dpac 0 Report post Posted January 16, 2004 How come the attitude wwf symbol has to be blurred out (which is pretty annoying), but the old school block letter one doesn't have to be? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USC Wuz Robbed! 0 Report post Posted January 16, 2004 The scratch logo is the logo in question for the lawsuit with World Wildlife Fund. The block WWF, Wildlife Fund doesn't find offensive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
River City Rocker 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 In that case, I suppose the blurring is something that we'll all have to live with for a long time, unless WWE decides to do something about it...and I almost wish they would. By the way, I just bought the Foley set from the Best Buy in Evansville, Indiana. Wasn't it supposed to be released sometime next week? -Ben Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes Report post Posted January 17, 2004 In that case, I suppose the blurring is something that we'll all have to live with for a long time, unless WWE decides to do something about it...and I almost wish they would. By the way, I just bought the Foley set from the Best Buy in Evansville, Indiana. Wasn't it supposed to be released sometime next week? -Ben Yup. January 20th, 2004 in the United States. (Waits for Amazon to ship) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Amazing Rando 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Uhmm...I've seen it for sale already at my local FYE... 26.99 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Ghost of bps21 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Alright...I guess I'll ask the stupid question... if the World Wildlife people only have a problem with the scratch letters...why didn't they just change the logo and not the whole name? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbacon 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Alright...I guess I'll ask the stupid question... if the World Wildlife people only have a problem with the scratch letters...why didn't they just change the logo and not the whole name? It was both the initials and the logo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Askewniverse Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Alright...I guess I'll ask the stupid question... if the World Wildlife people only have a problem with the scratch letters...why didn't they just change the logo and not the whole name? I've got a stupid question too... Why does WWE have to blur the scratch logo on home video releases? I can (somewhat) understand blurring the logo on TV, but blurring on DVDs doesn't make sense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I always wondered why they couldn't just place the current logo over the old one instead of blurring it. I know there are some instances where it would look goofy but it would look better than the blur. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
River City Rocker 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I've got a stupid question too... Why does WWE have to blur the scratch logo on home video releases? I can (somewhat) understand blurring the logo on TV, but blurring on DVDs doesn't make sense. You know, that's a great point. It made me think about it: why blur any images on products released and intended for private viewing? But I assume there's some legal reasoning behind blurring on the DVDs, you know, some small print in the settlement. Like I said, unless Vince McMahon wants to do something about it (no blurring the logo on future releases, or even going back to the old block logo and referring to the company as "World Wrestling Federation Entertainment" again), we're more or less stuck with it. -Ben P.S. So far, no easter eggs have been found-yet! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Metal Maniac 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 If I'm not mistaken, the fed had reached an agreement with the Fund over the use of the initals WWF. HOWEVER, when the fed changed their logo, that somehow opened the door for the Fund to go after Vince again. It violated their agreement, or something. Thus, the scratch logo is the real problem. I think they edit it out of the DVD's just to hide their own ass. I mean, it's possible they can get away with it...but why risk it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Like I said, unless Vince McMahon wants to do something about it (no blurring the logo on future releases, or even going back to the old block logo and referring to the company as "World Wrestling Federation Entertainment" again), we're more or less stuck with it. You know its odd cause I call the "WWE" WWE, and I've made it such a posting habit that I actually refer to it as that when I talk. I even made a logo...taking the old scratch logo and adding a subtle lower case E behind the F. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JHawk 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Well, they started blurring the scratch logo about the time THQ was being sued by the Fund. THQ was publishing the first two SmackDown games as Greatest Hits titles, and the packaging used the WWE logo, but the games were untouched. The Fund actually sued over the WWF scratch logo being in the game despite nobody buying it under the "WWF" title. THQ won the appeal though, so I would think Vince is in the clear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I think the difference is that the WWE renegotiated/reaffirmed their agreement with the WWFund when they changed their logo back in 1998. The WWFund had no problem with the block lettering, so it would be hypocritical of them now to say "blur that too" since they agreed to it before. You know, that's a great point. It made me think about it: why blur any images on products released and intended for private viewing? But I assume there's some legal reasoning behind blurring on the DVDs, you know, some small print in the settlement. You *do* know that they are commercially selling these dvds, right? Therefore there is nothing "private" about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sonic Reducer 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Regardless ... How's the DVD? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
River City Rocker 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 Regardless ... How's the DVD? So far, it's really good, once you get past the blurring during the scratch-logo era (which, I have found, really isn't that objectionable, but still, I'd like to see that problem addressed again in the future). I did notice that the matches that Jesse Ventura did commentary in (Jack-Vader, Foley/Thorton-Bulldogs), Jesse was completely dubbed out, leaving some really awkward, Joey Stylesesque periods of silence, particularly in the tag match, where there are a few instances where McMahon was cut off in mid-sentence. I've found two easter eggs, which may or may not have been common knowledge. But if you're curious, here they are: * Under Chapters on disc 2, highlight Shawn Michaels vs. Mankind, then click left twice to access the first Chef Boyardee commercial Mick made. "Mmmm, BEEFY!!" * Under Extras on disc 2, highlight the Birth of Mr. Socko, and click right twice. You'll be taken to the "Have a Bad Day" skits where Dennis Knight, impersonating Mick, went to the unemployment office after being fired by Triple H. -Ben Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamoaRowe 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I can't wait for it to show up at my Best Buy so I can buy it for 18 bucks or so with my discount Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I did notice that the matches that Jesse Ventura did commentary in (Jack-Vader, Foley/Thorton-Bulldogs), Jesse was completely dubbed out, leaving some really awkward, Joey Stylesesque periods of silence, particularly in the tag match, where there are a few instances where McMahon was cut off in mid-sentence. That's absolutely horrible. Why have they done this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fökai 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 I did notice that the matches that Jesse Ventura did commentary in (Jack-Vader, Foley/Thorton-Bulldogs), Jesse was completely dubbed out, leaving some really awkward, Joey Stylesesque periods of silence, particularly in the tag match, where there are a few instances where McMahon was cut off in mid-sentence. That's absolutely horrible. Why have they done this? Easiest explanation would be that Vince and WWEHV was taking a small jab at Jesse for that royalties lawsuit a few years ago. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2004 They could really easily put the new logo over the old one. I mean, older episodes of DBZ have facial blood and/or other wounds matted out and it's only really obvious about 10% of the time. That was done in 1997 by a company that doesn't have nearly the funds and equipment that WWE does now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fairtoflair7 0 Report post Posted January 18, 2004 I got an egg on Disc 1 where you get footage of Foley just off a house at a young age onto a mat. Pretty funny stuff... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrVenkman PhD 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2004 I'm no legal expert nor have I really read up on the whole thing, but the DVD thing does kinda bother me. I was of the understanding the WWF thing was an international concern and DVDs being released domestically in the US should not have to be blured. Since Canada and the UK have their own distributors (Koch/Silvervision), WWE Home Video in the US shouldn't be responsible for the bluring... but I guess they feel it's just easier to blur everything. I'm also wondering when all these rules took affect, because it was certainly not when WWF went to WWE. For example, the Hogan DVD has Hogan both saying WWF and scratch logos from right before the change. A few months later on TV, the blurring began, and then on the Flair DVD, "WWF" has to be cut from audio. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2004 I would venture to say that since the WWE blatently ignored the agreement that as a punitive measure they were banned from using it in the US. Or it was under the international copyright or trademark law - I know the U.S. is signed under one agreement that binds it to other countries. As for the Hogan DVD, it was probably already in development as the WWFund lawsuit occured, so it would be unreasonable for them to completely change it in a short period of time - there was probably an allowance of 6 months for them to make the change. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zetterberg is God 0 Report post Posted January 19, 2004 Either way, I don't see how a stupid logo somehow damages the prestige of the World Wildlife Fund. If you asked most people, they would tell you that the initials WWF make them think of wrestling and not the nature organization. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dandy 0 Report post Posted January 20, 2004 My best guess would be that the courts ruled that the WWE can earn no profit off the scrath logo, and they could not be called "WWF" no matter if that is what they were called at the time of the footage. Remember that the footage, even though it was shot pre-lawsuit, was not put on DVD and produced for profit until after the lawsuit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted January 20, 2004 Either way, I don't see how a stupid logo somehow damages the prestige of the World Wildlife Fund. If you asked most people, they would tell you that the initials WWF make them think of wrestling and not the nature organization. You're answering your own point, there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zetterberg is God 0 Report post Posted January 20, 2004 Either way, I don't see how a stupid logo somehow damages the prestige of the World Wildlife Fund. If you asked most people, they would tell you that the initials WWF make them think of wrestling and not the nature organization. You're answering your own point, there. My point is that no one gives a rat's ass about the WWF (wildlife) so why must they be such bastards about this whole censoring logos thing? Has this made the WWF anymore reconizable or made their cause anymore important? I think it's a big no on both counts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
geniusMoment 0 Report post Posted January 20, 2004 In the end all they want is cash. If Vince throws a little money at them they will all of a sudden realize that they do not mind the scratch logo again. You can bet if Vince ever starts up the wrestling network the panda people, not TNA, will get a hefty some of money and the WWE will once again have attitude. Get it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
