UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

shermjack wrote:In other words, they will print them in Taiwan anyways and won't care about the IP infringement since they can't be sued there.

IP is a fairy tale like Santa Claus. That just for the matter of fact.

You are better connected to the playing card scene (and especially behind the scene) than I am therefore, you may be right but I would assume since some months passed, that they actually waited for the IP claim to be settled. I for my part can't wait to support a fun deck with A+ print quality, stunningly accurate borders and non-migrating inks.

Harvonsgard wrote:

shermjack wrote:In other words, they will print them in Taiwan anyways and won't care about the IP infringement since they can't be sued there.

IP is a fairy tale like Santa Claus. That just for the matter of fact.

You are better connected to the playing card scene (and especially behind the scene) than I am therefore, you may be right but I would assume since some months passed, that they actually waited for the IP claim to be settled. I for my part can't wait to support a fun deck with A+ print quality, stunningly accurate borders and non-migrating inks.

I am no IP lawyer, but I would believe that the only way to settle a valid IP claim would be to pay for damages, if there are any to be paid, and not do anything to infringe upon them, but that is only if it is enforceable. The original claim was for the KS project, which is governed by US law, so the project got shut down as KS won't risk affecting its cash cow with any law suits. I doubt that Jerry's has an IP claim in Taiwan and even if they did, I don't know how feasible it would be to enforce a claim and that is probably why Hanson is still going ahead with printing.

Regardless, I personally am not a fan of the deck, amongst other things, so I definitely will not be getting this deck, but that is just my personal opinion.

shermjack wrote:I would believe that the only way to settle a valid IP claim would be to pay for damages,

That's what I meant. I believe that the IP claim according to US laws was invalid. I'm no IP lawyer either but as far as I know it works like that; you start a project. Then somebody makes an IP claim against said project. The project gets frozen in (kickstarter shuts your campaign down). Then an authority decides if the IP claim is valid or not. Both sides get heared and showcase their perspective. If the IP claim is valid according to the law then the project is prohibited to continue, or if it was already sold, compensation/damages has to be paid. If it is invalid the project goes live again.

Maybe I'm wrong and kickstarter only shuts a campaign down it the IP claim already is declared as valid and doesn't do it precautionary.

Is there any info if the IP claim is/was valid according to US IP law?

Well that's pretty f'ed up.

It is totally F’ED up indeed.....
Why this IP infringement happened now - release of Green vintage chicken nuggets, but not during the creation of Red and Blue And White Chicken Nuggets?

My assumption: EPCC becomes prideful when their reprint JN is a success

laitostarr777 wrote:Why this IP infringement happened now - release of Green vintage chicken nuggets, but not during the creation of Red and Blue And White Chicken Nuggets?

Because back then, EPCC didn't bad the Jerry's Nuggets license. They only have them since around 2019 after the OG Chicken Nuggets were released and sold.

Thanks for sharing Princess.