|
Post by c-scope on Jul 18, 2015 20:48:53 GMT -5
So this jusit just popped into my head.
So say their is a charecter ( gobbly gooker for example) in wich the likeness person who is portraying it is not shown in anyway( gobbly gooker/hector guerero) and their ne is not used would Mattel still need the rights to that person? Or would all they need is the green light from wwe?
|
|
wwewwfecwcw75
Mid-Carder
emphasising club!
Joined on: Mar 16, 2015 20:45:16 GMT -5
Posts: 413
|
Post by wwewwfecwcw75 on Jul 18, 2015 21:21:16 GMT -5
I want to know to, because someone like blue blazer I really want but is it going to be just as hard to get him as a owen hart would be.
|
|
|
Post by ZDB on Jul 18, 2015 21:33:24 GMT -5
I want to know to, because someone like blue blazer I really want but is it going to be just as hard to get him as a owen hart would be. They wouldn't do Blazer even if they didn't need Martha's approval
|
|
|
Post by qdogg on Jul 18, 2015 21:36:35 GMT -5
My guess is somebody would have to be credited somehow for it to happen. I've always thought Gooker in a breakable egg would be really cool.
|
|
|
Post by Classic Collector: The Return on Jul 18, 2015 21:42:56 GMT -5
It depends on who owns the gimmick/character. Because WWE owns Doink they can make him without signing anyone (Jakks confirmed this along time ago). I would guess WWE owns Gooker since Hector never used it elsewhere. The Patriot is owned by surprisingly Honky Tonk Man.
|
|