This sets a very bad precedent, I understand both Aquaman, New Zealand and Wonder Woman, Uzbekistan are considering legal action too.
The only person this is good for is Robin. If the city wins, he's got a countersuit standing by to force the city to take him on as its ward.
You beat me to it--I was thinking of bringing this up.It really is a pretty funny situation.
Given that it's published in Variety, Seriously? Sounds like something from the Onion.This is just so mind boggling, that it can not be real.
Um...::looks at news report again and, with a heavy sigh, scraps plans for hot new superhero ANKARA! and scary supervillain "The Istan-Bull"::...crap.
Heh, before 1950 Batman was a little nothing village ... then they hit oil. First of all, Batman is the anglicization of the name, which has nothing to do with men dressed up like bats.Second, DC Creator made this in 1939 when Batman wouldn't have even been on a map available to most americans, as it was just a little village.Third, that the creator would have had to have named his creation after the town and not just have created the name. The creation of the character is fairly well documented though.Fourth, that the statute of limitations for such stupidity has long run out. Not to mention, that they would have not had working knowledge of the character before Dark Knight.Fifth, that some court would actually entertain such a claim.Sixth, that the WB / D.C. Comics also would want to lose their profits to a frivolous suit and be willing to entertain such future suits. Not to mention the loss of capital in a bad economy.
Post a Comment