Citing ‘Greatest American Hero’ Case, Judge Rules ‘Three’s Company’ Parody Doesn’t Violate Copyright: Media; Deadline.com, 3/31/15

Jeremy Gerard, Deadline.com; Citing ‘Greatest American Hero’ Case, Judge Rules ‘Three’s Company’ Parody Doesn’t Violate Copyright: Media:

"In a significant free-speech victory, Loretta A. Preska, Chief United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of New York, ruled Tuesday that 3C, a play that parodies the 1970s sitcom Three’s Company, does not infringe on that copyrighted program. The ruling ends nearly three years of court tennis during which playwright David Adjmi was prohibited from publishing the script of his black comedy and pursuing new productions. And in her ruling, Judge Preska cites the famous Superman v. Greatest American Hero case still discussed today."

How Copyright Law Protects Art From Criticism; Pacific Standard, 9/29/14

Noah Berlatsky, Pacific Standard; How Copyright Law Protects Art From Criticism:

"Oliver Wendell Holmes is right—judges aren’t necessarily going to be experts on, or very thoughtful about, aesthetic issues. Courts have to consider aesthetics in copyright law, but the result is often going to be messy and painful and often even unjust. There isn’t any way out of that.

However, there is a change that could ameliorate the situation to some extent. Gone With the Wind was published in 1936. That means that it’s 78 years old. The first American copyright act of 1790 allowed for a copyright term of 14 years, which could be renewed for another 14-year term if the author was alive. If that original law was still in effect, Gone With the Wind would have gone out of copyright almost 50 years ago. For that matter, Star Wars, Star Trek, Spider-Man, Faulkner’s oeuvre, and Stephen King’s early books would all be out of copyright. If you wanted to do a parody or sequel to any of those, no court would have to rule on the aesthetic value of anything. It wouldn’t matter if a court believed Stephen King’s work was canonical, or if they thought Faulkner’s racial views deserved to be undermined and questioned. When a work is out of copyright, it’s aesthetic value, or lack thereof, is irrelevant. Whether it’s great or whether it’s awful, the work is fair game for parodists, remixers, piraters of cheap editions, and anyone else."

Lindsay Lohan Sues 'Grand Theft Auto V' Maker [Updated]; Forbes, 7/2/14

Erik Kain, Forbes; Lindsay Lohan Sues 'Grand Theft Auto V' Maker [Updated] :

"Last December we reported that actress and controversy magnet Lindsay Lohan had called her lawyers about the inclusion of a character with her likeness in the blockbuster video game Grand Theft Auto V...

The suit claims that the character Lacey Jonas is an “unequivocal” reference to Lohan, depicting everything from her likeness to her clothing line to the Chateau Marmont hotel where Lohan once lived...

According to the Digital Media Law Project: “As a general matter, you will not be held liable for using someone’s name or likeness in a creative, entertaining, or artistic work that is transformative, meaning that you add some substantial creative element over and above the mere depiction of the person. In other words, the First Amendment ordinarily protects you if you use someone’s name or likeness to create something new that is recognizably your own, rather than something that just evokes and exploits the person’s identity.”

I’m not a legal expert, but Rockstar seems to fall well within this guideline. The character in question was not specifically Lohan, and engages in entirely fictional activities that are designed to parody a certain type of celebrity. I sincerely doubt that this case has legs."

Why It's So Hard to Get the Law to Protect a Good Joke (Guest Column); Hollywood Reporter, 6/8/14

James J.S. Holmes and Kanika D. Corley, Hollywood Reporter; Why It's So Hard to Get the Law to Protect a Good Joke (Guest Column) :

"Comedians work hard to refine their craft, which often results in the creation of an intangible asset — a signature style of comedy. Such assets are deserving of intellectual property rights protection — but which one(s)?

Under the Copyright Act, protection extends to original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed. It follows that artistic content in tangible form, such as a comic's written jokes performed to an audience (or recorded), is entitled to protection. Taken to its logical conclusion, if comedic works are copyrightable, then those who engage in "joke thievery" should find themselves subject to suit for copyright infringement, thereby entitling the complainant to the Copyright Act's statutory damages and attorneys' fees.

Not so fast! A thorough review of the tenets of the Copyright Act when viewed in the context of professional comedians raises a problem."

Beastie Boys settle copyright dispute with toy company GoldieBlox; Guardian, 3/18/14

Guardian; Beastie Boys settle copyright dispute with toy company GoldieBlox:

"The Californian toy company GoldieBlox has reached a settlement with the Beastie Boys over its parody of their song Girls, which was used in an advert that went viral.

On 21 November 2013, a San Francisco-based law firm representing GoldieBlox filed a pre-emptive lawsuit asking the court to rule that, because it was a parody, the company’s version of the Beastie Boys song constituted fair use. An agreement to dismiss the claim has now been reached, and was filed in a US district court on 17 March, the Oakland Tribune reported.

The video, which gained more than 8m views in a week, encouraged young women to code apps, build spaceships and become engineers."

Playwright Sues to Salvage Play Deconstructing ‘Three’s Company’; New York Times, 1/30/14

Patrick Healy, New York Times; Playwright Sues to Salvage Play Deconstructing ‘Three’s Company’ :

"The New York playwright David Adjmi, best known for Off Broadway satirical works like “Marie Antoinette,” went to federal court on Thursday to try to salvage his play “3C,” which has been tied up by the copyright owner of “Three’s Company,” the landmark television comedy that Mr. Adjmi deconstructs through a dark lens in “3C.”

In a 20-page complaint, which was accompanied by supportive comments from acclaimed theater artists like Jon Robin Baitz, Tony Kushner and Stephen Sondheim, Mr. Adjmi asked the Southern District Court of New York to declare that “3C” does not infringe on the copyright of “Three’s Company,” which ran from 1977 to 1984 and remains in syndication. Mr. Adjmi’s lawyers, citing the First Amendment and the legal doctrine of fair use, argue that “3C” is an original parody that only borrows some elements from the sitcom to examine its premise, character types, and homophobia and sexism in that era...

Mr. Adjmi’s lawyers cite multiple examples of parodies that were protected under the fair use doctrine, including the novel “The Wind Done Gone” (which re-tells much of “Gone With the Wind” from a slave’s perspective) and a “Saturday Night Live” sketch that featured a tourism jingle from Biblical times, “I Love Sodom,” sung to the tune of “I Love New York.” Plays like “Mr. Burns” (which uses elements from “The Simpsons”) and “Dog Sees God” (a parody of the Peanuts cartoons) have also successfully avoided copyright problems by taking personality traits and references from the original material and presenting them in wholly new ways."

What's so funny about Gangnam Style?; Guardian, 9/24/12

Arwa Mahdawi, Guardian; What's so funny about Gangnam Style? : "Psy has produced a video that is born to spawn and has further facilitated this by waiving his copyright. This stands in high contrast to many western hip-hop stars who have been slow to relinquish control of their "intellectual" property in the same way (take Jay-Z's Empire State of Mind, for example, which quickly generated a host of YouTube tributes that were quickly removed by EMI). Psy's relaxed attitude to his tributes has meant that Gangnam Style has already enjoyed a prolific after-life. Everyone has made their own version, which only adds to the success of the original. Nevertheless, I can't help thinking that there is a slightly odd dynamic at work in this mimicry. For one thing, Gangnam Style is itself a parody. If a spoof spoofs a spoof then what's that spoof spoofing? What, exactly, is the source of all that hilarity?"

If Three Constitutes Company, Add Lawyers to Make It a Crowd; New York Times, 7/17/12

Patrick Healy, New York Times; If Three Constitutes Company, Add Lawyers to Make It a Crowd:

"Most playwrights have jitters on opening night, but David Adjmi was in a panic amid the festivities last month for “3C,” his darkly comic deconstruction of the 1970s sitcom “Three’s Company.” That same day he learned that the copyright owner of “Three’s Company” had sent a cease-and-desist letter to the play’s producers charging that Mr. Adjmi had infringed on the copyright by borrowing so many elements from the TV series, including its premise about a man who pretends to be gay to live with two female roommates.

The show went on — but the copyright fight remains far from resolved.

At issue is whether “3C” is enough of a parody of “Three’s Company” to be protected under First Amendment exceptions to copyright law — specifically, under the legal doctrine of fair use, which allows artists to use copyrighted work to lampoon or critique the material, as the international hit “Forbidden Broadway” has done for years with its sendups of famous musicals."

On Tyson’s Face, It’s Art. On Film, a Legal Issue; New York Times, 5/20/11

Noam Cohen, New York Times; On Tyson’s Face, It’s Art. On Film, a Legal Issue:

"The range of material that individuals and businesses are seeking to get copyright protection for has only been expanding, often at the insistence of movie studios. Mattel has gone to court to assert the copyright of the face of its Barbie doll; fashion companies have been lobbying Congress to pass a law to protect unique, nontrivial new designs. And trademark, which is governed by different laws and is much more contextual, has been used by athletes and coaches to get a measure of control over terms like “three-peat” or “Revis Island.”"

EFF defends Yes Men from business rage over climate hoax; Ars Technica, 10/23/09

Matthew Lasar, Ars Technica; EFF defends Yes Men from business rage over climate hoax:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is telling the US Chamber of Commerce to get over a parody site that turns the trade group's opposition to greenhouse gas legislation on its

"The nation's leading business trade association is not a happy camper about a parody site that has rewritten its controversial position on climate change legislation. Attorneys for the United States Chamber of Commerce have issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown demand notice against the latest prank by the Yes Men, that self-described "genderless, loose-knit association of some 300 impostors worldwide who agree their way into the fortified compounds of commerce"—and then unleash the clowns of public relations war.

But lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation are telling the Chamber to cool off about the whole affair.

What's the furor about? The Yes Men staged a fake press conference this week at the National Press Club in Washington. A "Yes Man" calling himself "Hingo Sembra" actually took to the podium in front of reporters to announce the Chamber's shift on climate change, only to have the whole spectacle turn truly bizarre when a real Chamber official showed up.

According to CBS News, "The press conference began normally but dissolved into a surreal scene when a legitimate Chamber official burst into the event, having heard about it from a reporter, and exclaimed that 'Sembra' was a phony. The activist holding the press conference then called the Chamber official, Eric Wohlschlegel, a fake and demanded his business card."

http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/10/eff-tells-business-group-to-get-over-yes-men-hoax.ars

Salinger faces curse of creating a classic; Toronto Star, 6/14/09

Toronto Star; Salinger faces curse of creating a classic:

"The book, not yet published but listed for sale on Amazon.co.uk, follows Mr. C., a curmudgeonly 76-year-old who wanders away from his retirement home to revisit some of the Manhattan sites and people originally encountered by Caulfield in Salinger's seminal work. Although Colting and his company say they intended no infringement of Salinger's artistic rights – the novel is dedicated to him – the book has been described as a sequel, which is precisely where the ailing author's complaint draws its strength. Unlike a parody, which is considered fair use of an original work, a sequel is held to be within the original creator's domain. It may well be due to this distinction, and the issue of whether a character like Holden is copyrightable, that Salinger will win out."

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/650210

When love is harder to show than hate; The Guardian, 5/13/09

Cory Doctorow via The Guardian; When love is harder to show than hate: Copyright law is set up to protect critics, while leaving fans of creative works out in the cold:

"But that's not what this column is about. What I want to ask is, how did we end up with a copyright law that only protects critics, while leaving fans out in the cold?"...

The upshot of this is that you're on much more solid ground if you want to quote or otherwise reference a work for the purposes of rubbishing it than if you are doing so to celebrate it. This is one of the most perverse elements of copyright law: the reality that loving something doesn't confer any right to make it a part of your creative life."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/may/13/cory-doctorow-copyright

Don Henley sues Senate candidate over song use; CNN.com, 4/18/09

Via Cnn.com: Don Henley sues Senate candidate over song use:

"Don Henley, a founding member of "The Eagles," is suing a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, claiming the candidate is misusing two of his popular songs.

The suit filed Friday in federal court in California claims Charles DeVore is using Henley's hit songs "The Boys of Summer" and "All She Wants to Do Is Dance" without authorization...

"We're responding with a counter-claim, asserting our First Amendment right to political free speech," the site said. "While the legal issues play out, it's time to up the ante on Mr. Henley's liberal goon tactics. By popular request, I have penned the words to our new parody song."

DeVore then posted the lyrics of a song he called "All She Wants to Do Is Tax."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/04/18/henley.lawsuit/index.html

One Man’s Blanche Is a University’s Infringement, The New York Times, 2/5/09

Via The New York Times: One Man’s Blanche Is a University’s Infringement:

"Through friends Mr. Rosenthal obtained pro bono representation from lawyers at the New York office of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, who argued that First Amendment rights contained in the legal doctrine of fair use allowed Mr. Rosenthal to create a new performance piece partly inspired by the “Streetcar” character.

But in a cease-and-desist letter to Mr. Rosenthal’s lawyer, sent on Jan. 22, the university’s legal team disputed that the fair-use doctrine applied to this play."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/theater/05ceas.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=infringement&st=cse