The "Team Four Star" actors were blacklisted by Funi and Toei rumor

[WittyUsername]

The “influence” on Kai amounts to Nappa saying he hates the media and a Wilhelm scream being used in the same scene it was in DBZA and the would be joke with the Cell Games recreation that TOEI put the kibosh on.

Some references does not qualify as influence

What about Goku’s line about Mr. Popo being scary when he’s angry? Also, it might just be a coincidence, but it is worth noting that TeamFourStar’s Freeza predates Chris Ayres’ version, and the two renditions do sound similar.

[MasenkoHA]

The “influence” on Kai amounts to Nappa saying he hates the media and a Wilhelm scream being used in the same scene it was in DBZA and the would be joke with the Cell Games recreation that TOEI put the kibosh on.

Some references does not qualify as influence

What about Goku’s line about Mr. Popo being scary when he’s angry? Also, it might just be a coincidence, but it is worth noting that TeamFourStar’s Freeza predates Chris Ayres’ version, and the two renditions do sound similar.

What about it? Yes its another small reference. Again that doesn’t make it an influence.


And it is a coincidence they wanted to make Freeza more like the Japanese version and realized Young didn’t fit so she was replaced

[Melee_Sovereign]

They sound exactly the same. It can't be a coincidence.

But actually, I didn't even realize DBZA Frieza predates Kai Frieza.

[WittyUsername]

The “influence” on Kai amounts to Nappa saying he hates the media and a Wilhelm scream being used in the same scene it was in DBZA and the would be joke with the Cell Games recreation that TOEI put the kibosh on.

Some references does not qualify as influence

What about Goku’s line about Mr. Popo being scary when he’s angry? Also, it might just be a coincidence, but it is worth noting that TeamFourStar’s Freeza predates Chris Ayres’ version, and the two renditions do sound similar.

What about it? Yes its another small reference. Again that doesn’t make it an influence.


And it is a coincidence they wanted to make Freeza more like the Japanese version and realized Young didn’t fit so she was replaced

My point is that the writers at FUNimation seemed to like/and or recognize how popular DBZA was, so they decided to reference it in their official dub.

I’m gonna be honest, it really does seem like you and ABED are letting your personal dislike/indifference about TeamFourStar cloud your judgment. You don’t have to personally like to something to recognize how significant it is with a fandom.

[Soppa Saia People]

They sound exactly the same. It can't be a coincidence.

But actually, I didn't even realize DBZA Frieza predates Kai Frieza.

i mean kuriboh's freeza is more or less just a more masculine version of newstones/young's voice for him, and ayres' voice is kind of the same deal but ehh, there's a lot more to it i think. also, tfs' freeza only predates ayres' first appearance by like 2 months, i don't know how dubbing works, but i would have to imagine funimation had already cast ayres and have him record his lines before then.

[jjgp1112]

They sound exactly the same. It can't be a coincidence.

But actually, I didn't even realize DBZA Frieza predates Kai Frieza.

i mean kuriboh's freeza is more or less just a more masculine version of newstones/young's voice for him, and ayres' voice is kind of the same deal but ehh, there's a lot more to it i think. also, tfs' freeza only predates ayres' first appearance by like 2 months, i don't know how dubbing works, but i would have to imagine funimation had already cast ayres and have him record his lines before then.

Little Kuriboh's Frieza first showed up in the Barock special, which if memory serves was still 2009. Linda Young had still been Frieza in the very first episode of Kai in Mid-2010 and her recasting was very last-minute. Given how close-to-airdate the dub episodes had been recorded, LK's voice had already been out in the ether by then.

[Soppa Saia People]

ah yeah, the bardock stuff tripped me up, the YouTube upload date is january 2011, but looking through the DBZ:A thread on here says like fall 2009 or so. my mistake.

[ABED]

My point is that the writers at FUNimation seemed to like/and or recognize how popular DBZA was, so they decided to reference it in their official dub.

I’m gonna be honest, it really does seem like you and ABED are letting your personal dislike/indifference about TeamFourStar cloud your judgment. You don’t have to personally like to something to recognize how significant it is with a fandom.

I'd hardly call a shout out significant. People here have claimed that it kept the story popular and even was largely responsible for the revival.

[WittyUsername]

My point is that the writers at FUNimation seemed to like/and or recognize how popular DBZA was, so they decided to reference it in their official dub.

I’m gonna be honest, it really does seem like you and ABED are letting your personal dislike/indifference about TeamFourStar cloud your judgment. You don’t have to personally like to something to recognize how significant it is with a fandom.

I'd hardly call a shout out significant. People here have claimed that it kept the story popular and even was largely responsible for the revival.

I certainly wasn’t one of those people. Again, I specifically said that I think it’s a stretch to credit TFS with keeping Dragon Ball relevant. All I ever said was that it left a big impression on the Western side of the fanbase.

[Robo4900]

TFS's DBZ Abridged doesn't have to be a reason why the original show is popular for it to still be a good series.

The reality is that DBZA has had a significant impact on the fan culture and internet culture in general (both positive and negative), but that general audiences have always gravitated to new official Dragon Ball except in times of severe fatigue brought on by the series having run for 10 years without a break (Japan in 1995-1997).

I think one thing that's missed by those in this thread who are pushing the idea that TFS reinvigorated the franchise is that the lack of new official Dragon Ball in the west from 2005 to 2012 wasn't a period where the franchise was in danger of being forgotten; far from it, in fact. The popularity of licensed video games, DVDs (including stuff like uncut seasons 1-2), Kai, etc. consistently proved that people remembered and still liked Dragon Ball, even if there weren't any new episodes or movies to watch. DBZA didn't resurrect a dying franchise, it was a fan series celebrating a well-liked show that wasn't running new episodes at the time, but which had recently had a smash-hit DVD re-release.

While it is true that many Dragon Ball fans are not also DBZA fans (ABED, Cure Dragon 255), there is a very sizeable portion of Dragon Ball fans who are Abridged fans (in fact, I would guess you're far more likely to run into a Dragon Ball fan who's seen and enjoyed Abridged than one who's seen the original Dragon Ball anime), and for such people, Abridged is a valuable part of their experience as a fan. And that's fine, but DBZA doesn't have to have somehow saved Dragon Ball for you to enjoy it; it doesn't become more "valid" by having helped the show out of a tough time to be very meaningful to your personal enjoyment of Dragon Ball, just like how Toonami's run of DBZ didn't have to be Dragon Ball's saviour in the west to have been very important to many American fans of the show.
(And, to be clear, DBZ's pre-Toonami syndication run was very, very popular; the only reason it moved to Toonami is Saban wanted to focus on in-house programming that they made more money off of, and thanks to its popularity, DBZ found its new home on Toonami pretty much immediately after Saban dropped them)

If you like DBZA, good for you. If you don't like it, then also good for you. No one's opinion is more correct than anyone else's. It's far more sensible to discuss the series in terms of its own qualities, though, rather than any potential impact on the original show and/or its popularity.

---

As for TFS's standing in official terms, they're a group making money off of work on a franchise they never obtained a license for. Are they within their rights when they do that? Well... I don't think it really matters, but I feel it is worthwhile addressing it briefly... Except it can't really be addressed briefly, so here's an optional diversion about fair use:

Spoiler:

DISCLAIMER before I proceed: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. I am not accusing anyone of breaking any laws. Do not take legal advice from randos on the internet. This is my understanding as someone who has done some googling.

Fair use doesn't automatically apply to works of parody/satire as many seem to think, because the reason fair use typically applies to such works is because one of the main qualities to determining if fair use applies is matters of criticism and education. Movie critics can use clips of movies they're critiquing, and parody artists on YouTube can make song parody videos in which the lyrics and staging mock and dissect the original, but Weird Al Yankovic needs to get permission to do his work.

Another important quality of fair use is whether the work is transformative; ultimately, TeamFourStar are still using roughly the same characters and story as seen in the original manga and anime, and using it for the purposes of retelling that story in a slightly different context. It's not so much a parody/satire as much as it's a comedic remake.

Another interesting one to consider is whether it damages the brand in a way that could potentially harm the profits of the company who owns the rights. Clearly many fans (such as myself) wouldn't think so, since it has enhanced our enjoyment of the franchise, but who's to say a court wouldn't see it differently? And regardless, this is just one of the qualities of fair use; fair use is a concept defined by some vague guidelines, it's not a clear-cut rule.

So, where does this leave TFS, legally speaking?

Speaking as someone who is not a lawyer and whose ramblings should not be taken as legal advice, it's not clear. TFS themselves have referred to their work on Abridged as being legally grey, and they (unlike me) have good reason to research how fair use actually works in-depth, so I think it would be foolish for any of us non-lawyer fans to definitively say "They unambiguously qualify for fair use." TFS probably know better than any of us in this regard, they're saying it's grey, so I would say it's a mistake to assume fair use would apply just because their work is often labelled as a parody.

Personally, I think something involving as much effort, creativity, and talent as DBZA should count as fair use on the principle that it's using a copyrighted work to aid in creative endeavour, but that's just my opinion on how it should be, not an observation of how it actually is. How it actually is is very unclear to a not-lawyer such as myself, so I couldn't possibly say whether Abridged is protected by fair use or not. If this subject interests you, I suggest looking it up. Fair use itself is essentially a 2-page legal document, so it's not that hard to get a surface-level layman's understanding like I have. But, to be clear, this is just for interest. If you are looking for actual legal advice, talk to a lawyer, do not listen to some rando on the internet.

But ultimately, whether or not TFS's work on DBZA counts as fair use is immaterial here. If we assume TFS are operating within the bounds of fair use, Toei are still well within their rights to ask Funimation to change stuff about their English dubs, such as removing their lines from Kai TFC. Personally, I would assume someone at Toei USA asked Funi to remove that TFS scene from Kai TFC, and that led Chris Sabat to be far more careful about potential inclusion of TFS in future works, since their inclusion could suddenly be ordered to be removed by Toei, necessitating a last-minute change to a finished product, and wasting any time or money that went towards putting TFS into the work, and it could anger Toei, who are very precious about how their franchise is handled. But this is just speculation, don't take it as fact.

The blacklisting rumour sounds like it was started by common sense connecting of dots and theorising as I did just now, which some people started spreading as fact, even though there's no evidence for it. Happens all the time online, and particularly it happens a lot in the Dragon Ball fandom, so we shouldn't exactly be surprised by this. See: "Toonami saved DBZ from failure!", "Sean Schemmel passed out while recording Super Saiyan 3", and about 90% of what's written on the Fandom Dragon Ball Wiki.

[Adamant]

Personally, I think something involving as much effort, creativity, and talent as DBZA should count as fair use on the principle that it's using a copyrighted work to aid in creative endeavour

If that was the case (which it ABSOLUTELY isn't), no dub company would ever have to license the shows they dub.

but Weird Al Yankovic needs to get permission to do his work.

No, he doesn't actually HAVE to:

Does Al get permission to do his parodies?

Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it’s important to maintain the relationships that he’s built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties.

[LoganForkHands73]

The videos being free is undoubtedly one of the biggest factors to consider in DBZ:A's cultural influence. I can't count the number of times I've unwittingly fell down a TFS rabbithole thanks to autoplay and recommendations.

[Melee_Sovereign]

I think one thing that's missed by those in this thread who are pushing the idea that TFS reinvigorated the franchise is that the lack of new official Dragon Ball in the west from 2005 to 2012 wasn't a period where the franchise was in danger of being forgotten; far from it, in fact. The popularity of licensed video games, DVDs (including stuff like uncut seasons 1-2), Kai, etc. consistently proved that people remembered and still liked Dragon Ball, even if there weren't any new episodes or movies to watch.

I think the original claim that sparked this discussion wasn't "DBZA kept Dragon Ball popular" but rather "helped keep Dragon Ball in people's consciousness" meaning it helped keep Dragon Ball in active discussion.

Dragon Ball would always be popular with or without DBZA. But it doesn't mean it will always be in active discussions. DVD releases and such sell, sure. But it doesn't give people much to talk about. Its material everyone has already seen. A parody series that many people find funny and love to quote, does give people something to talk about. And hell, if you hate the series, that also gives you something to talk about.

[MasenkoHA]

Dragon Ball would always be popular with or without DBZA. But it doesn't mean it will always be in active discussions. DVD releases and such sell, sure. But it doesn't give people much to talk about. Its material everyone has already seen. A parody series that many people find funny and love to quote, does give people something to talk about. And hell, if you hate the series, that also gives you something to talk about.

Except those season sets gave fans plenty to talk about (and not really good things but still) from the awkward 16x9ing of the 4x3 footage to the dub finally being paired with the Japanese score (something Fukunaga had been talking about doing since 1997) to the selective redubbing. Those controversial season sets are still sparking discussion to this day.

Between those sets and Dragon Ball Kai, DBZA was far from the only things fans had to talk about in that time period

[Robo4900]

I think the original claim that sparked this discussion wasn't "DBZA kept Dragon Ball popular" but rather "helped keep Dragon Ball in people's consciousness" meaning it helped keep Dragon Ball in active discussion.

Dragon Ball would always be popular with or without DBZA. But it doesn't mean it will always be in active discussions. DVD releases and such sell, sure. But it doesn't give people much to talk about. Its material everyone has already seen. A parody series that many people find funny and love to quote, does give people something to talk about. And hell, if you hate the series, that also gives you something to talk about.

Sure. And in that case, I would be willing to argue that both sides are kinda right -- the people who love DBZA are right that TFS gave them a lot of fun stuff to talk about and consume while there wasn't anything else new happening, and the people who hate it are right that all this really was, was people who were already fans having more to talk about and it ultimately had no significant impact on the franchise's popularity.

I do think DBZA has largely been good for the fandom, and internet culture at large. The people who hate it are in the minority, and those who love it have experienced a lot of joy from it.

But, even if DBZA had solely kept Dragon Ball in the minds of casual fans with new stuff to discuss for a time, that time would cover only the first 8 episodes, after which Kai was announced, and began airing between episodes 9 and 10. Granted, it wouldn't hit the USA until May 2010, nearly a year later, but in that time, TFS only put out three more episodes. DBZA would go on to run for just about another ten years, during which there was a fairly steady stream of Dragon Ball that was at least as new as DBZA was, to English-speakers. (New tone, dialogue, actors, faster pace, etc. That's Kai in a nutshell. Then there was outright new Dragon Ball from 2013 onwards, which was even more new)
And that's all while ignoring the 2008, 2010, and 2011 OVAs, as well as the Orange Brick DVDs in 2007-2008, and the Dragon Boxes in 2009-2010.

So, again, even though I do love DBZA, if it hadn't been around, there would have been a lot of new stuff to discuss in the 2008-2018 span it ran for.
Again though, DBZA doesn't have to have had a marked effect on the popularity of Dragon Ball and discussions thereof to be a really good series beloved by its fans. So, this is fine.

If that was the case (which it ABSOLUTELY isn't), no dub company would ever have to license the shows they dub.

lol. Yep.

My idea of an ideal scenario here falls down pretty much the moment you introduce the idea that we don't live in a post-scarcity utopia, and therefore we are still beholden to capitalism (or one of the other, even worse systems).
It's a nice idea, but it doesn't work in the real world, sadly.

Though, in fairness, with DB being about 30 years old by the time TFS got to it, a public domain argument could be made about it (if they specifically did DB rather than the then-just-less-than-20-year-old Z), but that's a whole 'nother can of worms based on the (very reasonable) assertion that intellectual property copyright should, just like hardware patents, only last for about 20 years.

No, he doesn't actually HAVE to:

Does Al get permission to do his parodies?
Al does get permission from the original writers of the songs that he parodies. While the law supports his ability to parody without permission, he feels it’s important to maintain the relationships that he’s built with artists and writers over the years. Plus, Al wants to make sure that he gets his songwriter credit (as writer of new lyrics) as well as his rightful share of the royalties.

I'm pretty sure that's wrong. The law does not support the ability to parody without permission in the sense it's used here, as far as I'm aware. Fair use isn't about doing a funny version of something else, none of the qualities of fair use refer to that. Criticism is one of the qualities of fair use, which is the one people tend to point to as the "Satire/parody clause of fair use", since it often covers works of parody, but that does requite it to criticise the original work.

This video by Tom Scott which was extensively fact checked by lawyers explains that

[The baseline for uploading a video of yourself playing a cover song before YouTube] is that you'd have to pay for an expensive license, or you get sued and you lose. Or more likely, you get a cease-and-desist letter, you pay a bit of money to make the lawyers go away, and you drop out of the music industry, disillusioned. And you can't get away with it by changing the lyrics. A parody is probably not "fair use" unless you're directly criticising the original, and even then, it's questionable. 'Weird Al' Yankovic, the most popular parody artist in history, licenses the songs he parodies. There are lots of lengthy law journal articles asking whether he needs to, but... It's better safe than sorry, and yeah, I wouldn't fancy his chances if it actually went to court.

Anyone definitively saying "Weird Al does not need to ask permission to do his parodies" is probably very misinformed, as even a cursory glance at how fair use works makes this idea fall apart. Realistically, if he really wanted to go that way, he could try it, but I would guess he'd be tied up in legal proceedings for years, regardless of whether he successfully argues fair use or not -- and there would be no guarantee he would win. Licensing the songs is safer, smarter, and (interestingly, as is mentioned in that FAQ entry) keeps up a good relationship with the artists he parodies, which he wouldn't have if he went the route that would mean a lot of them would likely have sued him by now.
Why this misinformation is on his FAQ remains a mystery to me, but I would guess it was written by someone he hired to do PR stuff who didn't directly consult with his lawyers.

Now, again, I am not a lawyer, but the video I cited here was extensively fact-checked by real lawyers, and it mentions that there's some dispute over whether he has to, so a definitive statement of "[...] the law supports his ability to parody without permission [...]" is not something to throw around so casually. Particularly when similar cases are happening as recently as this past December, where a "Parody" that didn't criticise the original work, much in a similar vein to the word of Weird Al, was ruled as not protected by fair use.
So, even though it would be naive to say his work would definitely not be protected by fair use if it went to court, it's far more naive to say it's definitely protected, and he would be quite a fool if he tried to do his work without getting the necessary permission.

[Melee_Sovereign]

Except those season sets gave fans plenty to talk about (and not really good things but still) from the awkward

I'm not saying DVDs give people nothing to talk about. But it simply doesn't compare to how Abridged permeated the fandom.

[MasenkoHA]

Except those season sets gave fans plenty to talk about (and not really good things but still) from the awkward

I'm not saying DVDs give people nothing to talk about. But it simply doesn't compare to how Abridged permeated the fandom.

And I’d argue the complete opposite. The abridged series hit a subsection of the fandom (as well as people who have no interest in Dragon Ball outside of the abridged series) were the season sets were obviously going to take up a lot more discussion for Dragon Ball fans since it pertains to the actual show


Same thing with Kai since it was part of the actual franchise and not just some parody thing.

[kemuri07]

Though, in fairness, with DB being about 30 years old by the time TFS got to it, a public domain argument could be made about it (if they specifically did DB rather than the then-just-less-than-20-year-old Z), but that's a whole 'nother can of worms based on the (very reasonable) assertion that intellectual property copyright should, just like hardware patents, only last for about 20 years.

I don't think you need to be a lawyer to know that there's no chance of that happening.

[TheGreatness25]

Though, in fairness, with DB being about 30 years old by the time TFS got to it, a public domain argument could be made about it (if they specifically did DB rather than the then-just-less-than-20-year-old Z), but that's a whole 'nother can of worms based on the (very reasonable) assertion that intellectual property copyright should, just like hardware patents, only last for about 20 years.

There is no public domain argument. Dragon Ball is a copyrighted property.

[Robo4900]

I don't think you need to be a lawyer to know that there's no chance of that happening.

There is no public domain argument. Dragon Ball is a copyrighted property.

When I said "public domain argument" I meant there's an argument that something as old as Dragon Ball should be in the public domain.

That's not how it currently works, but it's how it should work.

... But, yeah, that's never gonna happen. For one thing, Disney is never gonna let any change to copyright pass that would let Mickey Mouse fall into public domain. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.