View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
|
omoikane
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 494
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:23 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | after Good Smile had sued the two former vice presidents along with Grecia Diaz in 2020 for competing with the company's merchandise business while employed there. |
This clause makes no sense if you came into the story without what the GSC suit was originally, but it makes sense if you already know. Given ANN didn't report on the first claim, I think this needs to be rewritten into an article or at least a paragraph, or link out to Polygon.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Blanchimont
Joined: 25 Feb 2012
Posts: 3564
Location: Finland
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:25 pm
|
|
|
Suit doesn't seem to have much merit based on the details, just comes across as an angry temper tantrum, as one user on Kotaku put it...
And all their figurines are based on commercial game/anime and alike media characters, so can't see where the 'illegality' would exist...
|
Back to top |
|
|
FallenDomino
Joined: 09 Aug 2016
Posts: 89
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:36 pm
|
|
|
Shoutout to Kotaku for overgeneralizing to the point of not giving a correct definition of "lolicon"
|
Back to top |
|
|
ryanvamp
Joined: 08 May 2007
Posts: 420
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:51 pm
|
|
|
I don't know how long it's going to take, but USA will indeed manage to ruin anime (and its merchandise) for the whole world sooner or later. Some companies WILL censor themselves for western sensibilities or downright refuse to commercialize some licenses overseas. That's my take away.
And this is coming from someone who does not consume the type of anime/figures these former employees are complaining about; but I've seen enough from current american culture to realize that outrage & censorship rarely extends to "just the actually questionable stuff".
|
Back to top |
|
|
animefan57892
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 4:53 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | Nendoroid and Figma toy company Good Smile
Good Smile is the company that develops the popular Nendoroid and Figma figure lines. |
Scale figures are also a big portion of GSC's business. Don't know why ANN/kotaku frame GSC as 'Nendoroid and Figma toy' company.
Quote: | suing Good Smile for distributing "potentially obscene sexually explicit anime products and merchandise" of underage characters, ..., and funding controversial website 4chan |
Whatever you opinion of 4chan is, funding a controversial website is not a crime, whether their allegation is true or not. Puting the claim in a lawsuit is ridiculous.
If those two former employees are so distressed by "sexually explicit underage" fictional characters, they should've looked at GSC's figure production history before joining the company.
I just can't take their allegations seriously.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tempest
I Run this place.
ANN Publisher
Joined: 29 Dec 2001
Posts: 10456
Location: Do not message me for support.
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:05 pm
|
|
|
FallenDomino wrote: | Shoutout to Kotaku for overgeneralizing to the point of not giving a correct definition of "lolicon" |
I often find that complaints about the definition of lolicon often come from readers who don't themselves understand what lolicon is, so I was fully expecting to disagree with you, but yeah, Kotaku's description of lolicon is a little inaccurate.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Greboruri
Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Posts: 387
Location: QBN, NSW, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:48 pm
|
|
|
It amuses me that most sites reporting on this are fine to report the lawsuit's claims unchallenged, while Good Smile's law suit against Brand and Kim barely gets a mention nor is it discussed in any great length. I also note while you asked Good Smile to comment, you didn't do the same for Brand and Kim's lawsuit against them.
|
Back to top |
|
|
tfwnoymir
Joined: 03 Dec 2017
Posts: 325
Location: Hungary
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:01 pm
|
|
|
Reading about it, it sounds like sour grapes for me. They've been fired for stealing company secrets and embezzlement and they're trying to cover their stuff up with nonsense counter-claims like this. It's one thing lolicon (and shotacon) is not illegal in California as far as I know (as we're talking about fictional characters' fictional ages), but I also don't know how funding a website - no matter what is my opinion about them (let's just say it's not positive) - is illegal. The only things that might have merit are these parts:
Quote: | engaging in false designation of corporate officers as independent contractors, tax evasion, improper licensing practices |
but they need to prove that too.
Anyway, creating a moral panic around this is probably a waste of time, but I'm sure there are some folks who will take the bait willingly.
|
Back to top |
|
|
09jcg
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 536
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:55 pm
|
|
|
ryanvamp wrote: | I don't know how long it's going to take, but USA will indeed manage to ruin anime (and its merchandise) for the whole world sooner or later. Some companies WILL censor themselves for western sensibilities or downright refuse to commercialize some licenses overseas. That's my take away.
And this is coming from someone who does not consume the type of anime/figures these former employees are complaining about; but I've seen enough from current american culture to realize that outrage & censorship rarely extends to "just the actually questionable stuff". |
I think it's less likely to come from the US and more likely from China. The thing to remember about lawsuits is that they're a dime a dozen, any one can file one, and they rarely go places. What's happening in the Chinese market though is legit state sponsored censorship.
|
Back to top |
|
|
FallenDomino
Joined: 09 Aug 2016
Posts: 89
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 6:58 pm
|
|
|
Tempest wrote: |
FallenDomino wrote: | Shoutout to Kotaku for overgeneralizing to the point of not giving a correct definition of "lolicon" |
I often find that complaints about the definition of lolicon often come from readers who don't themselves understand what lolicon is, so I was fully expecting to disagree with you, but yeah, Kotaku's description of lolicon is a little inaccurate. |
It's very inaccurate since a) the term didn't even originate in culture and b) using "underage characters" in place of "literal children" directs vitriol towards people who don't fit the description in the slightest.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Touma55
Joined: 22 May 2021
Posts: 242
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:04 pm
|
|
|
ryanvamp wrote: | I don't know how long it's going to take, but USA will indeed manage to ruin anime (and its merchandise) for the whole world sooner or later. Some companies WILL censor themselves for western sensibilities or downright refuse to commercialize some licenses overseas. That's my take away.
And this is coming from someone who does not consume the type of anime/figures these former employees are complaining about; but I've seen enough from current american culture to realize that outrage & censorship rarely extends to "just the actually questionable stuff". |
Japan will be fine, but outside Japan? Yeah I could see it happening sadly. I just hope people don't become that moronic.
|
Back to top |
|
|
AJ (LordNikon)
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 515
Location: Kyoto
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:11 pm
|
|
|
Brand and Kim's counter claim has to be one of stupidest things I have read in thirty plus years in journalism!
Quote: | Brand and Kim expressed their disgust, objection, and/or refusal to participate in or be associated with what they viewed as illegal, objectionable or immoral activities.... Brand and Kim had met with their superior Enna Hozumi in summer 2019 to discuss the issue of sexually explicit merchandise of underage anime characters, stating them to be unethical, offensive, and potentially illegal |
This is like getting a job at Hustler, then suing Larry Flint six months later because they object to pornography! Did they have any idea what anime culture is? This is just revenge complaint for their own wrongdoing.
Quote: | engaging in false designation of corporate officers as independent contractors, tax evasion, improper licensing practices, and funding controversial website 4chan. |
Illegal activity isn't hard to prove, did they go to FTC or IRS before their termination? Doubtful. I think Japanese companies would have been on them if "improper licensing practices" happened.
BTW "funding controversial website 4chan" is not illegal last time I check.
|
Back to top |
|
|
GNPixie
Joined: 25 Jul 2018
Posts: 320
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 7:43 pm
|
|
|
All the articles read like they're pissed they got caught and are trying to pitch everything at the dartboard to see what even hits. GSC has been around for god knows how long and have always done what they've done. You had to know you were getting into before you joined.
AJ (LordNikon) wrote: | BTW "funding controversial website 4chan" is not illegal last time I check. |
And probably not true either. iirc, 4chan's always been mostly been run out of pocket (and bleeds money) It never had GSC ads(like, outright GSC ads) but did have J-List for years until Hiro took over iirc. So unless GSC had shares in J List, I don't see where that'd come from.
|
Back to top |
|
|
juaifan
Joined: 20 Mar 2021
Posts: 145
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:20 pm
|
|
|
AJ (LordNikon) wrote: | BTW "funding controversial website 4chan" is not illegal last time I check. |
It's not but this whole lawsuit sounds like a frivolous attempt to take Good Smile down with these former employees and is nothing more than a hit piece. They're going for all the triggers in American culture like associating the company with lolicon and 4chan, none of which is actually illegal but a bunch of news sites will jump on and try to drum up bad PR for the company like every time the BBC puts out a scathing article condemning Japan for sexualizing minors in anime, or some CNN/Fox News segment on 4chan that blames it for a shooting. Nothing ever comes out of those, but I guess this is their Hail Mary play.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rob19ny
Joined: 13 Jun 2020
Posts: 1976
|
Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:07 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | suing Good Smile for distributing "potentially obscene sexually explicit anime products and merchandise" of underage characters |
I would like to see the products in question first because it just sounds like they are wrongly including anime in order to try and make a case for themselves.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|