![Evidence Documents “issues and concerns” with Sega Laywers representing former Sonic comic writer Ken Penders in the ongoing legal dispute with Archie Comics have petitioned the judge in the case […]](http://www.tssznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ken_penders_header.jpg "Penders Counsel Asks Court to Ban Knuckles Archives #4 Sale, Related Material in Dispute")
Evidence Documents “issues and concerns” with Sega
Laywers representing former Sonic comic writer Ken Penders in the ongoing legal dispute with Archie Comics have petitioned the judge in the case to allow an injunction that would “prevent Archie Comic Publications, Inc. [….] from releasing, distributing and selling Knuckles Archives Volume 4 [….] and any other works which Mr. Penders created, which he is the copyright owner of, and which are the subject ofthe Case,” according to public records obtained by TSSZ this morning.
The move comes amid what appear to be broken down settlement talks we first told you about in December. Back then, terms of settlement appeared to have been agreed upon. That no longer looks to be the case, and with still legally valid copyrights in tow, Penders’s attorneys now want the court to halt any sales of materials in dispute. You may remember that we reported Diamond Comics at least temporarily halted distribution of Knuckles Archives #3 last year due to this dispute.
“Mr. Penders is compelled to move for relief, seeking to enjoin the release and distribution of the Knuckles Archive Vol.4 both online and in”real space” stores and wishes to also enjoin ACP from releasing, distributing or otherwise selling his work, which is the subject of this litigation,” the letter says in part. “A major concern of Mr. Penders is ACP’s continuing failure to properly credit Mr. Penders for his work. If the Knuckles Archives Vol.4 is released, Mr. Penders will suffer irreparable harm beyond financial consequences.”
Judge Richard Berman has given attorneys for Archie Comics until Tuesday at noon to respond. It does not appear a decision has been made as a result of this petition. Berman has also encouraged both parties “to continue to pursue settlement,” according to his endorsement.
Here’s the interesting part of the petition: Included as evidence and on the public record is an exchange between attorneys on both sides, which is usually subject to attorney-client privilege . It details Penders attorney Phil Daman asking Archie attorney Joshua Paul whether Penders “is pperly [sic] credited for his work which ACP is reprinting.” After a response from Paul, Daman asks “if the mediation is to focus on issues and concerns you [Archie] have re: SEGA or simply the schedule.”
Though it is not the first time we have seen the Sega name pop up among the proceedings–you may remember concerns about Sega renewing the Sonic licensing deal with Archie comics that has since been assuaged–it does play into some fan concerns that Sega is taking a more direct role overseeing the comic’s content in light of this litigation.
Should the injunction go through and be granted, the impact on sales and distribution for past Sonic comics, at least in the short term, would be profound. We will continue to monitor developments.
Loading ...
@Licht: At the same time, I don’t want to see Penders face bankruptcy.
@truebluesonicfan
This isn’t a personal vendetta, as, I’ve went and listed sources from my reasoning and conclusions based upon things that have been said by various users, and Ken Penders himself as you so adamantly speak up for.
However, the entirety of your argument is flawed as, if you’re going to dismiss the my the topic I bought up, there was nothing beyond the first sentence within your reply. Through your own sentence ending your first paragraph, “everything you’ve stated is ultimately irrelevant” as you’re not answering to the point of interest I’ve bought up. Also, much like user “BobR,” I’ll humor you. And much like I did to he, I’ll explain to you the folly of your argument.
Your second and third paragraphs are rather solid. There does need to have a correction made to the first sentence of your third.
“Mr. Penders is an easy target” is quite untrue due to the reason I’m under the impression you believe it. I do agree. If Archie Comic Publications is going to make money off his works, then legally as any artist would expect, he should be compensated for it. You aren’t the only person whom thinks that. This is as shown by various replies upon the board should you scroll upwards. The reason “Mr Penders is an easy target” is because he’s made no effort to seem apologetic for the collateral damage that’s clearly taken toll upon the comic in which he initially derived his success, and thus his fan base, for the characters and stories he’s produced. I’ve stated with my links above within my previous posts. Ian Flynn has addressed the issue as a neutral party in order to appease the fan base due to the changes to the comic regarding the results of the lawsuit.
If Ken truly had the respect for the fan base he’s attempting to sell this comic too, it isn’t going above what he’s legally allotted to say in making a simple post of “Please bear with me” upon his forum. Merely asking for support in his endeavors and appearing to appeal to those whom he is trying to make his target audience is a simple task that’s not infringing upon the vow of silence imposed onto him during this lengthy litigation process. He did no such thing, and yet continues to confidently advertise his soon to be created work as if it will have phenomenal success. However, nothing tangible has been produced to show for his boasting. Putting this together, the most logical conclusion most would derive of this is that he’s a delusion egotist that has no concern for the alienation of his own fan base, thus stunting the revenue he can only hope to bring in. All the while continuing to speak of how these same people are going to be the audience of his publication. That is nothing short of foolhardy, and that is what the fan base, those whom comment on this forum, and those who visit Ian’s forum frequently bring up.
In light of that, I will say that indeed, my topic does relevance to what Kenny is doing. As from the multitude of user responses across several boards, and what I’ve been able to give evidence to back my claims in the form of statements already said by Ken Penders himself, I’m clearly not the only one that sees this. I find it beneficial to you to take note of this before you make any rebuttals. Specifically because of your phrase of “not joining in a personal vendetta,” as per your own words, yet speaking of how you’re going to petition to Archie to take responsibility for their actions– essentially a personal vendetta conformed out of reaction to their own events. I’m going to kindly request you not undertake such hypocritical actions in your next reply to me. It lowers the validity of what you’re trying to get across to me, and essentially make you appear as a bigot to those whom are following along.
I’ve entertained your lack of addressing my own point by interjecting my own. If you’re going to post a reply to me, I’ll ask you look into the initial point I was trying to make and give objection towards it with evidence to support claiming why my conclusion is incorrect. This point, much like user “BobR” ignored, you did as well having given a tirade regarding your thoughts about Archie Comic Publications and the current actions of Ken Penders.
@Mr. Anonymous
I’m going to reply to your statements as they were posted. I wanted to reply earlier, however, the site seemed to have a problem moving to page three. Odd, but it just couldn’t be helped.
But is it smart to erasecharacters that many consider their favorites? They are favorites because of the characters, themselves, not because of the person that thought them up.
This is a difficult question to ask. As Archie Comics were the ones who started the lawsuit, it would make sense that they would want to cover themselves and not use anything of Kenny’s in order to not have to pay him rights for their use. Business wise, it’s smart. What it does to the fans, well…see the anger on this board from other readers.
At the same time, I don’t want to see Penders face bankruptcy.
I regret to inform you that I don’t share your sentiment. I’m sorry.
Had he made efforts to appease the fans he’s clearly angered instead of bulldozing ahead and damning all criticism regarding the backlash from it, which will also effect the sales of his product, then I would be able to give some empathy towards him. Seeing his personality from how he’s spoken on his forum, I, as many others in the fan base, can’t bring ourselves to do so.
@Licht
As Archie Comics were the ones who started the lawsuit, it would make sense that they would want to cover themselves and not use anything of Kenny’s in order to not have to pay him rights for their use. Business wise, it’s smart.
But removing the characters could also have a negative effect on sales, as well. Don’t get me wrong, though, I greatly enjoy the comics and I have for all 20 years they’ve been here. Which is why I hope they win this case and can bring the characters back. Especially Julie-su, who is my favorite of the female characters.
I do agree with you, on your reply to Ken and bankruptcy. You reap what you sow and Kenny boy will have to take what he brings on himself.
@Licht: Well, I mean, it’s not like he’s some sort of oafish, self-centered prick who only cares for himself and his finances.
Not that I care. Some what.
By the way, does anyone know what happened to sonicscanf.org? I can’t find the comics anymore.
@Trez
You wrote: “No one would care as much if Ken fought for royalties but no fan is happy with his plan to copyright and use those characters…” If that’s true, it doesn’t add up.
I read here that Mr. Penders did ask for royalties and Archie ignored the request. That’s how we got here in the first place.
By definition, royalties are sums paid by one party to another for the right to use an asset. To grant someone the right to use an asset, obviously you have to own the asset, in otherwords own the copyright.
Because Archie refused to acknowledge Mr. Penders and pay for reuse of his work from the beginning, we ended up with this mess.
Seems to me Mr. Penders filed to copyright his characters because Archie gave him no choice.
Regarding Mr. Penders using the characters himself, Archie seems willing to bury them, rather than pay the creators royalties for them. Mr. Penders seems to want to keep them alive, one way or the other, which is a heck of a lot more than Archie seems willing to do.
@Tempered
I agree. People should think and act for themselves. Unlike others, who seem to have a vested interest in whipping fans into a Ken Penders hating frenzy, I haven’t asked anyone to join me doing anything against anyone or anything.
To claim to only love the characters and not the writing that shaped them and gave them personality, well that’s just bizarre. It’s the stories that bring the characters to life, otherwise they are just drawings on a page. It only takes a quick look at the readership of the book during Penders’s tenure to see that they were popular then and they are popular now. I suppose people who feel they like the new stuff better, won’t care and simply won’t buy the Archives.
@truebluesonicfan
I agree that the storytelling gives them character. Though a lot, if not most, of the readers believe the characters truely came into light, when penders wasn’t the one writing the storylines for them.