Slashdot Mirror
DC Comics Prevails In Batmobile Copyright Dispute
think_nix writes "Wired reports of U.S. District Judge Ronald S. W. Lew siding with DC Comics in the federal copyright court case against Gotham Garage owner Mark Towle. DC accused Towle of selling 'unlicensed replica vehicle modification kits based on vehicle design copyrights from plaintiff's Batman property, including various iterations of the fictional automobile, the Batmobile.' Lew noted that 'DC Comics pleads sufficient facts to support its allegations. Although, generally copyright law does not apply to "useful articles" such as autos.'"
I guess I can no longer count on my plan to sell copies of Wonder Woman's invisible jet to make my billions.
Please put that awful website out of its misery. Slashdot it, take an axe to the servers, email how-to documents to its perpetrator ( rhondamazurek@gmail.com ), I don't care! Get it out of my eyes!
DC Comics has withstood the defendant's motion to dismiss. The judge has not sided with them on any merits of their claims; he has merely said they have enough of a legal basis to proceed with their lawsuit. DC has not won yet.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
There is a difference between 'a device inspired by, and with similar functionality to' a fictional device, and 'a device who's sole selling point is it's resemblance to a fictional device'. An iPad and a PADD may be conceptually related, but no more than Burger King and McDonalds are conceptually related. (Less, probably.)
'Sensible' is a curse word.
I can see this being a problem for a mass-produced replica or knock-off toys, but the kind of buyer for this product does not have any other choice than to get one custom made. If I remember correctly the original was a one off by George Barris, and the Gotham Garage website hails a Munster Mobile, with apparently no issues there. If someone wants to plunk down (presumably) big bucks to fulfill a childhood dream, they should be able to. This is copyright gone too far.
"If the only tool that you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Donny Rumsfeld
if I had to choose between iOS and LCARS I'd take iOS.
Ever look at an LCARS interface? jesus, who designed this? Space aliens? Oh wait...
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
MY EYES!
I looked at that page - and It was like...
Wearing Ed Hardy, on LSD, IN HELL!
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Wow... Someone read too many comic books and not enough of other reading material to develop proper spelling....
Actually, comic books are chock full of big words, and they're nearly always used properly (when used improperly, it's for comedic effect). Super villain soliloquies and/or banter are especially verbose, and I remember having to reach for a dictionary as a child.
Since the Batmobile debuted in 1941, using the copyright rules in effect of the times, the name would be public domain since 1991. Since our congressmen are apparently paid by Disney, this date was pushed to 2011 and now 2031. Let us try to guess how much in royalties the descendants of the creators of the name Batmobile will get. Lets see... Oh yes they will get ditkuss.
Bill Finger probably made a total of 50K off of batman his whole goddamn life. So I am not crying for DC here.
This is where the whole idea of copyright goes to shit. I'd be totally behind the content owner if they were in direct competition with the garage, i.e. DC Comics also sold car modification kits.
I can see how piracy could lead to lost sales.
I can see how creating duplicate products can lead to lost sales.
What I can also see is the net end result here won't bring in any money for DC Comics, doesn't affect sales, and removes a product people were buying without any alternatives.
If you two don't stop it I will pull this thread right over! :)