Megathread The Lara-Su Chronicles and Ken Penders topic - READ PAGE 164, POST 4096

[Lorekitten]

1 hour ago, Promethean0416 said:

Not being included on here is more smack talking from the man about a certain deceased former writer from a well-known cartoon series, but it's just getting old at this point...

The guy has no class and by this point everyone knows it.

[babsiwuff]

3 hours ago, Lorekitten said:

The guy has no class and by this point everyone knows it.

I'm still surprised he actually said, "I didn't have to backstab him."  He literally confirmed that's what he did.  Disgusting excuse of a man.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

22 hours ago, King Scoopa Koopa said:

So it would probably take a court ruling to determine whether SEGA's contract with Archie would take precedent over the lack of contract between Archie and Ken.

I don't think it would have looked good for SEGA there, which might be why -- or at least part of why -- they wanted to stay out of it, and have Archie clean up their own mess.

While I mostly agree with your points here, I do have to argue this one. I don't really think it was a matter of bad press or anything that kept SEGA out of the lawsuit.

Put plain and simply, they didn't care. As much as Penders likes to ramble on and on about Archie being some massive blockbuster worldwide hit that rivalled the games, it didn't. The comics were exclusive to only America unless you could find a comic shop that sold international comics, and frankly - that only became more and more prominent around Worlds Collide anyways, at least where I live.

These comics were a drop in the bucket to SEGA, and the license wasn't nearly as tightly controlled back then as it is now. The comic was just a painless side hustle for SEGA. They get a small bit of cash from licensing it out and get the rewards for having the longest running video game comic, and they need to do little else.

I think it probably would have been possible for SEGA to intervene, and maybe steer the case towards a conclusion. If nothing else - their lawyers were bound to be far more competent than Archie's lawyers, and I would say - like you said - there's a chance that the license contract or agreement or whatever had a clause that all characters would automatically default back to SEGA.

But it just wasn't worth the trouble. All SEGA cared about was just the Bioware situation with Chronicles, and that already got thrown out of court repeatedly because again - despite what Ken wants to claim - inspired doesn't equal stolen, and that idea is fucking rich coming from the 'creator' of 'K'nox'. 

But most of Archie's cast was just not remotely relevant to SEGA. They weren't making merchandise of Mina, or Dr. Fini, or whatever. Hell, even the SatAM cast, Sally included - SEGA were about ready to just dump on the ground until Ian fought tooth and nail to keep them included. There was just no stakes to the case for SEGA. They don't care about Penders' characters, they only cared if it could possibly have an effect on the Bioware situation, and even then - ultimately, it didn't - as evident by the fact Shade still got included in the Sonic Encyclopaedia while other copyright hell material (IE - Sonic Pocket Adventure) wasn't.

That's really the main reason IMO that SEGA just told Archie to handle it or else. Because SEGA already didn't give much of a shit about Archie Sonic, and only really let things go on because it was a effortless way to bring in a little more money for little more work than just licensing and approving a comic. The Penders lawsuit was far, far more work and problems than SEGA signed up for, and their approach to it was it was Archie's fault this was happening, and Archie damn well better get a grip on it or else they're being stripped of the license.

I also would say it's not a coincidence that when Archie did finally lose the license, it was when another creator thought they'd get a quick payday by suing Archie and turning Mammoth Mogul into a 'comic superstar'. That one did ultimately flop on it's face to my knowledge, but I would say in SEGA's eyes - another bitter creator trying to recreate a Penders situation was the straw that broke the camel's back for them. Speculation of course on my part, but that's how I see it. SEGA just didn't want the trouble anymore, basically.

[Lorekitten]

51 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

While I mostly agree with your points here, I do have to argue this one. I don't really think it was a matter of bad press or anything that kept SEGA out of the lawsuit.

Put plain and simply, they didn't care. As much as Penders likes to ramble on and on about Archie being some massive blockbuster worldwide hit that rivalled the games, it didn't. The comics were exclusive to only America unless you could find a comic shop that sold international comics, and frankly - that only became more and more prominent around Worlds Collide anyways, at least where I live.

These comics were a drop in the bucket to SEGA, and the license wasn't nearly as tightly controlled back then as it is now. The comic was just a painless side hustle for SEGA. They get a small bit of cash from licensing it out and get the rewards for having the longest running video game comic, and they need to do little else.

I think it probably would have been possible for SEGA to intervene, and maybe steer the case towards a conclusion. If nothing else - their lawyers were bound to be far more competent than Archie's lawyers, and I would say - like you said - there's a chance that the license contract or agreement or whatever had a clause that all characters would automatically default back to SEGA.

But it just wasn't worth the trouble. All SEGA cared about was just the Bioware situation with Chronicles, and that already got thrown out of court repeatedly because again - despite what Ken wants to claim - inspired doesn't equal stolen, and that idea is fucking rich coming from the 'creator' of 'K'nox'. 

But most of Archie's cast was just not remotely relevant to SEGA. They weren't making merchandise of Mina, or Dr. Fini, or whatever. Hell, even the SatAM cast, Sally included - SEGA were about ready to just dump on the ground until Ian fought tooth and nail to keep them included. There was just no stakes to the case for SEGA. They don't care about Penders' characters, they only cared if it could possibly have an effect on the Bioware situation, and even then - ultimately, it didn't - as evident by the fact Shade still got included in the Sonic Encyclopaedia while other copyright hell material (IE - Sonic Pocket Adventure) wasn't.

That's really the main reason IMO that SEGA just told Archie to handle it or else. Because SEGA already didn't give much of a shit about Archie Sonic, and only really let things go on because it was a effortless way to bring in a little more money for little more work than just licensing and approving a comic. The Penders lawsuit was far, far more work and problems than SEGA signed up for, and their approach to it was it was Archie's fault this was happening, and Archie damn well better get a grip on it or else they're being stripped of the license.

I also would say it's not a coincidence that when Archie did finally lose the license, it was when another creator thought they'd get a quick payday by suing Archie and turning Mammoth Mogul into a 'comic superstar'. That one did ultimately flop on it's face to my knowledge, but I would say in SEGA's eyes - another bitter creator trying to recreate a Penders situation was the straw that broke the camel's back for them. Speculation of course on my part, but that's how I see it. SEGA just didn't want the trouble anymore, basically.

I don't know enough of the situation to 100% say for sure that this is what happened, but from everything I do know, I wouldn't be surprised.

[ArcBeetle]

1 hour ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

I think it probably would have been possible for SEGA to intervene, and maybe steer the case towards a conclusion. If nothing else - their lawyers were bound to be far more competent than Archie's lawyers, and I would say - like you said - there's a chance that the license contract or agreement or whatever had a clause that all characters would automatically default back to SEGA.

Ay, Sega, you could at least have tried...

[King Scoopa Koopa]

2 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

While I mostly agree with your points here, I do have to argue this one. I don't really think it was a matter of bad press or anything that kept SEGA out of the lawsuit.

Who said anything about bad press?

[Ryannumber1gamer]

1 minute ago, King Scoopa Koopa said:

Who said anything about bad press?

...You did?

Quote

I don't think it would have looked good for SEGA there, which might be why -- or at least part of why -- they wanted to stay out of it, and have Archie clean up their own mess.

 

[Stasis]

Just put a wait on shipping to once a week due to demand. Work on whatever Monday to Thursday, sign and package orders Friday (2 hours max), weekend off, dispatch Monday. Sorted, no price increases by the Mrs required. It's been over a decade, I'm sure people can wait a little longer for this tripe.

[Lorekitten]

5 hours ago, babsiwuff said:

I'm still surprised he actually said, "I didn't have to backstab him."  He literally confirmed that's what he did.  Disgusting excuse of a man.

Okay, now I have to ask. What the freaking hecc did Ken Penders do to Ben Hurst? Because I keep hearing he did something, but I've never heard specifically what.

[StreetSonic2022]

42 minutes ago, Lorekitten said:

Okay, now I have to ask. What the freaking hecc did Ken Penders do to Ben Hurst? Because I keep hearing he did something, but I've never heard specifically what.

Here's the laydown:

Around 2000, Ben Hurst wanted to make a movie based on SatAM and was going to make a pitch towards SEGA. Penders called him when he found out, interested in the project. While Ben was attempted to offer Penders to be included in the project, Penders went directly and stated to SEGA that Ben was going to "co-opt" the franchise, which led to the higher-ups to dismiss Ben's project. That's when Penders began to pitch HIS own Sonic movie project in 2003: Sonic Armageddon, where he added Knuckles, the Chaotix and his characters: Julie-Su and Sonic's Parents in the concept arts with the SatAM cast.  It didn't go anywhere because SEGA was focusing on Sonic X at the time. 

 

[babsiwuff]

56 minutes ago, Lorekitten said:

Okay, now I have to ask. What the freaking hecc did Ken Penders do to Ben Hurst? Because I keep hearing he did something, but I've never heard specifically what.

Bobby has details of it over here:  https://thankskenpenders.tumblr.com/post/183661235035/didnt-penders-have-an-idea-or-something-for-a

[captobvious42]

8 minutes ago, StreetSonic2022 said:

Here's the laydown:

Around 2000, Ben Hurst wanted to make a movie based on SatAM and was going to make a pitch towards SEGA. Penders called him when he found out, interested in the project. While Ben was attempted to offer Penders to be included in the project, Penders went directly and stated to SEGA that Ben was going to "co-opt" the franchise, which led to the higher-ups to dismiss Ben's project. That's when Penders began to pitch HIS own Sonic movie project in 2003: Sonic Armageddon, where he added Knuckles, the Chaotix and his characters: Julie-Su and Sonic's Parents in the concept arts with the SatAM cast.  It didn't go anywhere because SEGA was focusing on Sonic X at the time. 

 

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think Sega would have opted for a SatAM movie even if Penders hadn't backstabbed Hurst. The series had been dead for over five years, I don't think it was syndicated that much (that's what kept Star Trek alive,) and this was when the internet was in its toddler years and streaming wasn't a thing. I think it was far too niche at this point for anything beyond a direct-to-video tie-in.

That said, Penders did drop the chances to zero with his stunt, though the consolation is that his planned movie didn't happen either. Admittedly, I bet he'd go all Alan Smithee if it had happened since it would have been meddled by execs to Hell and back.

[babsiwuff]

5 minutes ago, captobvious42 said:

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think Sega would have opted for a SatAM movie even if Penders hadn't backstabbed Hurst. The series had been dead for over five years, I don't think it was syndicated that much (that's what kept Star Trek alive,) and this was when the internet was in its toddler years and streaming wasn't a thing. I think it was far too niche at this point for anything beyond a direct-to-video tie-in.

That said, Penders did drop the chances to zero with his stunt, though the consolation is that his planned movie didn't happen either. Admittedly, I bet he'd go all Alan Smithee if it had happened since it would have been meddled by execs to Hell and back.

I remember when Ken was trying to pitch this movie.  It was him and Bob Repas attempting this thing, and I never understood why, since it was like early 2000s when they attempted this and SatAM had well been off the air by that point.  It all seemed so dated and irrelevant.

[Lorekitten]

I'm not surprised that Hurst blamed Penders for whatever happened and while admittedly I doubt we'll ever know what Penders actually said, I definitely would not put it past him to have intentionally sabotaged that project... although I agree with Capt. Obvious that the project likely wouldn't have gotten anywhere anyway, even without whatever Penders told them. I don't want to assume malicious motives from anyone, but Penders had motive, opportunity, and a track record of being an arrogant, self-serving jerkface. We can't safely assume his innocence, and I'd be honestly surprised if he wasn't the guilty party.

Edited July 7 by Lorekitten

[StreetSonic2022]

4 minutes ago, captobvious42 said:

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think Sega would have opted for a SatAM movie even if Penders hadn't backstabbed Hurst. The series had been dead for over five years, I don't think it was syndicated that much (that's what kept Star Trek alive,) and this was when the internet was in its toddler years and streaming wasn't a thing. I think it was far too niche at this point for anything beyond a direct-to-video tie-in.

That said, Penders did drop the chances to zero with his stunt, though the consolation is that his planned movie didn't happen either. Admittedly, I bet he'd go all Alan Smithee if it had happened since it would have been meddled by execs to Hell and back.

There are a couple of factors:

1) I stated before, SEGA was focusing on Sonic X. No need to create two different continuities as this was during the Adventure/Heroes era for the SegaSonic canon. 

2) I know for sure, as far as syndication goes, AoStH and Underground was still airing at the time. The latter was running in the UPN channel in the US.  

3) Penders' stunt of backstabbing was very similar to what had happened during Sonic Xtreme's development when one of the teams tried to one-up the other for pitch demo of the game to Sega of Japan.

4) Years later after Hurst's death, Penders somehow made the official DVD cover for the SatAM Complete series after a contest, I presumed.

[Lorekitten]

I'm gonna be honest: the more I hear about Ken Penders, the less comfortable I feel knowing that some of his stories are on my bookshelf. Especially given the whole Sally and Geoffrey thing, which is absolutely wretched.

[captobvious42]

10 minutes ago, StreetSonic2022 said:

4) Years later after Hurst's death, Penders somehow made the official DVD cover for the SatAM Complete series after a contest, I presumed.

I could be wrong, but I think Hurst was still alive at the time as he was featured on the set's special features. Still, the fact that Penders' art on the case is pretty blasphemous. I wish they'd release a Blu-ray with everything except his art.

7 minutes ago, Lorekitten said:

I'm gonna be honest: the more I hear about Ken Penders, the less comfortable I feel knowing that some of his stories are on my bookshelf. Especially given the whole Sally and Geoffrey thing, which is absolutely wretched.

Part of the reason I sold or donated all my comics (though I could have at least kept the Flynn era comics I guess.) I still have issues 13, 25, and a bunch of the specials and miniseries, but I think its nostalgia.

 

(Admittedly, I'm smiling internally at what I previously stated thought about Penders pulling an Alan Smithee... He'd probably be cursing Sega and whatever film studio/corporation made the film for ruining HIS vision...)

Edited July 7 by captobvious42

[Lorekitten]

3 minutes ago, captobvious42 said:

Part of the reason I sold or donated all my comics (though I could have at least kept the Flynn era comics I guess.) I still have issues 13, 25, and a bunch of the specials and miniseries, but I think its nostalgia.

I wouldn't even feel comfortable selling mine, given that any kid with an internet connection could look up Ken Penders' work online and find this... monstrosity that he's spent the past thirteen years on. Trust me, I don't want to be responsible for that.

[Tornado]

6 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

While I mostly agree with your points here, I do have to argue this one. I don't really think it was a matter of bad press or anything that kept SEGA out of the lawsuit.

Put plain and simply, they didn't care. As much as Penders likes to ramble on and on about Archie being some massive blockbuster worldwide hit that rivalled the games, it didn't. The comics were exclusive to only America unless you could find a comic shop that sold international comics, and frankly - that only became more and more prominent around Worlds Collide anyways, at least where I live.

These comics were a drop in the bucket to SEGA, and the license wasn't nearly as tightly controlled back then as it is now. The comic was just a painless side hustle for SEGA. They get a small bit of cash from licensing it out and get the rewards for having the longest running video game comic, and they need to do little else.

I think it probably would have been possible for SEGA to intervene, and maybe steer the case towards a conclusion. If nothing else - their lawyers were bound to be far more competent than Archie's lawyers, and I would say - like you said - there's a chance that the license contract or agreement or whatever had a clause that all characters would automatically default back to SEGA.

But it just wasn't worth the trouble. All SEGA cared about was just the Bioware situation with Chronicles, and that already got thrown out of court repeatedly because again - despite what Ken wants to claim - inspired doesn't equal stolen, and that idea is fucking rich coming from the 'creator' of 'K'nox'. 

But most of Archie's cast was just not remotely relevant to SEGA. They weren't making merchandise of Mina, or Dr. Fini, or whatever. Hell, even the SatAM cast, Sally included - SEGA were about ready to just dump on the ground until Ian fought tooth and nail to keep them included. There was just no stakes to the case for SEGA. They don't care about Penders' characters, they only cared if it could possibly have an effect on the Bioware situation, and even then - ultimately, it didn't - as evident by the fact Shade still got included in the Sonic Encyclopaedia while other copyright hell material (IE - Sonic Pocket Adventure) wasn't.

That's really the main reason IMO that SEGA just told Archie to handle it or else. Because SEGA already didn't give much of a shit about Archie Sonic, and only really let things go on because it was a effortless way to bring in a little more money for little more work than just licensing and approving a comic. The Penders lawsuit was far, far more work and problems than SEGA signed up for, and their approach to it was it was Archie's fault this was happening, and Archie damn well better get a grip on it or else they're being stripped of the license.

I also would say it's not a coincidence that when Archie did finally lose the license, it was when another creator thought they'd get a quick payday by suing Archie and turning Mammoth Mogul into a 'comic superstar'. That one did ultimately flop on it's face to my knowledge, but I would say in SEGA's eyes - another bitter creator trying to recreate a Penders situation was the straw that broke the camel's back for them. Speculation of course on my part, but that's how I see it. SEGA just didn't want the trouble anymore, basically.

On the other hand, with how bad Sega was at doing contractor agreements themselves, they might have gone to court on Archie's behalf and ended up losing the rights to the entire franchise.

[Lorekitten]

13 minutes ago, Tornado said:

On the other hand, with how bad Sega was at doing contractor agreements themselves, they might have gone to court on Archie's behalf and ended up losing the rights to the entire franchise.

Dear Solaris... I'd hate to see a world where Ken Penders LEGALLY owned the Sonic franchise. He'd run it into the ground.

[captobvious42]

20 minutes ago, Lorekitten said:

Dear Solaris... I'd hate to see a world where Ken Penders LEGALLY owned the Sonic franchise. He'd run it into the ground.

And you thought Duke Nukem Forever took forever to come out...

[Phoenix]

1 hour ago, Lorekitten said:

I'm gonna be honest: the more I hear about Ken Penders, the less comfortable I feel knowing that some of his stories are on my bookshelf. Especially given the whole Sally and Geoffrey thing, which is absolutely wretched.

Yeah, everything else I don't care about that much, ultimately. Breastfeeding scenes, godawful art, whatever. But this dogged insistence on having his adult expy taking a minor's virginity. Not even just having them have sex, but making that last point explicit, like it's a competition and St John (the goddamn adult) winning that competition.

Fucking ugh. Awful shit.

[Lorekitten]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix said:

Yeah, everything else I don't care about that much, ultimately. Breastfeeding scenes, godawful art, whatever. But this dogged insistence on having his adult expy taking a minor's virginity. Not even just having them have sex, but making that last point explicit, like it's a competition and St John (the goddamn adult) winning that competition.

Fucking ugh. Awful shit.

Whatever else anyone may think about Sally, she is not a prize to be won.

And even if she was, Geoffrey certainly never deserved her.

[King Scoopa Koopa]

10 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

...You did?

 

But... that's not what that means?

You've never heard expressions like "things don't look good for our heroes/sports team/whatever" when things aren't going their way?

If I'd said it was "a bad look for SEGA," that'd be more about public perception. But...

At least, I'm not aware of any instances where the two are interchangeable like that.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

39 minutes ago, King Scoopa Koopa said:

But... that's not what that means?

You've never heard expressions like "things don't look good for our heroes/sports team/whatever" when things aren't going their way?

If I'd said it was "a bad look for SEGA," that'd be more about public perception. But...

At least, I'm not aware of any instances where the two are interchangeable like that.

Dude, it doesn't look good for SEGA meaning it makes them look bad is kind of the default when the context is talking about what would've happened if they lost the lawsuit had they got involved. I really doubt most people would assume you meant "it doesn't look good for our heroes".