Just too damn funny, more Hello Kitty Warhammer

Thanks to AnotherAmpleUrsine, I did a google search, and sure as tootin, found the site she mentioned, Hello Kitty Sisters of Battle.


Check out the detail work on the mural on the back of that rhino! Just awesome!


So funny…

And on another note, since I’m talking funny…

I’m a big fan of Penny Arcade. Always love their work.

They did a comic a long time ago, that they had to pull from their site. As it is a parody that seems to be perfectly covered by law as I understand it, I am going to post it here until someone official tells me to pull it. Why? Cause it’s freaking awesome. Especially if you remember American McGee’s ‘Alice’ video game.

The image is not safe for work, so I’ll put it as a bookmark, and if you are in a safe environment, you can clickie the link.

Seriously, I know the image ain’t safe for work. It’s a webcomic, by Penny Arcade, but it’s still NOT something you want to have to explain to your school teacher. I think it’s funny as heck, especially knowing Sarah Michelle Gellar is going to play Alice in a movie version of American McGees Alice. But anyway… enjoy.

@ Rohan… you had to make me break out the Pooh Penny Arcade, didn’t you?


Pooh by Penny Arcade


18 thoughts on “Just too damn funny, more Hello Kitty Warhammer

  1. I think that HK tag on that back of the right tank is a sticker. It’s too shiny to have been painted onto the tank.


  2. The problem wasn’t that PA was parodying American McGee’s Alice. That’s perfectly allowable under copyright law. It’s that they were using Strawberry Shortcake, which is IP that they do not own, to do so.


  3. Ahhh, but see, that was the brilliance to me, that not only were they parodying American McGees’ Alice, but they were also parodying Strawberry Shortcake’s weird place in American culture at the same time.

    Sure, they don’t own the Strawberry Shortcake IP… neither did they own American McGee’s Alice.

    You don’t have to in a parody. That’s what made the whole thing so funny. I mean, seriously, if you have to own the rights to a property to parody it’s relevance to a culture, then MAD Magazine would have ceased to exist decades ago.

    I think it was using the actual names that were the core issue… and the possible reason they chose to pull it down rather than dilute the humor by caving and modifying the actual art.

    But that’s another thing that’s so great. Penny Arcade doesn’t HAVE to host it for it to be seen.

    This is true freedom of information. Penny Arcade created an image, a concept, and ‘the man’ said “You are forbidden to mock us.”

    Penny Arcade obeyed the law and removed the picture, but it was already too late. Anyone that viewed the image was free to save it themselves on thier own computer.

    And here we are, years later. The image lives on, and it will always live on somewhere. It was too late to crush it the second it went live, and long after anyone gives a shit about Strawberry Shortcake as a treasured icon of childhood, there will be people that remember that American Greetings tried to crush a parody because a suit somewhere didn’t like a bunch of gaming webcomic readers in a unique subculture seeing it.

    And if some suit somewhere tells me to take it down, I will, and I’ll post the letter here for everyone to enjoy, and someone else somewhere will put it right back up, because standing up to this kind of silliness is fun, and Penny Arcade is teh awesome.

    That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.


  4. The HK Warhammer 40K army reminds me of a Warhammer Fantasy army I saw at the Detroit GT a few years back. A local woman had taken an entire orc army and converted them all into females with aprons, long hair, and weird weapons, like rolling pins, spatulas etc. Even the giant was a huge hairy female giant with a rolling pin and apron. It was really well done, and hilarious. I just wish I had pictures of it.


  5. I wish you had pics of that too.

    I have been taught to appreciate and respect the hard work that goes into not only cleanly painting and decorating minis, but also the incredible work that goes into mods such as you describe.

    Mannyac did a mod on one mini, I actually have a picture of it at home, where he made a flame puffball in a dwarf mages’ hand from scratch. Real nice. He had to do the mod, cause how many dwarf mage figs do you see out there today?

    Dang it, now I can’t remember for sure that it was a Dwarf. I think that was why he had to do a mod, he wanted a dwarf mage.

    The pic is cool, I’ll have to go find it when I get home.


  6. Sure, they don’t own the Strawberry Shortcake IP… neither did they own American McGee’s Alice.

    That doesn’t matter. For example, you know how BRK makes those BRK Hunter Movies? If I wanted to, I could parody them. However, I could not make a Big Bear Butt movie to parody BRK. That would be misusing your IP.

    The target is fair game, but you have to have rights to the weapon.

    And I disagree that this was parodying Strawberry Shortcut at the same time. Any iconic childhood character could take her place and it would not change the meaning of the comic. For example, the exact same comic with Winnie-the-Pooh, or Dorothy of Oz would work. (Oh god, the images that just flashed into my head!)


  7. Rohan, you may very well be right. In fact, you probably are right.

    And you write a great blog. 🙂

    On the other hand…

    I love that pic, and I feel that it mocks Strawberry Shortcake pretty good. It may not do so as satire, but I know I’LL never look at Strawberry Shortcake the same after seeing that.

    And did you see Penny Arcades’ version of Pooh? Hold on, I got that pic somewhere….


  8. Rohan? No.

    The biggest reason for pulling it is that copyright fights are long and expensive, and American Greetings has a lot bigger pool for paying attorneys than Penny Arcade does. But as to the case itself,

    As to the situation itself, I’ll point to a Ninth District case and decision in particular. Called in public the “Cat in the Hat” case, it’s proper label is Dr. Seuss Enterprises v. Penguin Books USA. Quite simply, it is a book (The Cat NOT in the Hat) hammering OJ and the murder, written in the style of — and indeed using images extremely close to — Dr. Seuss’s (T. Geisel’s) Cat in the Hat. Dr. Seuss estate (in the person of his widow) brought suit.

    Pretty much exactly the case you said – hitting OJ in parody — by using a weapon that belonged to someone else (the Cat).

    The Supreme Court refused the appeal.

    There are other cases that involve parody, but that’s the benchmark for this sort of thing – where you do a parody that skewers one target by using the style/image/etc of another target. In other words, pretty much most of Weird Al Yankovich’s output.

    No, if the Penny Arcade crew could have afforded the cost of attorneys, they’d have eventually won. I think they call it a pyrrhic victory.


  9. You know…

    I’ll never understand why so many people that are smarter than me visit this blog.

    I feel like I should ask for payment in donations of bananas.


  10. Not smarter. Different learning. Trust me, we learn from you too.

    But the reason we come read is because we enjoy what you write – whether we’re being edjumacated or entertained, it’s worth our time.

    so… have a banana.


  11. I consider the part where the Appeals Court says:

    ‘[16] We completely agree with the district court that Pen-
    guin and Dove’s fair use defense is “pure shtick ” and that
    their post-hoc characterization of the work is “completely

    to be particularly damning.


  12. Rohan, the critical point in the decision that is relevant in this case is footnote 9. The concluding sentence is:

    “The court found that The Cat NOT in the Hat! was not entitled to a parody fair use defense because it failed to target the original work.”

    The poster pokes fun at both its targets. Indeed, most viewers would say American Greetings’ Strawberry Shortcake is the primary target, with McGee’s Alice being a secondary. No, let me be more precise, I perceive it that way, as have most of the people who have pointed the cartoon out to me, as they all refer to it as the Penny Arcade’s Strawberry Shortcake, not Penny Arcade’s Alice.

    I do regret being unclear – I let my mind go in way too many directions and so failed to be precise.

    I also need to back up from an earlier statement. PROBABLY, not CERTAINLY, had Penny Arcade had the money, they’d have won. They are definitely poking fun at Strawberry Shortcake, which Penguin’s Cat NOT in the Hat failed to do to Seuss. (In fact, there are several paragraphs not only in the District decision but in the decision to which it refers which point out the intent not to parody but to use as a hook to sell yet another story about OJ.) Pretty much every test on which Penguin’s book gets hammered is passed by Penny Arcade.

    In the end, though, it’s immaterial. First and foremost, because the cartoon was pulled instead of being fought in court. Second, and almost as significant, because it’s become an internet icon. As the bear said, if he’s asked to pull it down, he will – and someone else will put it up.


  13. I disagree that it targets Strawberry Shortcake. We call the strawberry shortcake comic because it’s entitled “American McGee’s Strawberry Shortcake”. It’s parodying McGee’s twisting childhood innocent works.

    If you used Dorothy from Oz (“American McGee’s Dorothy”) or Little Miss Muffet, or Goldilocks, or Sleeping Beauty, you’d get a very similar result. It would be pretty much the exact same comic, and carry the exact same message. If you can substitute another IP and still have the same message, to me that says that Strawberry Shortcake is not the target of the parody.


  14. Actually, the images are significantly different enough that this could be considered parody of the American Greetings folk. And I’d be willing to continue arguing on that – the fact we can ridicule most politicians with similar lines does not give them a protection. Gah, that’s badly stated. Instead… In general, the fact that multiple potential targets exist does not protect the actual target.

    That said, I went and did a little research, and I discovered a small fact that said American Greetings would probably have won the case. The reason is simple – it was not based upon copyright. It was based upon violation of trademark. And there the case is much more favorable to the card company.

    Had the folk at Penny Arcade changed the names slightly – possibly as small as “Berry Shortcake” for example (though that’s cutting it close) – they might have won. However, the cease and desist letter was specifically directed at the use of the Strawberry Shortcake, Custard, and Plum Puddin’ marks. (Custard is dangerous ground for the company alone, but in context with the other two — especially with the apostrophe’d puddin’ — is probably quite defensible as a trademark.)

    Bluntly, American Greetings was well within its rights to demand the withdrawal. That they did it in a ham-fisted manner that set themselves up as the bad guys in what is now an internet legend… yeah. They really should have discussed this with their PR department as well as their attorneys.


  15. I’m sure (lawy aside) some are thinking if there is any other sites (regular or underground) to find these old classics


Comments are closed.