Woman Claims She Invented Angry Birds

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I have no idea if this woman's claims are legitimate or not, I just want to know why the hell she waited so long to say anything? :confused:

However, Adams claims (although it's unclear with what evidence) that Hartz then went on to license the Angry Birds IP to Rovio, and then "dumped" Adams and began making toys based on Rovio's vision of Angry Birds, without Adams' permission and without paying royalties to her.
Click to expand...
 
It's been huge for a while, so it's not like she was waiting for then to get big then sue for a ton more money...

Hell, I invented Angry Birds, too. I want royalties. I'm very cheap, too. I'll take half a percent... That's still a lot!
 
Clickbait title. The lawsuit is based on IP re-use issues. Has nothing to do with her "inventing" Angry Birds.
 
It seems like she had licensed her trademark (Angry Birds cat toys) to Hartz until some time recently. After that deal expired, Hartz continued to use her trademark for Rovio inspired Angry Birds cat toys. The lawsuit claims the items are similar, but I don't really think they are (on the other hand, while you're filing a suit, you put in everything you can think of); the naming is certainly confusing and worth pursuing, Rovio or Hartz probably should have bought her trademark years ago.
 
toast0 said:
It seems like she had licensed her trademark (Angry Birds cat toys) to Hartz until some time recently. After that deal expired, Hartz continued to use her trademark for Rovio inspired Angry Birds cat toys. The lawsuit claims the items are similar, but I don't really think they are (on the other hand, while you're filing a suit, you put in everything you can think of); the naming is certainly confusing and worth pursuing, Rovio or Hartz probably should have bought her trademark years ago.
Click to expand...

Damnit man. You ruined the game where we guess the content of an article and thus make a wide-array of irrelevant or inaccurate conclusions based on that guess.

Go sit in the corner, you article reading sonuvabi***. :D :D
 
Spidey329 said:
Damnit man. You ruined the game where we guess the content of an article and thus make a wide-array of irrelevant or inaccurate conclusions based on that guess.

Go sit in the corner, you article reading sonuvabi***. :D :D
Click to expand...

Sorry, she's probably a crazy cat lady ;)
 
cortexodus said:
Clickbait title. The lawsuit is based on IP re-use issues. Has nothing to do with her "inventing" Angry Birds.
Click to expand...

I have forwarded your "clickbait title" complaint on to the author.


toast0 said:
It seems like she had licensed her trademark (Angry Birds cat toys) to Hartz until some time recently. After that deal expired, Hartz continued to use her trademark for Rovio inspired Angry Birds cat toys. The lawsuit claims the items are similar, but I don't really think they are (on the other hand, while you're filing a suit, you put in everything you can think of); the naming is certainly confusing and worth pursuing, Rovio or Hartz probably should have bought her trademark years ago.
Click to expand...

I don't know, she might have a case.

1407269762lUGZePRfNj_1_1.jpg
 
I invented Transformers when I was 5 years old, where is my royalty payout?
 
Can someone tell me why a hummingbird would be wearing sneakers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top