The TV Tropes Furry Club

Personally, I don't have an issue with it. And as long as you're not making money off your fan work, you should be in the clear legally (though if you make You Tube vids, there's always the risk of running afoul of a flagger who's compensating for something).

You can make money as a youtuber if you're successful enough. It's a bit of a gray area.

Fifty Shades Of Grey is an awkward spot here, because the two main characters are rip-offs of Edward and Bella from Twilight, and the author has profited from that.

Buuut how separate those two are from Edward and Bella is what's at question here, are they really close enough for enough resemblance to be there for it to become a copyright issue?

edited 12th Apr '16 2:16:58 AM by RatherRandomRachel

It's ripping off plot elements and characterizations (using these words loosely) but not the actual setting and characters, so I guess it's fine. It's more imitation than plagiarism.

And it's not as though Twilight is the pinnacle of originality, either.

edited 12th Apr '16 2:40:55 AM by Aetol

The Twilight series also copped half of its plot beats from a Tim Powers novel from the '80s, if I'm not mistaken, including the sparkly vampires and gruesome birth scene. The title is escaping me, however. Needless to say, I'd much rather read Powers' take on sinister romance with a glittering death machine.

Aetol - funny thing is that some publishers have a serious point to make with it, because some want it taken to a court in the US or UK to judge how far it really should go due to the similarities.

I feel that would be a very dangerous precedent to set for a number of reasons.

I think the biggest concern would be where the supreme court draws the line between "copied too much" and "not close enough". If the line leans closer towards being able to copy more, that could create a lot of copyright infringements that are now protected by the law. On the other hand, if it leans towards being copied less, authors and companies could be able to sue an upcoming author on even the smallest of similarities.

By not having the law deal with it, it can more easily be dealt with on a case-by-case basis rather than having the law set the precedent towards what's copying and isn't.

also don't forget to take my survey! this is the last time i'm going to mention it, so thanks for your help

That's a problem with common law systems, you can't really judge on a case by case basis.

There's a long list of things we need as a society. Stricter copyright laws is somewhere near the bottom. Look at the situation on You Tube. We have creators afraid to make new videos at the risk of losing their livelihood to some false flag operation, and people trying to put a trademark on basic concepts like "reacting".

Apropos of not much, something amusing.

(Originally posted in the Zootopia movie thread by Troper Hearts, in this post.)

Microsoft's CaptionBot, on the other hand, is not really good◊.

edited 15th Apr '16 4:09:58 AM by Aetol

Well, whoever is being targeted by that sniper may well have his head bloom...

Looks like they had a good reason to send that cease and desist to the Star Fox: The Animated Series.

Unless they're actually making an animated series themselves, no, no they didn't.

well they're back to the old "Boots that Could Be Prostheses" look again :P

I mean you can obviously tell by the way their pants are tucked into them that they're not but still

edited 18th Apr '16 12:33:36 PM by Lanceleoghauni

man, i'm super excited for this game. shame I'm strapped for cash, otherwise this would easily make it at the top of my to-buy list.

Technically because of how trademark law works, yes, they did have a reason to issue a takedown of the Star Fox: The Animated Series Patreon. Trademarks can be lost if unprotected so when money gets involved the C&D letters start getting sent.

That's the reason why it's not an issue with it now being called A Fox In Space.

edited 18th Apr '16 4:16:00 PM by Sixthhokage1

First off, copyright, not trademark. Mickey Mouse is a trademark, but that's because he's the official Disney mascot, as in he represents the company. None of the Star Fox characters are the "face" of Nintendo, Mario is.

That said, whether or not there is an actual official cartoon being made of SF is irrelevant. Nintendo was well within its rights to issue a C&D to the makers of SF:TAS, even if they never intended to do a single thing with the IP ever again. "But I like it" has no more legal bearing than "but what if I really want it?"

Trademarks are more than just the "face" of a company, they are branding used for various purposes, be that for a flagship franchise or for a single product. Here is some of the trademarks registered by Nintendo of America.

Huh....Fox and his colleagues look strange in that trailer. Out of place....

I didn't want to get into a doctoral thesis on the subject, I was aiming for focusing on the particular subject, that it wasn't a trademark issue that prompted the C&D.

Hey guys, here to let you know that my Research Paper has been successfully written and turned in! You were all of great help, thanks!

You're very welcome.

No problem, happy to help, it was an interesting survey to take. But then, I like taking surveys.