OOOHHhhh Oh! Trick or Treat VS Universal Studios

[MrDark1]

Now we know a scam I believe.

[MrDark1]

Fell for a scam posting.

[Lazarus]

They might have been able to copyright the Myers mask because of the alterations, but they don't own the original Kirk Mask it was made from.

Were the Halloween lll masks made specifically for the film, or did they use existing masks?

[MrDark1]

I can not find this, sorry.

[Dr.Terror]

Universal was selling merchandise with the H3 masks without TOTS knowledge.   TOTS is suing them for it.  Universal pull their licenses in retaliation.     I beleive thats whats going on.
 

[Dr.Terror]

They might have been able to copyright the Myers mask because of the alterations, but they don't own the original Kirk Mask it was made from.

Were the Halloween lll masks made specifically for the film, or did they use existing masks?

The pumpkin was created for H3.   Skull and Witch already existed although the color scheme for the witch was created for the film.

[Doh!]

Do you guys have any links? My Googlin' isn't getting any hits, other than the actual court filing(s) -- and you have to have an account to read them:


https://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/cacdce/2:2023cv03537/883992

[Haunted hearse]

They might have been able to copyright the Myers mask because of the alterations, but they don't own the original Kirk Mask it was made from.

Were the Halloween lll masks made specifically for the film, or did they use existing masks?

The Skull and the Witch were existing masks, the Jack O Lantern mask was newly created for the film.

[GeorgeHere]

  "Universal was selling merchandise with the H3 masks without TOTS knowledge.   TOTS is suing them for it.  Universal pull their licenses in retaliation.     I believe that's whats going on."

Hello Dr. Terror!   Not that I know more than the people at TOTS--and believe me I Love TOTS--but if I were running things over there I would have let that Universal infraction slide---knowing, that they might retaliate if I sued them--by pulling the entirety of the licenses.   As long as it was just one breach of contract--concerning one or two masks--I would have weighed the risk and decided to grit my teeth and bare it.  This is based on me wrongly or rightly thinking the Universal Movie Monster line brings them the most profits---but then the Michael Myers/Halloween mask craze is quite systemic.   I admit I know next to nothing about business licensing matters---such as if having a Universal license is needed for each Universal character mask---or one license for all of them. Hope I've not opened a can of worms, but this is just an example of how I think about such scenarios, and someone once told me I was too laid back to run a business.
 

[MrDark1]

More listings on this case can be seen on a few sites.  These are just listings of court filings, and do not have judgements, or verdicts, on cases.  These don’t even get into the case history, but it seems all so.
This is why TOTS lost, or did not renew the Uni brands.

Justia, Law 360, and CourtListener have all listed the filings on Trick or Treat Studios v NBCUniversal Media.  Filed 8/14/23, with latest response due from Uni on 10/13/23.