>>11554471Following up on this. So first of all, I still think you moved the goal posts. We argued about this back and forth last thread and you didn't bust out this "they just can't use PoP in tv shows, everybody knows this" until after I posted those card backs. If you knew this the whole time, why wait to post that video?
My impressions from watching that video is that it still feels like we are missing part of the puzzle as to what's going on.
>narrator consistently using "apparently", "perhaps" and other "IF this, than that" type language.Just pointing out that these are words jump out as assumptive language
>the contracts are not publicly available>taking Kevin Smith's word at face value>Revshit tanked and caused a backlash and there was only two parts of a supposed trilogyIt possible that Netflix didn't want to pay for the rights to something a show that wasn't connecting with fans. It seemed like by teasing Despara they were going to set up Adora and She-Ra.
>why did Scott have to pay Dreamworks royalties if Mattel owns toy rights but not TV rights?>why does the minicomics collection have a big Dreamworks logo on the back cover?I have the first edition from 2015. If Mattel owned toy rights, does that include mini comics? Does this mean that since 2015, Mattel bought back the rights to PoP because as I pointed out with the card backs there are no other companies logos on the PoP but they are on the Thunder Cats.
