HIGHLA-L Digest - 26 Jul 2001 (#2001-222)
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@LISTS.PSU.EDU)
Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:00:01 -0400
There are 10 messages totalling 507 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. bootleg tapes & more (6)
2. copyrighting characters (was bootleg tapes & more) (2)
3. bootleg tapes & more SAME SEX warning
4. : bootleg tapes & more
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 18:14:38 +0000
From: Judy Ruiz <macaruin@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
>:)
>John
>who thinks that if Macaruination isn't a word, it should be
As in a nation of Macaruins, how wonderful. Thanks for thinking of that.
:-)
MacaruinMcTrollwench
http://www.geocities.com/ruiz4js/index.html
PEACE-APFC
Since light travels faster than sound, isn't that why some people appear
bright until you hear them speak?
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:22:46 -0700
From: Lynn <lloschin@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: copyrighting characters (was bootleg tapes & more)
>From: Dragon Lady <dragonlady@darkmage.net>
>In most cases the characters are trademark protected.
Those only apply to visual representations of the characters,
like dolls or action figures, or comic book drawings, etc. You
can only trademark a product or service. A character in and
of itself is an abstraction.
Anyone can put a little "TM" by anything they want to... that
doesn't mean they have any actual rights. Often even registered
trademarks are not for the words alone, but for stylized words
or a logo (as are most of Gaumont's Highlander trademarks.)
They only word mark they actually own for "Highlander" is for
clothing. They apparently abandoned an attempt to trademark
the word for "entertainment services" -- in which they amusingly
described the movie and TV series as "futuristic" :)
Visit: http://tess.uspto.gov and do a search for Gaumont as owner.
Their abandoned application is the one for Highlander listed
as "dead."
Lynn
(I'm surprised they left out time-travel.)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:32:28 +0100
From: Jette Goldie <jette@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: copyrighting characters (was bootleg tapes & more)
Lynn
> Anyone can put a little "TM" by anything they want to... that
> doesn't mean they have any actual rights. Often even registered
> trademarks are not for the words alone, but for stylized words
> or a logo (as are most of Gaumont's Highlander trademarks.)
> They only word mark they actually own for "Highlander" is for
> clothing.
And even that can't be international, since there has been a range
of hiking/climing/camping clothing and accessories in the UK
and Europe for at least a decade called "Highlander" that is
nothing to do with the movie or the tv series, but everything
to do with mountains <g>
Jette
Glory may be fleeting, but obscurity is forever!
bosslady@scotlandmail.com
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fanfic.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:53:12 -1000
From: Geiger <geiger@maui.net>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
Carmel--
> Nina I have a very genuine question for you in light of the above.
Oh, I'm all ears.
> You seem
> to have an incredible amount of moral outrage (which personally I prefer
to
> target at world poverty etc etc) at the fact that fanfic writers expend so
> much of their energy writing about a universe and characters created by
> others. As I've pointed out before, this would preclude anyone writing
> anything based on the Bible or any other major *universes*.
This doesn't seem to be your "genuine" question, but let me point out that,
to my knowledge, the Bible was never copyrighted. On the other hand, HL
_is_ legally protected.
Carmel--
> My question for you is that you yourself recently wrote
critiques/summaries
> of Highlander for Eon magazine I think it was (a web Zine)? They were on
the
> web site for quite a while. You must have expended an enormous amount of
> energy doing this which surely could have been better expended writing
about
> something original? Were you paid? If you were paid (in cash or kind) I
> don't want to know how much - just whether you made money as a result of
> characters and a universe that D-P created and own? I think that given the
> amount of vitriol you have sprayed at fanfic writers that it is a
legitimate
> question. If you weren't paid - in cash or in kind - then why did you
expend
> all that energy "horning in" on someone else's creativity?
Yes, I was paid. Thank you for asking. The reviews were commissioned, I
wrote them--all 119--& received payment, & when those Internet rights soon
expire I'll likely resell them to another website that hosts genre reviews.
Just like others sell _their_ reviews to websites or like John has his
interviews printed in Impact. As for spending my time better--I'm touched
you seem to care, but I'm not a full-time writer, I DID make money doing the
HL reviews, & doing so in no way infringed on anyone's legal or moral
rights. In case you don't understand the difference between this sort of
writing & fanfic, I'll point out that reviews are clearly allowed under the
Fair Use clause as criticism/comment.
> Mind you I enjoyed your critiques very much - but that isn't the point.
Thank you. Exactly what IS your point?
me before--
> Nina: <<..Well, too bad Reunion disallows questions about fanfic, so
people
> can't ask
> & find out what HL's PTB really think. So, I guess you & I will both just
> continue to speculate...>>
Carmel--
> Nina do you really have no idea how silly and childish this sounds? IMHO
it
> doesn't do you or your case any good at all.
Well, YHO isn't the be all & end all, you know. IMHO, it's interesting that
people say fanfic is OK because TPTB really don't mind it, yet con
organizers prohibit ASKING TPTB about fanfic for the stated reasons it
causes trouble, on a par w/ questions that pry into the GOH's personal
lives. Odd.
> again take you to taks over your statement that
> one shouldn't distribute stuff based on another's creative work - isn't
this
> exactly what you did? Ooooh - I see...it wasn't *fanfic*!!
I'm glad you've got that figured out. Reviews, critique, research,
scholarship, news reporting, etc.--specifically allowed by law, as we all
know. No one would say that John (who I see has already responded to you,
all upset) should not write his Impact articles or that movie critics can't
make a living.
> you appear to regard them
> as lazy and irresponsible artistic thieves?
Sure seems to have struck a nerve w/ you.
> I remember once my dear
> Amelia, who was 3 at the time, deciding to experiment with how far
speaking
> appallingly to her 5 year old brother would get her. It got her a swift
> trip to her bedroom with her left ear lobe secured firmly between my thumb
> and forefinger. She was informed that when she was prepared to speak
nicely
> and treat people in the way she liked to be treated then she was welcome
to
> return to civilised company.
Well, here, instead of civility I'm exposed to YOUR company, so I guess I'll
just have to go by your bad example.
> my very kindest regards
You really ARE determined to live up to that usually a hypocrite thing,
aren't you?
Nina
geiger@maui.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 13:29:08 -0700
From: Marie <gumarund@colfax.com>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
There is one aspect of this that has not been brought up. What about shows
that are not available in professional tapes and might not be for a fair
length of time. There are several shows that have a large fan base that are
on stations that are not available to everyone. Until a few years ago I did
not get UPN or WB. I know several fans of Buffy who do not get UPN and
their cable company does not plan on adding it to the lineup.
The other instance is a friend of mine made copies of tapes of shows that I
missed while I was in the hospital and my mom does not know how to set up
the VCR.
When I make tapes like this I even include the commercials.
On anoother topic I changed ISPs and I lost the welcome message when I got a
new computer. To Unsub what address do I send the message to and is it
"signoff Highla-l" to unsub and "subscribe highla-l first name lastname" to
that address?
Lorna Marie
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:45:46 +1000
From: Carmel Macpherson <Carmel@stuartfieldhouse.com>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
Hi all
Aaaah - finally - it is now all clear. When Nina says:
<<.....The price for using a universe created by & belonging to others
should be not being able to profit
from her work--& that includes showing it off publicly & getting whatever it
is people get from that, as well as $$$ rewards...>>
and then says: <<...Yes, I was paid. Thank you for asking. The reviews
were commissioned, I wrote them--all 119--& received payment, & when those
Internet rights soon expire I'll likely resell them to another website that
hosts genre reviews....>>
Nina *you* are the one who got caught up in the ridiculously generalised net
of your own making.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
***Note again - I am not in any way referring to your having every right to
do as you have done. I have no trouble at all understanding the law on this
point. Also note that I am delighted to have tens of thousands of
journalists etc etc writing about as much of Highlander as they can. My
argument here is aimed directly at what appears to be an inconsistency in
*moral* terms with Nina and what she has argued up to now.***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am simply saying that you yourself took this argument well beyond the
copyright one to an argument whereby you have continually insisted that
individual effort is better exerted on original works that do not derive
form the creative efforts of others and that these original copyright owners
should not have their $$ diverted to these people who profit from their
copyright. If you believe your own argument, put ad infinitum here, then
whilst I agree that legally you have every right to do as you have done, I
don't understand why ***MORALLY*** you do not donate the $$$ made from D-P's
creative efforts to a charity or to D-P themselves or why you didn't refuse
payment?
Of course I realise that you may have done this - along with all those pro
bono cases you told us you may spend your time on. And, if you believe your
own argument, (despite the usefulness of the reviews, why not spend that
time writing something original?
And Nina - I take it that you yourself have never wasted your time reading
any fanfic - particularly slash fanfic and have never written any letters of
commendation to any of these authors?? Are you very *very* sure Nina??
It's just that you really got me thinking about hypocrisy....
Carmel (since you don't want my kind regards)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 22:45:55 +0100
From: "John Mosby (B)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
Nina said:
> No one would say that John (who I see has already responded to you,
> all upset) should not write his Impact articles or that movie critics
can't
> make a living.
If you feel the need to ask me to rephrase or not accidentally represent
your views in ways you say they are not originally intended, then please
make sure you're not doing the same damned thing to me a few posts later!
I simply responded to Carmel, saying that I wasn't sure I could agree with
every point she had made. I CLEARLY wasn't *all upset* and presented my
alternative views clearly and politely. She responded in an equally civil
tone towards me.
The very fact you can't tell the difference between the two (or choose not
to), only makes you look naive or vindictive. Either way, it's a rather
silly and needless aside that detracts from your argument (which, I was,
ironically, largely agreeing with!) and does exactly what you've complained
about in others.
John
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:53:03 -0400
From: Julie Beamer <jbeamer@infi.net>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more
Bridget Mintz Testa wrote:
> Thanks for the clarifications and definitions, Lynn! Julie Beamer
> previously corrected my confusion about losing copyright vs. losing
> trademarks, and it got me to wondering if failure to prosecute
> copyright infringement has any detrimental effect on the
> copyright-holder at all. Can either of you respond to that--such
> that if TPTB fail, over a period of years, to do anything about
> fanfic, would that in any way harm their ability to prosecute a
> fanfic writer for copyright infringement at some later point in time?
> If the fanfic writer could show that TPTB had tacitly allowed fanfic
> to be written for a long time, and thus tacitly allowed the
> infringement, would that have any bearing in a real case?
I'm hardly an expert in copyright (I've just had to explain it to a variety of
college professors over the years -- why they *can't* put 20 copies of an
article on reserve), but my understanding would be their lack of action would
not have much bearing. One could try the "they never tried to stop it"
approach, but depending on what brought about the lawsuit, it may not work.
Your opinion, Lynn?
Julie
Founding Geezer, etc.
--
jbeamer@infi.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 15:36:33 -1000
From: Geiger <geiger@maui.net>
Subject: Re: bootleg tapes & more SAME SEX warning
Carmel--
>>>I could at least understand Nina's argument when it was simply about
copyright. What I don't understand is the outrage about wasting energy
stealing the original work of the creators of the Highlander universe. >>>
You exaggerate. I don't have any such outrage. I think the comment you are
referring to of mine was in response to someone (Marina or possibly Bridget)
rhapsodizing about the irresistible creative muse, the futility of beating
down creativity, simply HAVING to write & share fanfic--or some such. THAT
seems very silly to me. That's all.
Carmel--
>>>That is what doesn't make sense to me
in Nina expending so much energy writing about Highlander in the episode
commentaries when by her own terms she could be using all that energy
writing about something original??>>>
Because I was _hired_ to write reviews. And, while I have written fiction
(NOT fanfic), I don't consider that my forte. So, the reviews were a good
use of my time.
Carmel--
>>>But there are other people who can
*legally* make money off Highlander and D-P, by, for example, getting paid
to write an article or episode reviews.>>>
And that seems to morally outrage you. Why is that?
Carmel--
>>>I'm saying that I can't reconcile the moral outrage on Nina's part which
seems to be prejudiced towards fanfic and fanfic writers alone???>>>
Ah--prejudice! And YOU complain about MY misplaced moral outrage???
Prejudice is the new defense; whenever anyone is caught doing anything they
shouldn't--THEY become the victim & bleat that others are being mean to
notice what they did. Personally, I prefer to reserve the term "prejudice"
for the very real instances when people suffer from it.
me before--
> The price for using a universe created by & belonging to others
> should be not being able to profit
> from her work--& that includes showing it off publicly & getting whatever
it
> is people get from that, as well as $$$ rewards...
> and then says: <<...Yes, I was paid. Thank you for asking.
Carmel--
> Nina *you* are the one who got caught up in the ridiculously generalised
net
> of your own making.
No. The 1st snippet you dug up was specifically re: _fiction_. No one has
said that non-fiction related to a franchise is legally or morally
problematic. Thus, John's Impact articles are both legitimate & accorded
legal protection themselves. Similarly, my reviews & indeed ALL reviews &
critique of protected material are a well-established exception in
intellectual property law. This is very basic stuff, & I'm sorry you got
all excited, thinking you _had_ me (you, of course, who have said repeatedly
that you don't see "discussion" as a for-points thing), when in fact you
have nothing at all.
Speaking of profiting from HL & of hypocrisy, I noticed your recent ads
plastered all over the lists, selling tapes from the last HLDU. I
wonder--did the GOHs readings there include your fanfic? How about, oh, the
name escapes me.... You know--the one set in Rev. 6:8, where Kronos
tortures & rapes a bound Duncan, w/ the other Horsemen standing around
drooling? And then, Kronos "forces" Methos to do the same thing to Duncan,
only that time Duncan likes it? Well-written, as I recall, for what it is.
Seems like that would have been a dramatic choice of readings for the GOHs
to have tackled.
> don't understand why ***MORALLY*** you do not donate the $$$ made from
D-P's
> creative efforts to a charity
Actually, I probably spent it all at the HL: Store--surely DPP's favorite
charity. But, that's irrelevant; the money was just as much for MY efforts
as John's Impact salary or fees are for HIS efforts. Unlike fanfic.
Carmel--
> And Nina - I take it that you yourself have never wasted your time reading
> any fanfic - particularly slash fanfic and have never written any letters
of
> commendation to any of these authors?? Are you very *very* sure Nina??
You just haven't been keeping up. I was asked if I ever read fanfic, & I
answered that I used to do so. I _used_ to do lots of things.... Yes, I've
even read some of your fanfic, hence my familiarity w/ the story mentioned
above. So? I may well have written you about some of your work--I don't
recall one way or the other. It must have made your day, that you do. So?
I don't read fanfic anymore, though to be brutally honest that is probably
as much due to lack of interest in it as to moral outrage.
> Carmel (since you don't want my kind regards)
Kind regards would be fine; it's the obvious, breezy lie that sickens me.
Nina
geiger@maui.net
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 15:44:59 -1000
From: Geiger <geiger@maui.net>
Subject: Re: : bootleg tapes & more
John--
> I simply responded to Carmel, saying that I wasn't sure I could agree with
> every point she had made. I CLEARLY wasn't *all upset* and presented my
> alternative views clearly and politely. She responded in an equally civil
> tone towards me.
You sounded "all upset" then to me, as you do now. Maybe it was the way you
mentioned needing to correct Carmel right away before I could comment. But,
OK, let it be known that previously you were--what? Mildly miffed?
Conspicuously concerned? Yet, of course, responded politely. Heaven forbid
that your character should be stained.
Marina (who feels an odd need to keep talking about me)--
>>>Since they broke the 'law' (obviously not as serious as violating
copyright for characters that don't even exist), I'm sure Nina will
totally agree that they should have died.>>>
Wrong again. That's another bad thing about deleting/kill-filing--they
perpetuate ignorance.
Nina
geiger@maui.net
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 26 Jul 2001 (#2001-222)
************************************************