I still kick myself for not pre-ordering the Takara E-hobby Gobots and Grey/Purple Astrotrain back in the day. I got lots of the other E-hobby G1 repaints (Road Rage, Crosscut, Clampdown, Deep Cover, etc.), don't know why I didn't pre-order those at the time.
I know who created the original machine Robo line. What are you on about? My point is THIS flying Garbage Can below isn't Pathfinder. Not to me. and it never will be. The fact we've gone all these years without a proper retool into her more Machine Robo Likeness is a bit Frustrating to me. It always was. I was annoyed as hell even way back when when that set was released. It was by far the Laziest choice for an E-Hobby exclusive set I had ever seen. much better G1 toys could have been selected. That fact Takara themselves had a hand in it boggles my mind. Did they have some sort of grudge against Bandai or something and did it to Spite them? Well...whoever the original designer in Bandai for Pathfinder was, had to be weeping after seeing Cosmos's fat ass be recolored into his character, I know....I know....Money. Still doesn't make it sting any less. PATHFINDER was the very first Transforming Robot I ever owned as a kid. So I am naturally very protective of her I admit.
Thanks. Feel free to go look at the wip pics and comment. I love getting likes but I get more satisfaction from constructive criticism.
Well here's proof Action Toys still functions and is actually making stuff.......just not the stuff this Thread wants: I'm never going to get Blue-Jet and Turbo am I...............
If they were to put about the same amount of die-cast metal in these sets as they did the Machine Robo figures, these would be perfect.
My guess is that there's already a copyright on that name for Toys, Games and Figurines. https://www.amazon.com/Pathfinder-H...finder&qid=1572010819&s=toys-and-games&sr=1-2 Hasbro could get around it by naming her Autobot Pathfinder or Private Pathfinder, though. Or maybe even Path Finder, which would be weird because that looks like an actual real life name when you look at it and sound it out.
It's starting to feel that way. And if we don't get those, I'm going to feel like all my other purchases supporting this line were somewhat in vain. Yeah, I got those toys out of the deal, but many of them were "meh" compared to the ones I actually cared about getting.... and might never see. It would be criminal if they abandoned those figures, given their popularity and how critical they are for the GoBot fans supporting the line. Without the gobot connection, I would have bought exactly none of these, but as it stands, I've been all-in so far. Hopefully they won't let us down.
That's not how trademarks work. You don't "get around" someone else's use just by appending an extra word to their trademark. If that worked, then Gatorade wouldn't have lost millions of dollars in court to Thirst-Aid, for their advertising campaign where they sang, "Gatorade is Thirst-Aid". If that worked, selling Lego Star Wars wouldn't require Lego to pay anything to Disney. The issue appending an extra name resolves is when the original name is descriptive, or non-distinct in a crowded marketplace, and you want a registration when you can't otherwise get one. If there's a competitor's registration that prevents use of the name on toys, then slapping your own mark next to theirs doesn't make it better.
Pathfinder is a copryright, not a trademark. And we don't know whether the word pathfinder qualifies as descriptive or non-distinct. We do know that if Pazio tried taking Hasbro to court for "Autobot Pathfinder", Hasbro would have a better chance of winning the case because they aren't blatantly trying to claim IP that's not theirs, unlike the examples you sited. But simply "Pathfinder" would have an element of applying the idea of an IP to a product that Hasbro has no rights to - in that Pazio can argue that Hasbro is causing confusion by having another toy product with the same name on the shelf. Hasbro put the screws to Mattel over the "Bumblebee" dolls over a trademark - which is admittedly different than copyright but is also much stronger. Had Mattel used Karen "Bumblebee" Beecher, Hasbro would have had a much weaker case. That's not to say they might not have gone for it. But by simply calling the dolls "Bumblebee", it was low-hanging fruit for Hasbro to strengthen their trademark. And you don't waste money on cases you know you might not win.
