Simply change one minor detail about it. Like maybe the buttons are gold rather than pink or something like that. I don’t know if the pink Mercy skin has buttons on it or not. That’s just an example.
There is already a precedent for this. Disney does it all the time to skirt around legal problems. For example with the American flag. Turns out there are a ton of laws about how a company should fly the American flag. It must be taken care of and respected. How Disney skirts around these troublesome laws and flies a ton of them 24/7, with a little to no care, is by changing one little detail on them. Like maybe one less stripe, or one less star. With that one minor change they’re technically no longer American flags, they’re just flags.
You can do the same thing with the new pink Mercy skin. The new one will look almost exactly like the old one but there will be one minor difference to show that it’s a knockoff. That way anyone who actually had the original Pink Mercy will still have a special skin that nobody else has, and more importantly, the charity that was behind the pink Mercy skins existence can’t sue blizzard, because the new “Pink Mercy” skin is technically not really the pink Mercy skin.
Why would they want to cheapen something that is practically their own intellectual property by making a ‘knock-off’ of it. In all likelihood, with the evidence presented to us, Blizz can’t simply make the decision to run Pink Mercy again on their own, as it was made in conjunction with BCRF -and indeed has BCRF branding on it…and frankly, even if they could, I don’t think they should. There are skins in the game that are genuinely limited time, rare skins. It’s literally a business model. The more often Blizz decides to dilute that notion, the less belief people have in their ‘limited run’ skin system, and people won’t buy into it.
They’re a company looking to make money in some form. Cheapening their business model and their IP is not good for business. Even running the charity again to get Pink Mercy isn’t good for business; they did that exact same charity before. What would be good would be an all new skin collaboration with an all new charity.
What I am saying is that it has never been shown or said by a representative from blizzard OR BCRF that they are contractually bound in any way NOT to use Pink Mercy as they see fit.
There is no reason for it either. The skin was made in-house by blizzard and the event was run by blizzard with BCRFs permission to attach their name and branding TO THE EVENT. BCRFs involvement was in promotion, accepting the money, and then telling everyone what they did with it. None of that says they have rights to any of the blizzard assets.
I have no idea what you’re arguing with me for, I’m just tired of people implying there’s some sort of legal excuse for blizzard to not rehash distribution of the skin in some way. There is not until someone who represents either side of that partnership says there is or a contractual and legally binding document or clause is found.
I can understand this argument, and from the perspective of someone who values exclusivity enough to pay for it, I can say it’s valid, at least as an argument against.
I’m just noticing the mythos springing up around why the skin isn’t coming back and people saying things like “they gonna get sued” or “they legally cannot without BCRFs approval”, and that bothers me… cause none of that was ever said or even hinted at.
Do you think blizz puts every single one of their contracts on a public forum so everyone can see their goings on?
It’s quite obvious they can’t just ‘use it’. This goes with any collaborative venture.
I don’t care if it comes back. I really don’t. But it wont