1.) Dayraven asks: It seems a lot of fans are having more frequent issues w/ the QC of the MOTUC figuress they’ve received, with loose ankles and biceps swivels being the most frequent complaint. Is Mattel addressing these issues with the factory?
Yes, we constantly work with our vendors to improve these issues.
2.) Too-Man-E-Faces asks: Is it possible to print the CE certificate on MOTUC and other collectible items’ packages, as it was done with the MOTUC/DCUC crossover sets? Some European collectors have problems with customs saying that MOTUC figures are not fullfilling the safety requirements of the European Union. (Which they actually do. It’s only that the CE sign/certificate is missing, which in some cases results in customs not handing the items out to Matty’s customers.)
This is a great suggestion and we will do what we can to ensure our Mattycollector.com items can ship to as many countries as possible.
3.) RocketPunch asks: The Ghostbusters 2 Winston with Slimer Blower is missing the football pads-style chest armour, will this be corrected before release?
This is not a detail we are able to add for the initial release, but will look at making this improvement down the road!
4.) Damien asks: Are Superstars currently signed with WWE’s competitors still options for the Legends line; such as Razor Ramon, Double J, Diesel, or Mankind?
We do have access to their look when they were signed with the WWE and this would be great for our Legends line, but nothing to announce at this time.
5.) Zach asks: I know you’ve stated before that it would not reduce the cost of figures, but to reduce the environmental cost, would you ever consider reducing the large amount of packaging used on DCUC and MOTUC figures? Especially the two-packs? There is so much space in the packaging and this just seems so wasteful.
Many times pack outs like this are done to increase the value on-shelf. We are always very environmentally conscious and do our best to keep the pack outs dynamic while looking out for unnecessary packaging as well. Great suggestion!
to be honest, when can we as a fan community have a chat about the white mailer boxes for motuc? personally, i see them as wasteful, and though matty didn’t price hike us to get them, they HAVE to be costing me money… if i can get skeleswords of millenium heads back for losing the white mailer, i’m all for it.
i know the white mailer is to appeal to the MOCers, but i get warped cards even in the mailer, so it is REALLY helping them at all?
Pingback Ask Matty September 15th Edition « It'sAllTrue.Net
@dayraven: The white box should be optional and at an extra cost for those who want it.
THANKS, Poe for passing my CE certificate question along! Many people might be happy about that. Now Matty, let’s see some action.
Please.
Question 1 would, I think, be better phrased as “what is Mattel doing to address these issues,” though it would’ve gotten the stock “we’re always making it better” response anyway.
They won’t be releasing any TNA characters. That’s silly. They may have outfit rights, but they don’t have the rights to the people who played those characters. So unless you want Honky Tonk Man in Diesel’s outfit, you’re stuck with what you got.
I’m baffled at the idea that Mattel would re-release Slime Blower Winston at another time with improvements. Like, would people really buy Slime Blower Winston Version 2.0?
It’s like Hasbro constantly updating Snake Eyes or Darth Vader. It’s a $20 specialty figure that should be done right the first time.
That should say, it’s NOT like Hasbro updating Vader or Snake Eyes.
Yeah they dropped the ball on Winston. looks like getting a decent head cost too much. or maybe they spent all their tooling budget on the stack of books.
@Newt: I didn’t ask about TNA characters. I asked about WWE characters where the talent that ‘played’ the character is signed with TNA (or anyone else).
And I think the answer was a great one. We CAN get those guys. That’s a good thing. I’m happy with the answer. Thanks for posting my question, Poe!
@Damien: You obviously misunderstood their answer and how these things work. There is no way on Earth you are ever getting a Double J figure. Because Double J was played by JEFF JARRETT. His likeness is trademarked to him. Same for Nash as Diesel, and Foley as Mankind.
Because the person under those costumes was played by someone who is under contract to someone else, no you CAN’T get those guys.
The closest you could get is maybe Fake Diesel or something. But all WWE owns is the names and costumes. The figures couldn’t look like the actual person, without permission from that person. And anyone that’s under contract to TNA, will likely already be signed with Jakks.
@Newt: I think -you- might actually be misunderstanding the point. Luckily, Mattel seemed to get it. The issue is whether or not those characters are even an option. IF likeness issues are present, and IF, say Kevin Nash, were legally able to sign a deal for his likeness rights while working for TNA – would Mattel be able to pursue that.
Answer – yes. They have access to those gimmicks. Implying WWE hasn’t kept those separate and said ‘no, these guys work for a different company, so you can’t make them.’
Plus, Fake Diesel might not look too bad in figure form. Or Fake Razor Ramon, for that matter.
Mankind would be interesting because, through the mask, fairly little of his face is showing. Not sure how likeness rights work there, but they may even be able to make him if the details of the face behind the mask are .. inaccurate.. to Mick Foley.
Who knows.
Either way, I’m not a lawyer for a toy company. Neither are you, I would assume. So it’s just interesting to note that these characters -are- on the table. Glad to hear it, myself. Sorry if you felt like it was a waste of a question or anything.
Just to say, I think it means they could make those wrestlers but only in outfits they wore with WWE.
@Damien: Nah, doesn’t bother me. I see what you’re getting at now, but it’s pretty clear to me that ToyGuru didn’t run this by anyone in the WWE.
This would also completely buck the trend of anything WWE has ever done. Why would they make toys of people under the employ of their rival? It’d be like WWE still making Diesel shirts.
You don’t have to be a toy lawyer to realize that beyond that it’s pretty improbable to figure out a way to release those figures without the men who played the characters agreeing to it.
If Mattel made cloth clothes for the figures, it’d be a possibility, since, they could release Diesel’s tights. Which is why old characters attires and music often appear in WWE video games, but never anything that quite resembles the human who played the wrestler. That’s the extent of what WWE owns.
So long as your happy with the answer though man, good on you. But I’ll eat a Mattel WWE Double J figure if one comes out while he’s under contract to Jakks and TNA.
@Andrew Davis: Nope. No matter what TG says here. You can’t release figures of those wrestlers without consent of the person who played them. It’s like Playmates John Connor figure. They didn’t have the legal issues worked out with the likness of Bale, so they released a Connor where you couldn’t see his face.
Even then, there are some differences. Most of these characters were only ever played by one person. So they are partially responsible for this creation. Any money made on merchandise of these characters, goes to that person as well as WWE.
WWE essentially works like that. They own the costumes and names. In the case of characters like Double J, they literally own even less. As his costume and such wasn’t something they had a trademark over.
Although the reply to my question was less than encouraging, Toyguru did recently post on the Matty forums saying they are looking to improve Winston, even it means delaying his release. Fingers crossed!
Considering that they never bothered to add the missing strap for the normal proton packs to the basic (and frequently re-used) body, I can’t say I’m surprised that they’re not putting the right harness on Winston.
I read an interview with Keri Fisher. She said that Harrison Ford was the only actor that didn't sign away his rights. Lucas dose have to pay Ford royalties. Not the other actors though.
@Dead Man Walking: that would require more legwork than i suspect mattel would be willing to do on our behalf, but that would be capital DMW. you’d think a simple “click the box” option to chose to mailer or not mailer would be pretty easy…
@Newt: um, guys, evidently, you don’t know how modern pro wrestling do you? let me help you guys out.
barring the wrestler performing under their actual name, in which they obviously retain the right to their own name, they own their character to the say degree that johhny depp owns captain jack sparrow. that was the entire point of the fake deisel and razor back in the day, that the WWE could essentially recast any of those characters at whim. aside from a few rare individuals who either bartered a good deal later or had some foresight in the early part of their career (like hogan or ultimate warrior), most of these guys are screwed when it comes to their characters.
for example, WWE can and has released figures of deisel when he’s not on contract w/ them, they’ve released figs of razor ramon, double j, etc… because razor ramon isn’t scott hall. for example, whn jeff jarrett, under the auspices of TNA, released that “greatest moments of my career” DVD, it had to be from smokey mountain wrestling and his TNA years… why? because the WWE owns all of “double j” and they wouldn’t allow him access to his own matches & promos.
as for why the WWE would release a figure of a guy not on contract, well, traditionally, they generally don’t, but every once in a while, they’ll crank one out, and really, it would be in their interest to do so more often, because then your competition is doing free advertising for your product.
bottom line, in most cases, the WWE retains rights to these characters whether or not the dude playing said character wants them to. if next year, michael hickenbottom shows up in TNA, the WWE still owns “shawn michaels” and can slap his name/face all over whatever product they want. unless he benoits his family, there’s no guarentee that the WWE won’t make some cash at his expense.
@Newt Since when do wrestlers “own” the rights to their character? Even as a non-wrestling fan, this sounds a bit ridiculous and unlikely to be true.
@dayraven: I guess my question, then, is what about likeness rights? Is this sort of like how Lucasfilm can slap Harrison Ford’s 30-year-old face on every single comic and novel starring Han Solo? Do they pay Ford royalties for all that, or did he sign those rights away with everything else when he was hired for the original trilogy?
@Poe:
lucas owns all likeness rights. He was a smart man. He did this before really anyone cared about things like likeness rights.
It is actually because of Star Wars that actors, studios etc fight so feverishly over these type of rights.
Pingback AFP Ask Matty Round-Up for 9/15/10 | ActionFigurePics.com
@dayraven: Unfortunately, you're completely wrong with everything you just posted. I'm not going to continue to argue it, but your assessment is completely wrong.
No figure has ever come out of Diesel, Razor or Jarrett while they were under contract to another promotion. Jakks very first series of WWE Superstars had Diesel and Razor in the set, but they were released when Hall & Nash were still under contract to WWF. When the jumped to WCW, Jakks stopped shipping them, making them very rare figures at the time.
Secondly, it's not WWE policy to release products of wrestlers not under contract. If a WWE wrestler is working elsewhere, WWE completely ignores them. This goes well beyond merchandise. WWE actually removed Victoria their website Alumni section when she signed with TNA. Brought her back on the site when she quit TNA and took her away when she resigned with TNA. If you are working for the competition you don't exist. ESPECIALLY when it comes to advertising and products.
I have NEVER said that a wrestler owns his rights to a character. Although actually many do.
However, they still own the rights to THEIR LIKENESS. IE: DC Comics can not release a George Reeves Superman, just because he played Superman at some point. Even though DC owns all rights to Superman, they don't own George Reeves face. Wrestling works exactly like that.
You can not under any circumstances release a "Double J" figure that looks anything like Jeff Jarrett without the consent of Jeff Jarrett. It's just that simple. It's never been done and it never will be done, because it's against the law.
As I originally said, in some bizzaro universe WWE could release a John Cena figure wearing, say Diesel's outfit with Diesel as his name, but it couldn't resemble Kevin Nash.
In most cases WWE owns THE NAME of a character and very little else. In the case of Double J Jeff Jarrett… They own the following:
"Ain't I Great"
"Double J"
That's it. They don't even own Jarrett's tights. More often than not, WWE doesn't own character's tights.
In the case of Diesel and Razor, they own the name, Razor's fake accent and presumably Diesel's glove.
If the WWE creates an entire gimmick for someone, like say Goldust or Mankind, that the gimmick itself (How they act and their costume) go hand in hand, then they own that entire part.
If Shawn Michaels left WWE for TNA, he actually could take his name with him (Michaels had that name prior to WWE, so unless he allowed WWE to trademark it, he can take it. That's the rule) actually.
But for the sake of your scenario, let's say he can't. WWE has rights to release videos of HBK without HBK's consent. This is true. However, ANYTHING with HBK's likeness in terms of merchandise… Michael Hickenbottom gets money from. If the WWE decided they wanted to make a new t-shirt of him, they would have to contact him. They could in theory sell a t-shirt that says HBK, but they couldn't sell one with his face. HE OWNS HIS FACE.
To even further drive this point home… If WWE worked the way Dayraven and Rainyboy suggest, why would Mattel or Jakks before them ever have to contact any old wrestlers and pay them for their Legends line? Because while WWE may own certain gimmicks, they do not own the likeness of the wrestler underneath said gimmick.
No Ax and Smash of Demolition, without permission and money to Barry Darsow and Bill Eadie.
I should add for clarification, Dayraven, you confused video & TV rights with likeness rights. Jeff Jarrett couldn't use footage of his time in WWF because WWE owns that footage and would have to give him permission to use it. However, he can use photos from that time (again so long as someone other than WWE took them) and any video that wasn't shot by the WWE.
The WWE can do anything they want with their video library, but that's the cutoff point. They can't use Jarrett's face beyond video without consent from him.
This is why WWE could release a DVD making the Ultimate Warrior out to be a lunatic (not hard) but had to make nice (through Jakks) with him when it came time to make a figure of him. They own the video, not the man who played the character.
@Newt: You are 100% correct.