AA case begins

[Qui-Gonzalez]

This really is one big 'Brian love in' and 'AA bashing session'. Very sycophantic reading.

Still think he won and Lucas lost. I say good luck to him.

You can call it sycophantic reading all you like, but the facts remain that he was still there, you weren't and I wasn't. Hell, I think of our members, he was the only one that was part of the production.

You say "Lucas lost" like this is the end of the road. Sorry, it isn't. You know that it isn't. Ainsworth deserves a bashing for what he tried to do. Go read up on the dockets before you comment about these things. The guy is a FRAUD.

 

[nailuj]

You can call it sycophantic reading all you like, but the facts remain that he was still there, you weren't and I wasn't. Hell, I think of our members, he was the only one that was part of the production.

You say "Lucas lost" like this is the end of the road. Sorry, it isn't. You know that it isn't. Ainsworth deserves a bashing for what he tried to do. Go read up on the dockets before you comment about these things. The guy is a FRAUD.

Like I earlier in this thread, I did read them all before posting. I'm not completely uneducated on this matter. He still won. GL has taken a few shots at others and I am sure we all thought the outcome of this case was really clear cut given the different sizes of each of the guns being pointed at each other (howitzer at a pea shooter).

Still think good luck to him.

 

[KevVader]

This thread has turned very interesting...great stuff Brian!

I just don't get how AA could think that he could pull this off without anyone noticing and/or caring...he was advertising in Empire magazine for crying out loud.

 

[exoray]

I'm not completely uneducated on this matter. He still won.

Well then you should have no problem clearly explaining to me what claim he made to the court that was awarded?

And just for a primer, the whole UK copyright ownership issue, wasn't awarded to either side, it was declared expired by the court...

He also didn't "win" the right to keep producing the armor, that is still open to debate, he is just reading the ruling through his tinted spectacles...

And he was found liable for violations of US law...

So what did he win?

 

[nailuj]

Well then you should have no problem clearly explaining to me what claim he made to the court that was awarded?

And just for a primer, the whole UK copyright ownership issue, wasn't awarded to either side, it was declared expired by the court...

He also didn't "win" the right to keep producing the armor, that is still open to debate, he is just reading the ruling through his tinted spectacles...

And he was found liable for violations of US law...

So what did he win?

Hey exoray, I've seen you throw your legal arguements back and forth on many threads with some authority and wouldn't think to question your background on this, but...

Can he keep producing? Yes

Does he have to stop selling? No but with caveats

Thats a win to me

 

[exoray]

Hey exoray, I've seen you throw your legal arguements back and forth on many threads with some authority and wouldn't think to question your background on this, but...

Can he keep producing? Yes

Does he have to stop selling? No but with caveats

Thats a win to me

You do realize that Judge left the case open and even hinted for it to be continued and clarified in more detail?

A reprieve yes, but a win no... There is a difference as the story isn't over...

280. I therefore conclude as follows:

(i) The claim of the claimants based on an infringement of US copyright succeeds.
(ii) All other claims of the claimants fail.
(iii) The counterclaim of Mr Ainsworth fails.

His ability to keep producing and selling is the opinion of his law firm, no where did the judge rule as such...

 

[firebladejedi]

Is Andrew Ainsworth any relation to Gordon Brown or did they both study at the same school of ethics?

 

[nailuj]

A reprieve yes, but a win no... There is a difference as the story isn't over...[/quote]

So whats your guess on where it goes from here?

 

[nailuj]

A reprieve yes, but a win no... There is a difference as the story isn't over...

So whats your guess on where it goes from here?[/quote]

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

I will offer up the same guess that Exoray probably will. LFL will appeal this decision. They will appeal it until they get a win, and they have the pockets to do so. Ainsworth does not.

 

[defstartrooper]

I will offer up the same guess that Exoray probably will. LFL will appeal this decision. They will appeal it until they get a win, and they have the pockets to do so. Ainsworth does not.

They can't just keep appealing till they win the judge will just keep throwing the case out unless they can show that SDS have violated UK copyright laws.
They have to bring something new to the table they can't just keep presenting the same case.
I think what's happening here is people are letting personal feelings and issues cloud what the legal case is actually about, the court won't.

Is Ainsworth a liar ? Yes

Is Ainsworth out of order claiming other peoples work as his own ? Yes

Does that have anything to do with breaching the copyright laws in the UK ? no not according to the judgement made.

 

[exoray]

They can't just keep appealing till they win the judge will just keep throwing the case out unless they can show that SDS have violated UK copyright laws.

They can simply appeal the judge's ruling that it was industrial design, from that point lots can happen... Or they can continue with further hearing that the judge was clear needed to happen...

They have to bring something new to the table they can't just keep presenting the same case.

A lot was left out of this case, Trademark for one thing, as well as other items, focus was very limited in the UK trial as clearly outlined by the judge...

Does that have anything to do with breaching the copyright laws in the UK ? no not according to the judgement made.

This isn't exactly a closed and shut case... This can very well also be continued or even started new under EU reciprocatory treaties and conventions over and above the UK courts...

If LFL wants to continue to press the issue they have lots and lots of channels available to them...

A simple appeal is not the only option open but it will probably be the start if they continue to press the issue...

The consequences of this determination will have to be followed through in a further hearing. The parties (sensibly) did not seek to take the US proceedings any further. Questions of relief will have to be decided at a further hearing, for which directions can be given if necessary. I am not aware of any other outstanding issues that arise in relation to the US claims; if there are then again it might be appropriate to have further argument on them. The parties acted sensibly in this action by limiting issues where they could. If apparently cutting back on them in their submissions leaves some potential loose ends, I will consider how those loose ends are to be dealt with.

That leaves A LOT to be ruled upon at a further date, including but not limited to his rights to sell said objects in the UK and the rest of the world that do honor and recognize US copyright ownership to whatever degree...

It also left damages and other reliefs wide open for ruling...

The UK case focused pretty much solely on UK ownership of the copyright, and enforcement of said ownership, if determined, in the UK...

There were and are still many issued and sorts that were not fully sorted out...

 

[drusselmeyer]

What the **** does this prove? :rolleyes

It was the Mcquarrie pre production paintings that were used to SELL Star Wars to the studios.

Here is the Stormtrooper basic final design...

Um, I thought you guys were SW fans! That is not a Stormtrooper! In that context; that is clearly Darth Vader!!

It proves someone isn't paying attention!

Besides, Who the heck would want to be a Stormtrooper anyway?!! Let me see: They can't shoot straight, they get killed by the millions and they ultimately lose in the end. Oh yes, sign me up for a set! :lol

 

[Mr. No Stripes]

They can't shoot straight, they get killed by the millions and they ultimately lose in the end. Oh yes, sign me up for a set! :lol

I'm offended... stormtroopers can shoot straight... here is me shooting strait up... im a winner!

 

[drusselmeyer]

Jez, I'm sorry on this, but I will take the recollection of a fellow who was there over supposition any day of the week.

Not a good idea. AA is not alone in making incorrect claims after 30+ years.

In one instance; I was researching a project that had next to nothing for reference. I stumbled upon an interview with the original builder...but all of his info was wrong!

How do I know? Just like everyone here - careful observation. The entire story about how a certain brand of vehicle was obtained, modified and disposed of was completely unreliable. The few usable photos proved that the model, and even brand were different.

Here was the original guy that everyone recognized, telling a complete falsehood about one of his best known projects. Was he mistaken, confused, senile? It doesn't matter. What matters is; after 30+ years, he was wrong.

 

[drusselmeyer]

That's straight up? Another Ainsworth Shooting School graduate I see.

lol:lol

 

[defstartrooper]

They can simply appeal the judge's ruling that it was industrial design, from that point lots can happen... Or they can continue with further hearing that the judge was clear needed to happen...



A lot was left out of this case, Trademark for one thing, as well as other items, focus was very limited in the UK trial as clearly outlined by the judge...



This isn't exactly a closed and shut case... This can very well also be continued or even started new under EU reciprocatory treaties and conventions over and above the UK courts...

If LFL wants to continue to press the issue they have lots and lots of channels available to them...

A simple appeal is not the only option open but it will probably be the start if they continue to press the issue...



That leaves A LOT to be ruled upon at a further date, including but not limited to his rights to sell said objects in the UK and the rest of the world that do honor and recognize US copyright ownership to whatever degree...

It also left damages and other reliefs wide open for ruling...

The UK case focused pretty much solely on UK ownership of the copyright, and enforcement of said ownership, if determined, in the UK...

There were and are still many issued and sorts that were not fully sorted out...

Yeah that's pretty much what i said,almost everything you listed would be in effect be entirely new cases not just a matter of appealing the judgement in the hearing that's finished.
I never said LFL would quit or had no options i was just responding to Qui's post that LFL will just keep appealing till they get the win.

 

[SHalamar]

Um, I thought you guys were SW fans! That is not a Stormtrooper! In that context; that is clearly Darth Vader!!

It proves someone isn't paying attention!

Besides, Who the heck would want to be a Stormtrooper anyway?!! Let me see: They can't shoot straight, they get killed by the millions and they ultimately lose in the end. Oh yes, sign me up for a set! :lol

Actually, that IS an early Stormtrooper. When they had riot shields, and lightsabers. That was taken out later on.

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

Jez,

I don't know where you are getting these dates from. I have copies of all of Ainsworths statements that were frequently changed over the 18 month period of the preparation for the court case. He was then changing them again during the court case to suit the evidence that was being brought into court by the defense witnesses.

In the first statement he gave he says that Pemberton introduced him to John Mollo on 19th Feb 76. He started the work on 26th Feb 76 . He told many lies in this statement -eg that Pemberton asked him to design a plastic helmet for a school play but he didn't have to lie about the dates at this point until other factors were put in front of him.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the info over the time line.

Youre right about not trusting any of my dates from Ainsworth, since as you said his witness statements kept changing. I actually meant "Mollo met Pemberton" to discuss the helmets on 23rd Jan (and back to back Pemberton was discussing with Ainsworth since AA was effectively his fabricator).

However the key date I was referring to was that by 12th Jan there was a decision to outsource at the very least some of the helmet production/fabrication(at that time to Pemberton), and I'm going on the dates as per John Mollo's notes.

I think your dates re Liz sculpting the helmet are a little out. IMO it would have been left at Elstree by 1st Feb.

Cheers

Jez

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

Jez, I'm sorry on this, but I will take the recollection of a fellow who was there over supposition any day of the week.

I dont think my post disagreed with what Brian's said. My point was that they outsourced it as they knew they werent going to be ready on time using internal resource. Brian's already said that....

Even without the problems with the vac forming machine, as previously stated, there was so much else to be vac formed that outsourcing would have happened at some point in the production.

Cheers

Jez