valdyrgramr

Reminds me of loot crate as of late. They keep promising dates then blaming the ports, makes more promises on dates, and keeps using the ports as an excuse. Even if the ports were to blame, businesses can't make a promise like this and then make excuses as it is fraud. More so if money is involved, but if not they're damaging their reputation.

You said they look the same. If the official is white, and the non-official is black then it's kina obvious there's a difference that should matter.

Except the side panels are black and the ones on the ps5 are white. I know I have one with the optical drive sitting next to me right now.

Well, as I said the main reason these companies are doing it is due to the crash back in the 80s. Nintendo is the most paranoid over it.

Doubtful, Sony has been sue happy for over a year. They went after others too last fall.

Marxist-Leninist*

Did you read what Sony's lawyers said? "Indeed, dbrand concedes that this design is an "apocalyptic spin on" SIE's protected trademark." The reason Sony is clearly upset over a parody of their logo is their own wording, "that elected to create an edgy variation on the decades-old PlayStation Shapes Logo." This sounds more like an uptight Japanese company taking a joke way too seriously. I just don't see that going well for them in court. Even if it was trademark protected you're basically telling the legal system that you're doing this because you're feelings were hurt. That's a tough se

Well, I'm kinda curious as to what a judge rules on that. On one hand, dbrand stated they had no affliation with Sony, and many others, before all of this from what I remember. At the same time they said something else in their rant, which was an outright lie, over the PS5 name thing. So, that's going to be interesting in court if it goes there. Honestly, I can think of a few reasons why Dbrand would change the design. A better one, this was just a publicity stunt between the two[also Kennedy is in Mexico], even if they had a case challenging MS/Sony/Nintendo in court is one of the du

I don't disagree on the last part, but on the first part I think it does in Canada. Well, if they had used the filled in logo on the PS4 Pro that's an easier case for Sony. Using a stencil basically has always been a much harder case to sell for both sides. From what I remember it usually comes down to whatever the jury decides on that one. But, Sony overall has a more of a case where dbrand actually used the PS5's name. That's the strong part that can get them more legal leverage. If I were Sony, I'd lean more on that because not only did they do that, but dbrand lied and said th

It's fair use because they altered the logo in a comedic way that even Sony admitted to in the C&D. Just because Sony was offened by it doesn't mean it's not a parody. Thus, it is fair use. Using the outline of a logo is a bit harder to argue in court than outright using the logo. The problem with art is that unless you copy it the way the original artist did it can complicate the case, hence why I said the one on the PS4 Pro could go either way. I'm also not sure where Canada stands on that compared to the US. However, both have the same idea of fair use for things like parodies.

Damn it man! He was supposed to get John to eat his shoe!

One supports your back and ass, one supports your ego.

Nice try officer.

Can we just start shooting companies who come up with these stupid price tags?

EboLn4SFCh9OFea%vBY2XTROYsir2$nr9KA&D25pg^HuTnwp8IY4Kym7SLph!URBXOwZRv!B@qF9zN&&W0BaY7AgfHKlZPTnZD@ Um thanks lastpass I don't need ebol...oh nvm...