PDA

View Full Version : Copyright "Law" "Enforcement"



MooseDog
11-12-2008, 09:10 PM
DLA Piper, the firm that represents Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. (DSE), contacted the students that created the 3 ½ minute animated short based on the book “Marvin K. Mooney Will You Please Go Now!” and has asked for the removal of any and all content regarding this project.

Any release or use of this movie, whether or not for "profit," will be a violation of DSE's intellectual property rights. In cooperation with both DLA Piper and Seuss Enterprises we will make no use of this movie and regret to inform the community that it will never see the light of day.

Copyright Infringer (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=774971&postcount=29)

1.) how smart is this?
2.) legally within their (dse) rights?
3.) is sanctimonious condescension a requirement to graduate law school?

Hopper
11-12-2008, 09:15 PM
I don't know, but you'd better change your avatar or YOUR NEXT!!!

Titus
11-12-2008, 09:30 PM
It's a shame. Why they didn't got permission from the copyright holder first?

Disheartening.

MooseDog
11-12-2008, 09:39 PM
I don't know, but you'd better change your avatar or YOUR NEXT!!!

ROFLMAO! you almost made me spill my beer. then.....i wouldn't be laughing so hard! :devil:


Why they didn't got permission from the copyright holder first?

Fair Use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)

if mr. vaughan was involved, i'm assuming it was under his role as a professor at the d.a.v.e. school. you know, students studying :).

Titus
11-12-2008, 09:51 PM
I know what fair use is, actually in the past I've received several cease and desist letters :D.

I understand the love of Proton for Dr. Seuss' work, but it's a shame they limited the screening of the hard work done in this short due to a legal action. Next time they may choose copyright free stories like Peter and the wolf... or the second Tofu episode.

Well, just saying. I wish DAVE students the best.

Dexter2999
11-12-2008, 10:00 PM
Actually, I remember the thread posted back when this first came about. The Original Poster said that it wasn't a school project but a collaborative effort of some of the students. They made particular note that no instructors were involved. I think they liked Mr. Vaughn and chose something they thought would please him. I don't have any evidence of that, just my conjecture.


It's a shame. Why they didn't got permission from the copyright holder first?

Disheartening.

Most likely they wouldn't have gotten the permission if they had asked prior to production. However, at least then they wouldn't have put all that effort into it in the first place.

And if you think it was possible for them to get the permission, I find it doubtful as the companies in question were producing HORTON HEARS A WHO, benefiting from the Universal character license for SEUSS LANDING, and profiting from the DVD release of prior SEUSS properties both live action and animated... They are about profit. I don't have a problem with profit per se, but these people are aren't creators or innovators, they are exploiters only.

And that is what is disheartening, that those who do not create can quash those that do.

MooseDog
11-12-2008, 10:30 PM
sorry titus, wasn't implying otherwise. trying to help everyone and make a contribution.

dexter2999, couldn't agree more. this shows two things, imho;

1.) how out of touch the legal trade is with popular culture, it's tools, skills and wants, to the point where,

2.) one of dr. seuss's biggest fans, a life-long devotee is attacked and probably threatened. (talk about creating a casual disregard for the law and lawyers. boy, they're good at that!)

Matt
11-13-2008, 03:01 AM
That's a shame.

Speaking of copyright, on my YouTube channel (http://uk.youtube.com/user/TheDeadlyAvenger) I had some holiday movies I'd cut together. As a bit of a laugh, I put my favorite movie ident intro at the beginning - "20th Century Fox".

I recently noticed they had brought the attention of the Fox lawyers, bad times.

But then saw a "Copyright Claim Retracted" on the two movies I put it on, good times!

I like to think they saw the funny side of it!

SplineGod
11-13-2008, 07:56 AM
The other side of the coin is that many times those who want more flexibility and openess when it comes to use of copyrighted materials are the first to want their property protected at the first sign of infringement.
I think its common sense to ask permission before proceeding to use copyrighted material in any way.

cagey5
11-13-2008, 08:11 AM
Copyright Infringer (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=774971&postcount=29)

1.) how smart is this?
2.) legally within their (dse) rights?
3.) is sanctimonious condescension a requirement to graduate law school?

They're students right? Well I think they just learnt one of the most valuable lessons they could have before venturing into the commercial world.

I mean, all that time and effort and nothing to show for it. Could have been avoided because they should have seen it coming. I'm sure they won't get bitten twice.

Matt
11-13-2008, 08:59 AM
I have to agree with that.

Hey! I have IPR on that phrase! Cough up! ;)

Dexter2999
11-13-2008, 09:25 AM
I think its common sense to ask permission before proceeding to use copyrighted material in any way.

To you and me (and just about any other professional here) yes. I think these young people (I won't say kids because it seems derisive) are a generation growing up with "fan films". These films started at the fantasy, sci-fi, comic-cons and are now pouring over to Youtube. I think, to them, they just didn't see that they were doing anything wrong. In their minds it was a celebration of the story to bring it to life.

Most of these fan films are in fact infringements. I think a difference here is that the owners of the content are creators and I think they get a kick out of inspiring others to create and to see what they come up with.

There are two HUGE differences though.

Most fan films are not of a quality that could present a threat to the original work.

No fan film I have seen is an exact copy of the original work. It is usually a parody (and therefor protected) or an original work inspired by a famous work.

I think had a JR High School done this animation and it had turned out poorly, lawyers would never have raised their heads. They would have laughed it off as kids.

When talented people raise the bar to the level these students did, they are presenting a product that could have been misinterpreted as a professional work from the copyright holders....and something that could realize a profit unauthorized and un-negotiated percentages to the owners...well, just plain easier to just shut it down.

A friend of a friend is in the same boat. They produced an entry for a George Lucas Star Wars competition. The idea was to see who could make a short that would work as a pitch for a Star Wars TV spin off. Apparently these guys were serious. They scraped up $250,000 to make their short. Problem is they didn't make the deadline. So, they didn't qualify for consideration and now they have a quarter-million dollar piece they can't show outside of convention fan films.

Ouch, babe!

I know these people put alot of hours into their project. But they did get some beautiful results. They have something that can use for personal enjoyment. And as long as they don't reproduce the audio or story in full, I am pretty sure they can still use as pieces for their reel. And, I am sure they learned some valuable lessons in both animation and the legal realms.

MooseDog
11-13-2008, 11:02 AM
...I think its common sense to ask permission before proceeding to use copyrighted material in any way.

100% agreed.....outside of school.

the chilling effects of getting permission from lawyers to study something at school is unspeakable.


...Could have been avoided because they should have seen it coming.

you're probably 100% right here cagey. but the "it" i'm assuming refers to lawyers coming at you with an army of howitzers, telling you not to study something. which imho is more than illegal, it's immoral (which sets me up for a rant on the legal trade.....calm down, must calm down....).

flatpyramid
11-13-2008, 01:24 PM
How about photo-copying a text book... do you violate the IPR of the author?

MooseDog
11-13-2008, 03:53 PM
How about photo-copying a text book... do you violate the IPR of the author?

answer would be, it depends. i guess it depends on your use of that photocopy, afaik.

that's where the conflict lies in today's world: between protecting valid commercial interests, and protecting valid fair use interests. lawyers representing corporations don't give a rat's-***** about the latter, but possess the moral vacuity, training and money, lots of money, to threaten students, housewives, fans, devotees, etc etc.

case in point, where in the effing world is a group of d.a.v.e. school students going to get the money to fight a 3,700 Lawyer (http://www.dlapiper.com/) lawfirm?

it's not fairness and justice, it's bullying and intimidation.

Titus
11-13-2008, 06:53 PM
To my understanding, lawyers will never concede you as an individual the fair use as something valid, you have to defend your right to copy/use a copyrighted work. I was an administrator of a website in the past and received many threatening letters from lawyers, after my reply of fair use sometimes I never got back an answer from then again.

Dexter2999
11-13-2008, 10:11 PM
Titus, you ever read this? http://www.digest.com/

BeeVee
11-14-2008, 07:41 AM
This is lovely: YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo).

B

Cougar12dk
11-14-2008, 08:08 AM
That must've taken QUITE a bit of time, eh? :)

MooseDog
11-14-2008, 08:11 AM
nice ben :) nice!

BeeVee
11-14-2008, 08:56 AM
By the way, if you are using Firefox make sure you get the Greasemonkey extension and the YousableTubeFix script so that YouTube looks like the attached on your browser and uses the best quality video available (since YouTube often has high res versions as well).

B