Same here post em up!

He was banned by AZS sometime in March, I believe. As to why, I will not post what I have heard as it is not from my first hand knowledge and I do not like rumor-mongering.

I never heard about the Wolfman lawsuit. What was the result from that? Did he win or lose? Now that you mention Wolfman claiming ownership of Nova, I can see some similarities between Nova's flight powers & Starfire's.

Where's that marvel hot legal action you promised us? Snoopy shall be informed of your slacking.

I have been in trial the past two days, I will post over the weekend.
Nice to know someone is interested.

Damn intrested I love legal jargen used to debate about my rights to my teachers back in elementary and junior high. Thats sweet thats theres no nda on what you got I love seein behind the scenes stuff.

No, that's just the line of cow by-product a lot of warez sites toss out hoping it's true. Doesn't matter if the item is being actively published or not, or (for a fair bit of time) if the copyright owner is out of business or dead. Lines tossed out like "the movie studio is out of business or isn't releasing the movie, and they haven't busted anyone yet, so that means its public domain" is always either complete ignorance or a complete con job attempt. Copyrights are like cockroaches in that they don't go away just because you don't see them, and they're just as hard to prevail against once they're in place. Copyrights can be selectively defended (and even not at all) for decades, after which the owner can still decide to come down like a ton of bricks on an infringer. If the copyright is registered, the amount of damages they can recover can go up significantly. While options on defending and maintaining copyrights are very flexible, the protection they provide is relatively limited. Basically only the exact work, or very clear derivitives thereof, are covered.

Trademarks have to be defended - vigorously, in fact, as their value is directly related to uniqueness of name recognition and damages recoverable directly linked to value. I.e. wait until the trademark is infringed to the point where the name is ubiquitous, and your recovery for lost value of that trademark will be equally worthless. On the other hand anything that can be reasonably taken for the trademark can be considered infringement, even if some aspect of it (the image associated with the name, or the name with the image) is very different. And prior art isn't even an issue - which is why a certain 400+ year old Scottish Bed & Breakfast actually got nailed by a certain grease burger pit chain for carrying the family name.

Patents are somewhere in between, requiring a little more defending than copyrights (or, more accurately, maintaining and renewal of the patent) and more work than trademarks in proving infringement. Unlike either, patents can be challenged and overturned not just on prior concept issues, but on the very basis of the process being unsuitable for patent law.

Yeah, that'd be like killing Captain America off after Civil War.

I'm glad the creator's suing.