High resolution images of upcoming 25th Anniv/Animated figures

[Stompy]

That Brawn can also pass as it is for Movie Ratchet. In alt mode anyway.

[SilverDragon]

Okay, Brawn's wheels are becoming so inconsistent in colour it's becoming a debate along the lines of the whole Rumble-Frenzy thing ("No, they're black!").

Those toys look nice.

[Pulse]

Those toys look nice.

+ 1!

But I've got my eye on Beachcomber... That dune buggy alt-mode is sweet!

[griffin]

The problem with Beachcomber (to me) is that the wheels and seats/rollcage are out of scale, suggesting that a human would only stand a little taller than the tyres, making them HUGE!!!

[Pulse]

Eh, there's always room for exaggeration in TFs...

[FFN]

But a lot of other Transformer names are words commonly found in the English lexicon, e.g.: Bumblebee, Barricade, Lugnut, Scavenger etc., yet Hasbro continues to use these names for Transformers without modification. :/

Also, "Perceptor" is not a word that exists in the Japanese lexicon, so why would Takara call the reissue "Cybertron Perceptor"? There's also the question surrounding the typography of Encore Swerve's name too (ウエーブ　vs　ウェーブ), and "Wave" isn't a word in the Japanese lexicon either.

Yet "Bumblebee" and "Barricade" are easier? :/

I asked a friend who knows an IP lawyer about this and hopefully he'll get back to me with clarification.

Generally, "common word" is a very VERY simplified explanation. An explanation from the lawyer is "cluttered market". Some words are used in so many different fields so it's hard to just claim them as trademarks in the "toys" field.

What I gather from this is that some words are just used *too* widely to be easily trademarked, while other words aren't. But... with trademark law there are no easy answers for us layman to understand.

Walky once said with trademark law there is no "1 and 1 equals 2". It's more like "1 and 1 equals 2.7".

I don't have a problem with them doing that... but I do have a problem with them slapping completely irrelevant names onto a Transformer that's meant to be called something else; e.g.: Universe Tankor. I understand that Hasbro may not be able/willing to use the name "Octane" on its own, but why not modify it? "Decepticon Octane" or hell, even "Mega-Octane" (which Hasbro used in RiD) would've been infinitely preferable than call it freakin' "Tankor." (-_-)

I don't have a problem with names like "Autobot Jazz," "Decepticon Frenzy" or "Shockblast"... I can even accept "Hardshell"... but "Tankor" instead of "Octane"?? They're just not trying...

I'll try to get an answer for this too. According to Hasbro, they had planned him as Octane, but ended up having to call him Tankor. They even hint his original name in his bio.

It is unlikely that Hasbro ditched Octane to protect Tankor as some have suggested, because if they wanted to protect that trademark they could just have easily slapped it on any other toy rather than knowingly give a toy the wrong name. Basically, there must have been some problem that prevented them from calling him some form of Octane.

I think the issue with Robot Heroes Bombshell/Hardshell is being confused with names lost due to lapsed Trademarks. Bombshell, IRC, is like Slag, in that the name itself would be difficult to market in certain countries (probably Canada, which saw Beast Wars renamed Beasties).
I don't think there would be a Trademark problem with Bombshell, because they could easily slap 'Decepticon' in front of it like they already do with Movie Brawl, Fracture, Movie Reverb, RH Rumble, Universe Dropshot and Universe Heavyload (it might be more common for Autobots, but it does get used for Decepticons too).

Since they probably couldn't use (or didn't want to use) 'Bomb', they would have had to find something to go with 'shell', to at least make it a little familar (like Shockblast).
If Hasbro answers all our submitted questions, including reasoning behind design choices, we could submit a question for next month, to ask why it is called 'Hardshell', and get it straight from the horse's mouth.

I don't believe Hasbro is unwilling to use "bomb" in a toy's name, since back in 2005 made a female GI Joe figure from the comics that would have been named Bombshell, but since that trademark was unavailable, they renamed her Bombstrike.

[GoktimusPrime]

Generally, "common word" is a very VERY simplified explanation. An explanation from the lawyer is "cluttered market". Some words are used in so many different fields so it's hard to just claim them as trademarks in the "toys" field.

What I gather from this is that some words are just used *too* widely to be easily trademarked, while other words aren't. But... with trademark law there are no easy answers for us layman to understand.

Walky once said with trademark law there is no "1 and 1 equals 2". It's more like "1 and 1 equals 2.7".

As I understand it there are different trademark laws for different fields and areas, in this case, toy trademarks. So not being able to use the name "Bombshell" means that someone has acquired that name for a toyline. That's my current understanding of it anyway. *shrug*

I'll try to get an answer for this too. According to Hasbro, they had planned him as Octane, but ended up having to call him Tankor. They even hint his original name in his bio.

It is unlikely that Hasbro ditched Octane to protect Tankor as some have suggested, because if they wanted to protect that trademark they could just have easily slapped it on any other toy rather than knowingly give a toy the wrong name. Basically, there must have been some problem that prevented them from calling him some form of Octane.

Hasbro calls a flat-bed military truck "Mega-Octane" and a toy based on G1 Octane "Tankor." :/ IMO it should've been the other way around... the name "Tankor" would've been much better for the RiD version of Dolrailer (because "Mega-Octane" just didn't make sense for that toy considering his alt mode) and "Mega-Octane" would've suited Universe Tankor. Had they called it "Mega-Octane" I probably would've bought the Hasbro version, but I've decided to boycott it based on the naming thing... I personally don't care about the chrome thing on that toy but I refuse to buy a toy that's meant to be Octane but called something completely different. Even if they called it "Oktane" or "Octotane" ... something attempting to preserve the Octane name in some fashion. :/ Or heck, use his Japanese name and call him "Octone" (like what they did with Alternators and used Jazz's Japanese name (Meister)).

That's why I can forgive Hardshell, by at least maintaining the "shell" suffix they are preserving at least half of Bombshell's name. It's not ideal, but I can see some effort in preserving at least part of the original name. But I can't forgive calling Shrapnel "Predacon" or Octane "Tankor." It's too much of a deviation for me. :/

P.S.: I imagine that there could be differences between intellectual property laws in the United States vs. Australia.

[kup]

New pics from Ebay seller:

http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-...scream-166013/

http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-...nferno-166012/

- Inferno has some very nice side head molding resembling his G1/G2 white antenas. Hopefuly Henkei will paint them white.

- Hound now has a mix of bright green and dark army green. This sucks.

- Like I was sure of, there are no changes to Cyclonus.

[Paulbot]

- Hound now has a mix of bright green and dark army green. This sucks.

- Like I was sure of, there are no changes to Cyclonus.

Why do you think images of toys (that are not released anywhere in the world) from an ebay auctions (which often has stuff stolen from factories) are the final product?

Where did this ebay seller get a toy when it is not for sale anywhere? Did it fall off the back of the proverbial truck?

Wait until someone buys Cyclonus or Hound in a proper store and then see what it looks like (and complain all you want if it still looks the same)

From the Ebay auction, Cyclonus is in excellent condition except for some numbers etched into the wings and Hound has some numbers etched onto the hood. That sure sounds like prototypes to me, not a final toy!

[kup]

Why do you think images of toys (that are not released anywhere in the world) from an ebay auctions (which often has stuff stolen from factories) are the final product?

Where did this ebay seller get a toy when it is not for sale anywhere? Did it fall off the back of the proverbial truck?

Wait until someone buys Cyclonus or Hound in a proper store and then see what it looks like (and complain all you want if it still looks the same)

From the Ebay auction, Cyclonus is in excellent condition except for some numbers etched into the wings and Hound has some numbers etched onto the hood. That sure sounds like prototypes to me, not a final toy!

I hope you are right. Believe me, I would love to be proven wrong on this.