Talk:Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc.

message: Hbdragon88, I don't think that this article is B-Class at the moment. It's missing some very important facts like, the the $15 million settlement that Galoob won the following year for lost profits, it dosen't mention that the device was designed by Codemasters or that part of the settlement involved Nintendo buying shares in Codemasters. - X201 08:33, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yay, I don't know what happened there.  I actually wrote "start class" on the Essential article talk page but classified this article as B-class.  Fixed now.  I hope you can expand on it. Hbdragon88 21:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll add the info at some point in the future. I know I've got an article on it in one of my old Sega Mags, It's just a question of which mag. I'm sure it will come to the surface at some point during The Magazine Project. - X201 09:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Info

message: Due largely to the lawsuit, SonicBlue went bankrupt, even though the court never reached the point of ruling that selling what is essentially a better VCR that can skip commercials is illegal.
While I personally agree with the above statement, I have removed it as unverifiable POV. Pigsfly33 (talk) 20:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV re ReplayTV

message: I removed the reference to Midway Manufacturing as "the monopolist" as that is clearly a POV that shouldn't be in the article.
Honestly, I'm not entirely sure that sentence should be in the article in its present form: according to the other article, it sounds like a marginally related case; the major part of the ruling sounds like it was simply maintaining that Pac-man was a copywritten entity despite being "evanescent or transient" because it was neither, the circuit board always produces Pac-man. For that reason Puckman infringed. "The speed-up kit" that would be parallel to this sounds more like a secondary matter.
Flying Bishop (talk) 02:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: If Nintendo tried to sue Galoob, Nintendo (the plaintiff), should be the first name in the case citation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevefarwell (talk • contribs) 05:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They both tried to sue each other. Both actions were heard as one.  - X201 (talk) 13:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Isn't the citation backwards?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100517124947/http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/154/154.F3d.1107.html to http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/154/154.F3d.1107.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Found some sources that will help expand and improve this. Jorahm (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for all the article improvements. The article's coming along nicely. I did some work over at Camerica as I think they had some interesting involvement with the lawsuit too. Also I think TiVo Inc. v. EchoStar Corp. would be another interesting one to work on. Andre🚐 19:56, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources