PDA

View Full Version : what do you guys think?


fluxchild
07-08-2006, 01:55 PM
Ok, say you made up characters that were similar to Billy and Mandy and other characters from cartoon network and made an "adult swim" version....How close to their original countrparts can I make them without being sued? Or should it just be implied, and the people in the know would get the jokes, and ironies?



help a brother out....

Jason Powell
07-08-2006, 04:11 PM
Have you seen THE VENTURE BROTHERS (which is a spoof of JOHNNY QUEST). That is about as close as you can get.

-SIN-
GATOR

Morganza
07-08-2006, 04:13 PM
The only thing original on the cartoon network is the anime, so you're golden.

fluxchild
07-08-2006, 04:28 PM
Have you seen THE VENTURE BROTHERS (which is a spoof of JOHNNY QUEST). That is about as close as you can get.

-SIN-
GATOR

I didn't even think of The Venture Brothers. I can get pretty damn close then. Do you think "The Horrifying adventures of William and Amanda" is too risky?

Mwynn
07-08-2006, 04:36 PM
You should just call their Lawyers now.

Jason Powell
07-08-2006, 04:57 PM
I didn't even think of The Venture Brothers. I can get pretty damn close then. Do you think "The Horrifying adventures of William and Amanda" is too risky?

Actually you probably could get away with that but the story would be the issue. Mwynn is right about contacting them. You would be surprised at what you can and can not do. For instance, coming from my experience, when I invented FUZZY BUNNIES FROM HELL, Ralph (the demon rabbit) looked a lot more like Bugs Bunny than he does now. I wrote WB and explained what I was doing and how I didn't want to cross hairs with them so they (at no cost to me other than a phone bill) set me up with their art department head and we worked out a design that didn't violate their copyright. It was pretty easy and I have my own, original, character today. Plus I made some cool contacts and gain valuable experience from the process.

-SIN-
GATOR

fluxchild
07-08-2006, 05:22 PM
thanks guys....i appreciate the feedback.

Buckyrig
07-08-2006, 05:28 PM
The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

From official copyright website. (http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html)

As per usual, the law doesn't like to really define anything until is has to.