 Cacique Caribe  | 29 Oct 2012 10:59 a.m. PST |
|
| billthecat | 29 Oct 2012 11:03 a.m. PST |
|
 Parzival | 29 Oct 2012 11:05 a.m. PST |
|
| ancientsgamer | 29 Oct 2012 11:09 a.m. PST |
I don't think this is lawsuit material. It is about a tribe that has been nicknamed the Hobbits due to their stature…. I seem to remember some Yahoo story about the natives a few years back? |
| CPBelt | 29 Oct 2012 11:18 a.m. PST |
But IIRC hobbit is trademarked. |
Chocolate  | 29 Oct 2012 11:29 a.m. PST |
"But IIRC hobbit is trademarked." But IIRC it's not The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859.
The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of "boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies".
In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, the following appears:[5]
"4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.]" link |
 teenage visigoth | 29 Oct 2012 11:31 a.m. PST |
|
| Frederick | 29 Oct 2012 11:38 a.m. PST |
Well, it's good to know that Bai Ling has found steady work I have to agree about the trademark issues – words like "hobbit", "orc' and "elf" have so much public domain use trademark means nothing |
| Rassilon | 29 Oct 2012 12:14 p.m. PST |
Shame on Christopher Judge… |
| Desert Rat | 29 Oct 2012 12:14 p.m. PST |
I didn't realise the Stargate SG-1 money was running out for Teal'c! |
| Patrice | 29 Oct 2012 12:26 p.m. PST |
|
| Cacique Caribe | 29 Oct 2012 12:40 p.m. PST |
|
| DLIinVSF | 29 Oct 2012 12:59 p.m. PST |
I was under the impression JRR took Orc from the old term for the Normans.Being an A-S scholar he blamed the Normans (rightly as it happens) for the loss of a large part of A-S culture. Surely there are alot of terms out there which can't really stand up as copyright?A case of low brow internet entries and dumbed down dictionaries?But can some small company afford to fight a big company seeing how long these cases can take? Can't say I'd look forward to watching the movie myself,looks dreadful. |
 Patrick R | 29 Oct 2012 1:00 p.m. PST |
Hobbit is trademarked like Apple is trademarked. It pertains to a series of well known fantasy books like Apple pertains to a bunch of electronic items starting with the letter "i" Either the Tolkien estate or the Saul Zaentz thugs will go after the makers for using that title. Remember that TSR had to take out Hobbit from D&D ? If it isn't trademarked, they could have just thumbed their nose at Tolkien's lawyers and left it in. |
| The Beast Rabban | 29 Oct 2012 1:13 p.m. PST |
Why did they feel it necessary to bolt "Hobbit" onto the title? Effectively riding coattails, this is not. I prefer to think of Bai Ling as having fled the solar system immediately after "The Crow". |
| Tgunner | 29 Oct 2012 2:06 p.m. PST |
Why did they feel it necessary to bolt "Hobbit" onto the title? Effectively riding coattails, this is not. I could be wrong but I think this is the reason for them using "hobbit": link The bad guys are called "Java Men", most of the people look Asiatic, and so on. So I'm guessing that they are crossing Tolkien with these people to create a story of their own. It's still a mockbuster though. And yes, shame on Christopher Judge! But on the other hand work is work these days. Oh, and the law suit stuff has already began: link |
Toshach  | 29 Oct 2012 3:16 p.m. PST |
Boy. Lobellia is lookin' gooood. |
| 79thPA | 29 Oct 2012 4:40 p.m. PST |
I am sure it will be as awful as it looks. |
| cooey2ph | 29 Oct 2012 4:45 p.m. PST |
Aaargh. Double aaargh. Bai Ling:(( |
| Mithmee | 29 Oct 2012 4:51 p.m. PST |
"In their quest to destroy the Javas, the heroic partnership of humans and Hobbits will transform both species forever." Probably open up relations with all those little people. Now Cpt Jake can provide the Midget pic's. |
| Inkpaduta | 30 Oct 2012 10:01 a.m. PST |
Wow, they have a kick ass hot babe warrior…how unusual. |
| John M W | 30 Oct 2012 11:33 a.m. PST |
Wouldn't Jawas be a more appropriate antagonist to the Hobbits than "Javas"? ;^) |
| Cacique Caribe | 30 Oct 2012 1:20 p.m. PST |
Hobbits vs Jawas??? I'd pay good money to see that! Dan |
 StarfuryXL5 | 30 Oct 2012 10:47 p.m. PST |
What rules would you use? |
| StarfuryXL5 | 30 Oct 2012 10:55 p.m. PST |
Oh, look, there's a Java Warrior Balgog. I see it's from The Asylum. That explains it all. (For those who don't know of the Asylum, find out here.) |
| Cacique Caribe | 31 Oct 2012 7:20 a.m. PST |
I guess they'll have to change the movie title now: link Dan |
| StarfuryXL5 | 31 Oct 2012 9:10 p.m. PST |
They had to do a title change on their knock-off of "Battleship", too. |
