Are those real people? I’d google them but I’m too lazy.
I just love that this woman is now on record as saying that she looks so much like a tiny cartoon hamster that she felt compelled to file a lawsuit against said hamster’s manufacturer.
Here we see two Dalton Robertsons, side by side.
Clearly Hasbro is doing this on purpose.
The names did come up as real people.
No one famous, just regular folks.
Diabolical.
A very specific coincidence. You would think Hasbro might google search the names they “make up” for their toys.
Why would they Google every name? Trying to come up with a human-sounding name that’s not being used by a live human sounds impossible. Take “Dalton Robertson” for example. Should Hasbro not been able to use that name for their toy because some random person is also named Dalton Robertson?
As long as the name isn’t copyrighted, they should be free to use whatever they want.
“Why should I change my name? He’s the one that sucks.”
It’s probably fine that they used the name of the girl from this picture, since I’m assuming the serial killer next to her has probably already consumed her body by this point anyway.
Why wouldn’t they? An ounce of prevention and all that. Especially if the name belongs to someone in the public eye, that’s just borrowing trouble.
Because it would take 5 seconds to avoid a lawsuit by someone in the public eye whose name you used. Seems like a really simple thing to me.
Ok, let’s say the start Googling every name. What’s the threshold of fame they need to stay under for not getting a frivolous lawsuit? Any idiot can file a lawsuit. Suppose Dalton Robertson files one. Did Hasbro fuck up on that toy?
Someone on a network ( I know but Fox is kind of a network news channel) news show with a name you have picked might lead you to pick another name. Or someone on a pro sports team, or even a major college sport.
Are you really arguing Hasbro shouldn’t do some kind of due diligence in picking a name for a toy they are going to spend maybe millions promoting?
Maybe they did? Harris Faulkner, unlike Trump, didn’t trademark her name. So maybe the guy that came up with the name thought it was fair game for a toy? After all, she’s not some superstar household name. She’s an anchor (one of many) on Fox News.
Edit: Are you arguing that Hasbro may never use any name that is already taken by someone on the internet?
What the hell kind of name is “Harris Faulkner” for a children’s toy anyway? How about Horsey Faulkner? There you go Hasbro, I win! Where’s my fucking paycheck?
It’s a hamster, man! Not a pony! “Hammy Faulkner” might work, although that makes me think of pigs instead.
It’s a stupid lawsuit.
It’s also a stupid (and weird) name for a toy hamster. Though, I’m not so sure about it being as sophisticated an operation as some suspect. I don’t think they spent millions promoting this toy. Perhaps the overall line (maybe) but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a hundred different hamsters, all with equally stupid names.
Hasbro clearly subscribes to my preferred naming scheme for cute things (pets, internet cat pictures, small cars/people): stuffy sounding “fancy” People Names.
Next cat I get is gonna be Reginald Brookweather, III or so help me god. . .
So much weird. Is the human aggrieved because she is black? A woman? A Fox Newscaster? Is it a problem because the figurine in question is a hamster? It doesn’t look like any hamster I have ever seen; if it was a more accurate portrayal would that have been better? Would another animal have been acceptable? Does she really think it looks like her? Most importantly, what does Hasbro have in mind for Bill O’Reilly?
Maybe she thinks giving the doll her name will imbue it with mystical powers, allowing children all over the world to invoke her for their own nefarious purposes. Because I mean, who has time for that?
As well as Brian Rubin, Telefrog, Pogue Mahone and…
…waaaaiiiiittttt a minute.