Slashdot Mirror


Warner Bros. Sued By Meme Creators Over Copyright Infringement

Krazy Kanuck sends this quote from the BBC: "Warner Bros is being sued for the alleged unauthorized use of two cats that have achieved internet fame. ... The complaint alleged that the cats were used without permission in Scribblenauts, a series of games on the Nintendo DS and other platforms. Court documents alleged that Warner Bros and 5th Cell 'knowingly and intentionally infringed' both claimant's ownership rights. 'Compounding their infringements,' court papers (PDF) said, 'defendants have used "Nyan Cat" (designed by Christopher Torres) and "Keyboard Cat" (created in 1984 by Charles Schmidt), even identifying them by name, to promote and market their games, all without plaintiffs' permission and without any compensation to plaintiffs.' "

22 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Well... by Sigvatr · · Score: 5, Funny

    That escalated quickly.

    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Let us all watch and see how the MPAA/RIAA mafia wear their own regulations when thrown back at them, legitimately. ...installs self in couch, orders large supply of chips and sodas...

  2. I can haz memes? by femtobyte · · Score: 4, Funny

    nyan cat is watching you litigate!

    1. Re:I can haz memes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fair Use.

    2. Re:I can haz memes? by msauve · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, you're saying that WB infringed the memes, knowing they'd be sued, just so they could lose the case and set a precedent which they could then turn around and use against 4chan?

      I think your tin foil hat is borken.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:I can haz memes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I think it's not that it's being used, per se. That happens all the time and people do these and share them for fun. What happened here is that it slapped onto a product that was sold for profit without the original creators permission. In other words, they were actually making money off of someone else work without compensation.

  3. A Taste of Your Own Medicine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... How do you like them poptarts?

    1. Re:A Taste of Your Own Medicine by langelgjm · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's Pop-Tarts®. You'll be hearing from our lawyers shortly.

      Sincerely,

      Kellogg Company Special Counsel for Intellectual Property Issues

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    2. Re:A Taste of Your Own Medicine by idontgno · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And since the other distinguishing characteristic is the name (and the soundtrack), ripped directly from a copyrighted Japanese pop song, I think the creator of Nyan Cat owns significantly less than 25% of the thing.

      Although I would never wish legal trouble on anyone, even a copyright troll, it would certainly tickle my sense of poetic justice for Christopher Torres to be served with papers from Kellogg's and whoever "daniwell" on Nico Nico Douga is.

      Or maybe we just acknowledge that pop culture is a rich fertile humus best cared for by tilling and turning, rather than by boxing up and labeling.

      Yes. It's cultural compost. People are arguing about who owns manure. Makes me proud to live in the 21st Century.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  4. The LOLCATS endgame. by GodInHell · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well -- we all knew they were up to something -- now we now it really was world domination, just not the way we all expected.

  5. Copyright of IDEAS is ridiculous by SmokeSerpent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can we all just agree that idea of "copyrighting" characters is ridiculous? Trademark is one thing, but characters created without trademark should be considered travelers within the realm of culture, IMO. Actual direct digital copying of DRAWINGS of said characters, of course, falls under copyright.

    --
    All kings is mostly rapscallions. -Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
    1. Re:Copyright of IDEAS is ridiculous by Hsien-Ko · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've seen those two particular "memes" on the Playstation Store as dynamic themes in a recent April 2013 update, "officially licensed", for $3 each.

      So yep.
      . Who knows what would happen to the Steam Workshop for Scribblenauts Unlimited now, as it's 99% encumbered by facsimilies of real registered trademarks, created by players.

    2. Re:Copyright of IDEAS is ridiculous by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 5, Informative

      From the article:
      "Both Mr Torres and Mr Schmidt own copyrights and trademarks of the characters."

      --
      This space available.
    3. Re:Copyright of IDEAS is ridiculous by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then why were those trademarks not defended when they started being publicly used without authorization in the first place? There is an abundance of historical precedent that if you fail to defend your trademarks, you lose them.

      Of course, if they had defended them in the first place, then by very definition of what a meme is, they never would have become one.

  6. Seems reasonable to me by ilsaloving · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These media conglomerates salivate in their sleep while dreaming of litigating the crap out of anyone they can get away with so that they can maintain a stranglehold on culture.

    I am totally in favor of culture biting them in the ass, using the very laws they weas^H^H^H^Hchampioned.

  7. Pot, meet Kettle by redshirt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doesn't Nyan cat use the image of a Pop Tart as the body of the cat?

    1. Re:Pot, meet Kettle by femtobyte · · Score: 5, Informative

      Frosted breakfast toaster pastries aren't an exclusively owned intellectual property. Nyan Cat doesn't have a "Pop Tart (tm)" label on the image; just an image of a food (?) product of which many generic variants are available.

  8. Re:Public Domain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I was under the impression that once something becomes a meme, it is essentially public domain since it's extensive public use would forfeit any intellectual rights the creators may have had.
    "

    You don't seem to understand copyright at all then, sadly. Everything you just said is wrong. .

  9. Re:Madness must stop. by operagost · · Score: 5, Informative

    de-facto public domain

    No, in fact, they're not public domain. Declaring them public domain based on their pervasiveness would mean that Mickey Mouse is also public domain-- and we all know that isn't true.

    If you create a meme and plaster it all over the Internet, you can't expect to keep people from using it, for profit or otherwise

    Pretty sure Fatso the keyboard cat was simply posted on YouTube and the meme snowballed.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  10. Re:Madness must stop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you should consider a key difference here: not only is Warner Bros. using the work to make profit on the game but they are also using these images to promote the game. There is a huge difference between some kid posting Nyan cat on 4chan for the billionth time and Warner Bros. using Nyan cat for marketing. That random kid on 4chan isn't making a profit from it. It's not part of his business model.

    It's perfectly reasonable for the creator of Nyan cat to say "I don't mind it when random people (even if it is a lot of random people) post Nyan cat on imageboards just to have a laugh but I don't want a global corporation to use my image to make money without my permission".

    That's how copyright works and to a certain degree that's perfectly reasonable. You shouldn't be expected to litigate against every single person who ever uses your image withot your permission. That is going to be way too onerous for something like Nyan cat. The Nyan cat creator would go bankrupt trying to sue the internet. It does make sense, however, to target a huge corporation who really should know better.

  11. Purpose and character by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

    they were actually making money off of someone else work without compensation.

    Which is irrelevant in determining fair use.

    How so? The first factor in a fair use determination under U.S. law (17 USC 107) involves whether or not the "purpose and character" was commercial.

  12. Re:The second coming? by AioKits · · Score: 4, Funny

    Strangest Burma Shave advert, ever.

    --
    "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx