Messages

did death appear in any of the maegazines

Yes, people die in most editions, but thats not important right now.

that is a top notch cover.

I love the Red Seas as it stands but that cover immediately suggests a different 'tone' to the story.

Brilliant Cover.

Now what about a big  phone books of all the Red Seas tharg? Its not going to sell in 98page editions and its all black and white.

YOU KNOWS IT MAKES SENSES.

actually just had a flick thru and that wasn't the cover for the first collection of hh - it was a close up of his eyes and haircut. Am pretty sure I've seen it on an edition sometime tho.

yes thats the same cover that the first collected edition (shorty after its appearance in the early 700 progs) had.

its utter indulgent rank.

Isnt the obvious answer Sooner or Later?

I'd happily take over the running of barney and was already compiling a list of a few errors / omissions (very very few) for wake while ploughing through all the progs.

I do beleive wake stopped being sent complimentary copies of the GNs a short while before barney stopped updating (maybe I'm mistaken - recall something about this on the 2000ADReview site) which would make the EXCELLENT reprint feature of barney a pain to continue for the lad.

However if its dead its dead and - much like the likewise lamented 2000ADReview - a great gap on the legacy of 2000AD.

Much agree with the voices saying that the offical sites offering (whilst a doozy to look at) isn't a match for the power and functionality of ole barney.

three cheers for wake....

I read thru alot of this stuff (the next 3-4 casefiles) about 2 years back - its really not half as bad as being made out. Only Jonny Kiss REALLY grated. Bit more love for the casefiles people!

lol.


I can't beleive they are going to get me to buy Raptur again. Its like being molested twice in the summer.

Next time you have that lovely GN guy on answering questions do (gently) prod him as to why the hell they did that.

Isn't Dredd a trademark? If not, then on a site with a url ending "2000ad+gifts" I think it would be shooty-in to show that it was creating sufficient confusion among customers to establish infringement of "Judge Dredd".

The site even uses 2000ad as a meta-tag.

Heck, I found it because I was looking for a Judge Dredd mousepad - how much more do you need?

hadn't seen the URL.

Your friendly legal consul would tell you to go after that rather than the Dredd as its clearly passing-off (a misrepresentation offence) under trading standards.

As to the is Dredd a TM or has Copyright arisen in it - TMs you apply for - that they are granted doesn't mean they will be upheld when either (1) challenged or (2) used to litigate on. 

TMs need several criteria including distinctiveness and originality. Judge Dredd would more than likely give rise to one BUT it would be feasible to see that the extent of the TM (where it can be applied) is limited to causes involving comics or visual media / lit. Should Judge Dread (the DJ) have been Judge Dredd in name he may well have been able to argue that the scope of the TM dosn't extend to that - especially if he is not 'borrowing' any other '2000ad' iconography or given that his genre has more than one artist called 'Judge'.

You need to keep the extent of the TM distinct as an idea from misrep / confusion - ie a fish n chip shop called Judge Dredd would be less likely to be allowed as its more obviously misrep (at the very least misrepresenting that they have a licence) although again things like the use of '2000AD's' fonts etc on the shop front would add weight.

Dredd without the judge is yet more difficult to see as a stand alone TM (leaving aside the issue of the name of the site). Obviously someone releasing a comic called 'Son of Dredd' about a future dystopia could have problems even if they avoided 'judge' or references to MC1 etc because the TM may well extend to characters called Dredd in future / law enforcement roles. But would it extend to say a Marvel mutant called Dredd? Maybe not. Am sure people who read more comics than I can come up with characters with the same surname. Must be another Savage out there.

In the opposite direction 'Judge Dredd & the Mutants of Mega City One' is quite clearly enforceable because its greater specificity makes it less likely to be anything other than an unauthorised taking.Of course the problem there is that TMs need registered and rebellion undoubtably dont have a guy doing that for every possible TM.

Hence we have Copyright..

Copyright arises automatically in text but the copyright (protection) of individual words is very problematic - hence the use of Trademarks and the other tools of Intellectual Property (design right, patents) to cover them.

A simple phrase is unlikely ever to give rise to copyright ("i went for a walk") unless it arises and is used as part of a wider work (this reply). Whereas a piece of Wagner prose would clearly generate it time after time. From that you can see why single words are hard to copyright but then why names, in turn, are slightly less hard provided they meet the criteria for copyright including 'originality'.

Does the word Dredd have originality? Anyone with any knowledge of US constitutional law will tell you of Dredd-Scott a very famous case allowing slavery to continue in the C19th. Judge Dredd would have more of a claim to copyright than simple Dredd but again since dredd isn't an entirely fictitious surname (unlike say Judge Quadradbam-SiSpencer ) there may well be an argument as to whether it IS sufficiently original. Again a judge (in our world) would much rather hear arguments on fraudulent passing-off (the misrepresentation) than look into the providence of the copyright. Especially if he's a member of the Dredd family of East Grimsby who has finally fought years of jokes to become a member of the bench. 

thats al long answer to say - its complex but yeah that URL means undoubtably they would get shot down but not necessarily for either (C) or TM in 'Dredd'. 


Humm.. I could write a very nice seminar problem question on all that.

Your going to have a hard time alleging that the word Dredd is a (C) infringement when no design rights (the font) or graphic image is being used. Judge Dredd would be a delimited trademark, Dredd without an illusion to the comic or even comics per say (ie COMICS ICONS #1: DREDD) very unlikely to be one at all (regardless of registering, you would have a hard time advocating to an adjudicator that the term Dredd covers all contexts).

Am off to make mi 'ALPHA' tshirts up now....

news?

i have a dredd bolland poster than appeared in Computer & Video Games way back when.

That always struck me as random tat.

And a Will Simpson Tyranny Rex / Rogue Trooper print done for a small comic shop John McCrea used to own way back when simpson was doing The War Machine.


Marvellous it is too.

Thank the lord it wasn't the mongrol doll. There would be CARNAGE n SMUSHING going on.


(yeah - toy - looks cool in those pics people posted but I'd rather have another 2000ad GN)

Great Established Artists
Great New Artists

Great Established Writers
Great New Writers

Great Established Characters
Great New Characters

and... the fact that 2000AD finally mastered colour (although I still much prefer B&W)

TBH a shocking absence of 2000AD talent from that list most noticeably the unparalleled sublime talents of chris blythe. Also greatly saddened to see a lack of the brilliant GNs.

If I may be so bold as to suggest the much under-read Comics Journal for a vote partially due to its long-standing services to 2000AD - its iconic issue 300 contained a marvelous 20page discussion between Gibbons and Quietly largely revolving around 2000AD, plus there was that rather lovely O'Neil cover of late featuring all his thrll=powered finest.