by wannaexit 58 Replies latest jw friends
This protection extends to any copyrightable pictorial or written expression contained in the work.
The reference you provided from copyright.gov says a copyrightable pictorial. I never said items or characters aren't copyrightable, but there has to be with some degree of it being novel or original for it to be copyrightable.
'they are not able to claim a copyright for Caleb or Sophia."- Richard Oliver
"I never said items or characters aren't copyrightable" - Richard Oliver
Which is it ? Can they or can't they be copyrighted?
Personally, I think it's hilarious and a bit desperate.
It reminds me of those Shaklee or Amway "Ask me how!" bumper stickers back in the 80s.
It would be even more funny if it was an exJW / Apostate™ marketing those idiotic pins to JWs. I know someone who makes pewter pins and jewelry and he says it's easy money if you target the correct market.
I said that Caleb and Sofia are not copyrightable. I never said that all characters aren't. There has to be some novel or originality for a character to be copyrightable. I am using your own references. I understand you want to spin everything one way or the other. But atleast 4 circuit court of appeals has issued decisions on this subject, and keep highlighting the novel and originality needed. Ironman is unique and original, but a character who is 5-10 years old who is male and has brown hair and brown eyes is really hard to claim it is unique.
Richard Oliver writes:
a character who is 5-10 years old who is male and has brown hair and brown eyes is really hard to claim it is unique.
Well, you have Dora the Explorer © targeting young kids with "her" brand. IMO Caleb and Sophia are the WT surrogate for characters like this - marketing is targeted to *children*. This is the age (5 - 14 years) where brand indoctrination is the most effective, because children are drawn to make believe characters, including Dora, Caleb and Sophia, Tony the Tiger, Lucky the Leprechaun, Ronald McDonald et al, etc.
Cedars from jwsurvey complains he got notice from YouTube and other hosting sites of the take down of a video he produced mocking the Caleb and Sofia videos. Again sparky using your own reference, the part that was copyrighted was the video, not the characters, he used the actual video from Watchtower. The video itself is what has the copyright and that is why it was taken down.
You also reference you have to be a real lawyer to understand these issues. First, the bar association and rules from state supreme court bars anyone who is not a lawyer from giving legal advice, not to comprehend what the law is. Second, courts tend to write opinions in a way for lay people to read and comprehend their discussions and decisions. It is a cornerstone of Western judicial principal for anyone to understand the law to atleast a reasonable degree.
Dora the explorer can be claimed as unique and novel. A character who has a talking monkey as a friend who goes out on adventures of exploration. Again, I never said a character cannot fall under the copyright act, but there has to be some unique, original or novel. In Wrench v Taco Bell the court ruled that the benefit to a person or corporation does not, raise a character or idea to a novel, original or unique idea.
Richard: I said that Caleb and Sofia are not copyrightable.
If the cartoonists had drawn Caleb and Sofia as simple stick figures, I would agree. However, they are relatively detailed images; much more detailed then Mickey Mouse, for example. They are instantly recognisable. Thus the "originality" issue is satisfied.
This is a trivial issue, but please have another look at the quote in Sparky's second last post.
OK Richard Oliver......give me your 'expert' opinion:
The writers of the Simpsons cartoon show decide that they want to have a subset of characters, much like 'Itchy and Scratchy', appear on the show from time to time. They decide to copy exactly the characters of Caleb and Sophia from the Watchtower videos. Everything about the characters is identical: voice inflections, dress and grooming, their names, their facial expressions and even includes them using Watchtower 'talk' without directly lifting information 'word for word' from any publication. Does the Watchtower Society have any recourse against the creators of the Simpsons cartoon or not? If so, why? If not, why not?
Sgeperdless. You use the character of Mickey mouse as your example. Again there has to be some novel or unique idea for it to be copyrightable. If you say that the watchtower can claim Caleb as a trademark, the reference sparky posted talks about recognizable by the general public. I don't think anyone on this site could make the argument that Caleb can be recognized by the general public.
