If You Created a Cheap Star Trek Knockoff...

[Tim Walker]

It's been a long time since I've watched the original BSG. But I seem to remember that the (everyday) uniforms looked somewhat more interesting than fatigues, and could be turned into dress uniforms by adding capes.

 

[uniderth]

That's the part that seems fuzzy, though. If the name of the character was "John Smith", I would imagine that, copyright or not, you could use it in another work.
So, how is it delineated? Where is the line that makes naming a character "Luke Skywalker" a copyright violation, but not "John Smith"?

I've also been thinking about this.Easters eggs seems to get a pass, but if you very gradually increased the prominence of an easter egg, at what point would the hammer come down? Let's say you had a seven year run series and at the beginning of season one you started with brief glimpses of an R2-D2 droid mainly as easter eggs. And your plan is to gradually increase R2-D2's prominence until by the end of season 7 it was a main character.

I guess I'm wondering how trademark violations would work in cases of very gradual infringement through acclimatization. At what point would a company sue? Also at what point would a judge determine that they hadn't been enforcing their trademark and so you were free to use it?

 

[fireproof78]

I've also been thinking about this.Easters eggs seems to get a pass, but if you very gradually increased the prominence of an easter egg, at what point would the hammer come down? Let's say you had a seven year run series and at the beginning of season one you started with brief glimpses of an R2-D2 droid mainly as easter eggs. And your plan is to gradually increase R2-D2's prominence until by the end of season 7 it was a main character.

I guess I'm wondering how trademark violations would work in cases of very gradual infringement through acclimatization. At what point would a company sue? Also at what point would a judge determine that they hadn't been enforcing their trademark and so you were free to use it?

Trademark is different than copyright and doesn't have to be defended. @Maurice explains it better than I can but there is always an option for the holder to bring suit and the judges will look kindly if there is an increase in copyright material in to your own work. Hard to argue Easter egg when it is more prominent or part of the story: https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html

 

[Xhiandra]

Here’s an example: in The Man In The High Castle, the main protagonist is named John Smith. You are free to have your own character be named John Smith, as long as that character has no attributes of the John Smith from TMITHC. Because at that point it’s not about the name, it’s about the character. You could have a character named James T. Kirk as long as he has nothing whatsoever to do with the JTK from Star Trek. Luke Skywalker is a different story. That is a fake name copywrited by Lucasfilm.

Yes, I'm aware of all that, but it's no more precise. How does one define "the attributes of the character"? How does one delineate between "fake name" and "actual name"?
It all feels more like a gut-feeling than a rigorous principle.

 

[Dukhat]

Yes, I'm aware of all that, but it's no more precise. How does one define "the attributes of the character"? How does one delineate between "fake name" and "actual name"?
It all feels more like a gut-feeling than a rigorous principle.

I don’t know the intricacies of exactly how far you can go without crossing the line, but I would assume that if your John Smith character happens to be an American Nazi Obergruppenfuhrer from an alternate universe, I would think that Amazon would probably send you a cease and desist letter at the minimum. And as for the usage of the name Luke Skywalker, even if your character has nothing to do with the guy from Star Wars, I’d bet that Mickey Mouse will also be penning a letter to you.

 

[Maurice]

An entertainment lawyer friend/former colleague of mine advised me that even showing a few seconds of an old video game on a TV series could lead to legal trouble, because while one could argue that it was Fair Use who wants to risk going to court over such a thing and potentially losing?

Seeing an Artoo Detoo as more than just a quick throwaway gag in a parody sense is a definite Copyright violation and any commercial film/show that tried such a thing is begging for a C&D and serious legal trouble. You could make an Artoo-like droid that is clearly a sendup, but cannot possibly look close enough to the real thing so that anyone could mistake it for the real thing.

 

[at Quark's]

I don’t know the intricacies of exactly how far you can go without crossing the line, but I would assume that if your John Smith character happens to be an American Nazi Obergruppenfuhrer from an alternate universe, I would think that Amazon would probably send you a cease and desist letter at the minimum.

So, make him an "American Stasi american Obergruppenführer" - both components of which were very real, but the combination of which never existed IRL (and moreover, the DDR Stasi was decidedely antifascistic by its own declaration, but its very name is still evocative enough to recall the association with 'nazi Obergruppenführer' - what would happen ?)

 

[Dukhat]

So, make him an "American Stasi american Obergruppenführer" - both components of which were very real, but the combination of which never existed IRL (and moreover, the DDR Stasi was decidedely antifascistic by its own declaration, but still evocative enough to recall the association with 'nazi Obergruppenführer' - what would happen ?)

You think that would hold up in court?

 

[Relayer1]

I'd call it The Wilbur.

 

[at Quark's]

You think that would hold up in court?

Honestly, I have no idea. Which 'court' would that be, exactly ?

The DDR exists no more (as do most of its brethren communist states) , and it's not as if any US or other western court would hold any ubiquitous naming copyrights on such matters - though perhaps a federal German court would (can't look into such matters)..

 

[Dukhat]

Honestly, I have no idea. Which 'court' would that be, exactly ?

The DDR exists no more (as do most of its brethren communist states) , and it's not as if any US or other western court would hold any ubiquitous naming copyrights on such matters - though perhaps a federal German court would (can't look into such matters)..

I meant, if Amazon sues you for using a character named John Smith in your own work, and your character has, say, a 90% resemblance to their John Smith, even with the changes you state, do you think your changes would hold up in court?

 

[Dukhat]

in that case one still could have pre-emptively sued pre-emptively Amazon for their appropriation of the "nazi" epitaph, which was never really theirs, to begin with. Of course they would still have a case for the remaining commonalities with "their" John Smith.

But the term “Nazi” isn’t copywrited, so one couldn’t sue someone if they used that term.

 

[at Quark's]

But the term “Nazi” isn’t copywrited, so one couldn’t sue someone if they used that term.

Technically, no. However, I still think Amazon would need to present very precise evidence to prove some ripoff was a copy of theirs, given that they themselves shamelessly appropriated a cultural stereotype (which was not their own) to create their own character.

 

[Tim Walker]

I would be very careful regarding legalities. Before beginning production, I would give very careful thought as to how to avoid legal problems in the first place.

If I recall correctly, Prelude to Axanar was a prelude to a law suit.

 

[Dukhat]

Technically, no. However, I still think Amazon would need to present very precise evidence to prove some ripoff was a copy of theirs, given that they themselves shamelessly appropriated a cultural stereotype (which was not their own) to create their own character.

That’s not how it works. Cultural stereotype or not, the character of John Smith from TMITHC is the property of Amazon Prime Video Inc. So someone who uses that character without permission, or an extreme likeness of that character, is subject to legal action by Amazon. Whether the character is a stereotype is irrelevant.

 

[at Quark's]

^ OK, so please give me the exact definition of what would be part of " the character of John Smith", and what isn't . More explicitly, what attributes make him unique and 'copyrighted' and hence cannot be copied without modification make Amazon have a valid cause for prosecution, and which attributes could be copied without Amazon making a case ?

If you cannot provide that in any less than very exact terms, why would I take any of the above seriously ?

 

[uniderth]

If I recall correctly, Prelude to Axanar was a prelude to a law suit.

Therefore, I will call it "Prelude to Ranaxa".

 

[Dukhat]

^ OK, so please give me the exact definition of what would be part of " the character of John Smith", and what isn't . More explicitly, what attributes make him unique and 'copyrighted' and hence cannot be copied without modification without having Amazon having a valid cause for prosecution, and which attributes could be copied without Amazon making a case ?

I can't tell you that, because I'm not the judge officiating that particular lawsuit or the lawyers deliberating it. That's up to them to make those decisions.

If you cannot provide that in any less than very exact terms, why would I take any of the above seriously ?

Whether you take me seriously or not is irrelevant to me. I'm just giving you the facts. Just try to make your own work that isn't fanfic containing a character from someone else's intellectual property and then get back to me and tell me what happens.

 

[fireproof78]

^ OK, so please give me the exact definition of what would be part of " the character of John Smith", and what isn't . More explicitly, what attributes make him unique and 'copyrighted' and hence cannot be copied without modification make Amazon have a valid cause for prosecution, and which attributes could be copied without Amazon making a case ?

If you cannot provide that in any less than very exact terms, why would I take any of the above seriously ?

Because it is up to the court. The court basically gets to determine what the similarities are, including the character in question, the story being told, and the setting. The closer it gets to being like Amazon's show (in this instance) the more likely that it will be found in violation.

So, if your John Smith character is a former American serviceman who is fighting for a fascist regime and ends up saving the great leader and becoming the governor of America then Amazon is going to look very closely at that.

 

[at Quark's]

Whether you take me seriously or not is irrelevant to me. I'm just giving you the facts

Facts as pertaining to what, exactly ? And making my fanfic with a ripoff character where, exactly ?

I mean, suppose I were a Chinese person, favoured by the Chinese government. So I create a derivative work to be distributed in China and possibly other markets. An American judge rules it to be a ripoff, a Chinese judge rules it to be an original work and not subject to copyright. Not much Amazon can do about that, ultimately. You can feel it's not righteous (and I personally would agree with that), but in the end there's probably very little you (or Amazon, or even the US government) can do about it - unless China would be willing to cooperate for some greater good.

And if you object to me suddenly invoking China - the discussion was transnational to begin with, as it started about appropriating the 'nazi' stereotype.