"AGE OF THE HOBBITS": Asylum finally sued for making ripoff movies

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/11/09/52146.htm

YES! It has finally happened. I hope this means Asylum will finally stop making those crap ripoff movies.

 

This isn't the first time. Fox tried to sue them for The Day the Earth Stopped but nothing came of it. Universal did sue them and get them to change the title of their movie that had Battleship in it though.

 

Hobbits however are not in the public domain.

It's why DnD resorted to renaming them Halflings.

 

thought hobbits were an actual word and there is actually records fo a species that were basically hobbits?
In any case I hope Asylum wins this one.

 

Surely there must be some kind of precedent for this case, or did no-one ever sue Roger Corman?

 

There was a recent hominid species (Homo florensiensis) that might have resembled Hobbits, but the articles that compared them were mostly using it for "REAL LIFE HOBBIT" catchy headlines, they wouldn't have actually been hobbits any more than Gigantophithecus makes Sasquatch real.

 

I thought it'd be trademark infringement. They should've went all the way and called it "Lord of the Hobbits".

It'll be interesting to see where this leads, Asylum makes a lot of crap but I'm curious from a legal standpoint where they stand. Of course, I don't think the legal fees can stretch too far for Asylum before it simply isn't profitable to fight, right or not.

 

Considering Warner Brothers took over parts of the New Zealand government to make The Hobbit trilogy I'm not surprised about this.

Seriously, they did:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/7933903/Hollywoods-grip-on-Government

 

A lot of Asylum's stuff is more entertaining than the big budget crapfests they springboard off of.

 

^ Any examples?

 

I've honestly been amazed that they've been able to get away with such blatant ripoffs for so long.

 

A New Zealand professor has been banned by Saul Zaentz Company/Middle-earth Enterprises from using the word 'hobbit' in his lecture on Homo florensiensis.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/oct/30/hobbit-banned-prehistoric-hobbit

 

Tolkien came up with word as a derivitive of "Hobgoblin." I believe there was also a word "Hobb" in some dialects. "Hobbit" is definately a creation of Tolkien.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbit_(word)

 

This might not belong in this thread, but I can't believe how unexcited I am for the Hobbit. I loved the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I remember months before it's release, there's just be still photos released, like photos of Gandalf in his pointy hat. Yet it looked great because for the first time, despite being a fantasy, the filmed looked and felt authentic. I'm sure Jackson will make this new film series look the same, but the excitement is no longer there. He isn't challenging himself anymore, and what we will see when it opens is nothing new at all. We all know the story, we all know how it will look, and all know that Smaug will appear merely as another CGI creation. It can only disappoint. This new trilogy is simply the a vanity project for Jackson who has been doing vanity projects for the past eight years

 

hmm, I watched the trailer for that asylum thing and I would be hard pressed to actually make any definitive connection other than the name. To be honest I believe they've only done themselves a disservice by releasing so close to the big budget film.

But to be honest the "owner" of the word Hobbit can go fuck themselves. The word was in use before Tolkien, and was also a unit of weight. The whole fact that a pub had to buy a license to use a name it had been using for more than 20 years is disgusting, the only motivation there is to get more money. Obviously when the hobbit is in the cinemas, I won't go and watch the film in the cinema, noo, I'll go to that pub instead. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

lolwut?

I would never - never I say! - have expected to read such a comment from you after the last several months. Truly, I am thunderstruck.

 

Yes as a consumer, I'm really confused with a major cinema release and a direct to DVD movie. Not.

I wonder how many more people will be interested in taking a look at the Asylum movie now that a fuss is being made over it.