News Seuss Sues Star Trek

[AutoAdmin]

A new news article has been published at TrekToday:

Last week, Dr. Seuss Enterprises filed a complaint against ComicMix for it’s Oh the Places You’ll Boldly Go Kickstarter project. Those named...

Continue reading...

 

[Greg Cox]

The headline is misleading. Are they suing Star Trek or are they suing a Trek parody on Kickstarter?

I didn't see anything about them suing CBS or Paramount.

 

[mos6507]

It's not a Star Trek licensed project either, right? CBS/P should probably jump on the bandwagon too.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

They're not suing STAR TREK, the suing the creators behind an unauthorized, unlicensed STAR TREK/SEUSS mashup.

 

[nightwind1]

I'm pissed, because I kicked in on this. To me, it sure looks like it CLEARLY falls within satire/parody of both Trek and Seuss, and therefore (I'm not a lawyer), should be legal.

 

[Overgeeked]

As long as it's a parody, it should be protected. Well, under normal circumstances, it should be.

ETA: It doesn't look like a parody. It looks like Trek done in the style of Seuss, up to and including simply copying Seuss' art directly. Just because you laugh at something doesn't make it a parody. It might be parodying Trek, but it looks to be simply copying Seuss' art...not parodying Seuss in any way. Sorry, but it doesn't look good.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[Harvey]

I'm pissed, because I kicked in on this. To me, it sure looks like it CLEARLY falls within satire/parody of both Trek and Seuss, and therefore (I'm not a lawyer), should be legal.

How is it a parody of Dr. Seuss?

 

[Sgt_G]

It's a Trek parody, which is permitted under copyright fair-use laws, but it's a satire of/using Seuss which is NOT protected under copyright fair-use laws. It's a fine-yet-important line of distinction.

 

[Greg Cox]

In any event, this isn't remotely a case of "Seuss Sues Star Trek."

Maybe we can change the thread title to something like "Seuss Sues Star Trek Parody"?

Not as a pithy, I know, but much more accurate.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Seems like it's equal a parody of both Star Trek and Seuss.

Looks like there's just some guy sitting at home living off his father's residuals looking for more free money.

 

[Kor]

at Dr. Seuss Enterprises.

Kor

 

[The Old Mixer]

The thread title is the article title on Trek Today. Article was written by the boss. Ima leavit.

 

[jespah]

Dr. Seuss Enterprises is suing ComicMix (publisher and distributer), the editor, a second distributor, and the writer (David Gerrold), in the California Southern District.

 

[Overgeeked]

The thread title is the article title on Trek Today. Article was written by the boss. Ima leavit.

The boss should reconsider doing "journalism" then.

 

[Trekkin]

Seems like it's equal a parody of both Star Trek and Seuss.

Looks like there's just some guy sitting at home living off his father's residuals looking for more free money.

Keeping in mind that my area of specialisation isn't intellectual property (and therefore there's definitely some loop holes that I'm unaware of): it takes more than 'just' reproducing somone else's work and claiming 'I did it to be funny,' for a work to be legally considered 'parody.'

Where's the elements in those images that changed them from 'funny pictures,' to 'it's a critique of/commentary on *blah*?'

 

[Sgt_G]

Seems like it's equal a parody of both Star Trek and Seuss.

There is obvious parody, poking fun at, Trek. Where's the parody of Seuss???? I sure don't see it.

 

[jespah]

Blogged about this today - it's likely to be considered a parody of Trek (probably why CBS and Paramount aren't in on this case). But Seuss? Eh, not so much.
http://www.semanticshenanigans.com/dr-seuss-enterprises-vs-comicmix/
Many thanks for your kind support.

 

[publiusr]

I'f I were king of the world--all these type lawsuits would be thrown out.

 

[scotpens]

They're not suing STAR TREK, the suing the creators behind an unauthorized, unlicensed STAR TREK/SEUSS mashup.

"Do you like green girls and ham? I do not like them, Sam-I-am!"

. . . It doesn't look like a parody. It looks like Trek done in the style of Seuss, up to and including simply copying Seuss' art directly. Just because you laugh at something doesn't make it a parody. It might be parodying Trek, but it looks to be simply copying Seuss' art...not parodying Seuss in any way.

That's how it looks to me. I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on television, but I'd say there's a legitimate case here.

I'f I were king of the world--all these type lawsuits would be thrown out.

Meaning what? All lawsuits claiming trademark and/or copyright infringement?