE. After all, it's not her real name either. Oh, it does happen. It shouldn't though, and I gave a couple of examples of the claims being overturned when challenged in court, though I'll admit Honky might well be making his one up. WWE's a very different place than in those days as well, which is my point. Cody would win if it went to court, but it wouldn't be worth the money it would take to actually get there. They'd bleed him dry. Ultimately, though, if you create something, it belongs to you. Trademarking and copyrighting it helps PROVE its yours but it still belongs to you, and there are other ways of proving your ownership.Like MLW registering "War Games". They can own the trademark but WWE owns decades worth of footage that predates MLW as a Promotion, much less their use of the match. There's no way a Judge would look at that and rule that MLW's trademark was legit.

Moolah takes this I think, depending on how much value you give the Women's Title. She first won it in 1956 and last held it in 1999. 43 year difference.

Nah. They just have more money. It's not like we're talking about Stardust or "Dashing" here. The "Cody Rhodes" character is literally Cody Runnels, using the surname that his Dad used for decades. WWE can claim what they like but the IP over the Rhodes name clearly belongs to Dusty and his family. Trademarks aren't a race. You can't just register someone else's stuff and then demand they stop using it. That's how Ultimate Warrior and Honky Tonk Man won their respective lawsuits against WWE. Because the characters were blatantly just Dingo Warrior and Honky Tonk Wayne, with slightly different names. Well, yes. That's my point. They claimed Hall talking in a Hispanic accent was a unique part of the Razor Ramon character, and that him doing it in WCW was a violation. And, sure, it wasn't enough on it's own, but that doesn't change the fact that they claimed it was theirs in a legal document. Same with Nash's goatee. If Mark Calloway walks out with a gong sounding then, fine. If they do full the lights out bit, followed by haunting music and generally try and make it look like "THE UNDERTAKER IS HERE!!!!" then WWE could absolutely send them a cease and desist. The gong would just be a small part of it, like Hall's accent. Bruce Prichard's spoken about this on Something to Wrestling With before. Vince will occasionally say "fuck it, let them use it" depending on how he's feeling when a subject comes up. I would hope to fuck that Vince still has a good enough relationship with Undertaker that he'd refuse to file a lawsuit against him, no matter what he's done. But, aye, like you said, I can't imagine 'Taker actually trying to appear on the show in character.

Pretty much. I mean, WWE in no way own the "WASSSUP" shite but they were still able to stop the Dudleys from using it in TNA. Of course, a lot depends on whether the other guy can afford to fight any lawsuits. WWE's at the stage where they can claim whatever they like, because very few people can stand up to them financially. That's why Cody doesn't have a surname, despite having a pretty clear "fair use" argument. I'd be very surprised if WWE actually went after Undertaker for anything though. I mean, if anyone gets a pass then surely it's 'Taker? They once claimed IP over Scott Hall talking in a Hispanic accent.