Court Rules Batmobile Is Entitled To Copyright Protection

schwit1 writes: The Batmobile's bat-like appearance and other distinct attributes, including its high-tech weaponry, make it a character that can't be replicated without permission from DC Comics, the copyright holder, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said. "As Batman so sagely told Robin, 'In our well-ordered society, protection of private property is essential,' " states the opinion. "Here, we conclude that the Batmobile character is the property of DC, and Towle infringed upon DC's property rights when he produced unauthorized derivative works of the Batmobile as it appeared in the 1966 television show and the 1989 motion picture."

Comments

Private property?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just as copyright infringement is not theft; Intellectual property is not property. Intellectual property is merely a legal privilege, a set of rules that allows some people to restrict others in the free use of their own, true property. If anything, Batman's "sage words" defend the copier.

Re:Private property?

[Anonymous Coward]

And without significant limits on "intellectual property" nothing would be made out of fear that some distant relative of some inventor from the 15th century could come in and sue your company into the ground. There is a very good reason why the founders put "To promote the progress of science and useful arts" and "limited times" into the constitution regarding copyrights/patents. Society GRANTS artists and inventors the rights to hold a monopoly over something they create for a LIMITED TIME with the purposes of encouraging them and others to create more, not to grind society to a halt while high priced lawyers dig through centuries of minutia trying to figure out who "owns" an idea.

Re:Private property?

[ultranova]

Without IP, your car would be a heap of raw materials like steel, plastic, rubber, leather etc. These raw materials are cheap and constitute a tiny fraction of the retail price of the car. You're paying for IP and the processing of these raw materials.

Without IP, my car might be more or less advanced, that's all. On one hand there would be less incentive to research new features, on the other, the manufacturer could incorporate any they want without paying license fees. And as new manufacturing techniques, such as 3D printing, drive down the cost of making one-off prototypes, research will become cheaper and eventually reach the point where hobbyists can engage in it. At that point IP will unquestionably be a hindrance, if it isn't already.

someone draw the line

[ihtoit]

I'd like to know where "derivative works" meets "cold replica"?

Re:Well that settles it then

[GrumpySteen]

MANY MORE people will start creating batmobiles and replicas of other DC comics things.

That's actually okay and they won't do anything to prevent people from creating those replicas. It's only when someone decide to go into business creating and selling replicas that they'll take legal action to stop it.

Re:Well that settles it then

[MrKaos]

That's actually okay and they won't do anything to prevent people from creating those replicas. It's only when someone decide to go into business creating and selling replicas that they'll take legal action to stop it.

I wonder what happens if instead of them selling it, they are asked and paid to build one instead.

Circus Court

[aitikin]

Really? I'm the only one who noticed the summery's reference to the "9th U.S. Circus Court of Appeals"?

Re:Cars can now be copyrighted?

[Anonymous Coward]

The judge seems to not see that there is a difference between THE Batmobile and A Batmobile.

THE Batmobile, build by George Barris for the 1960's TV show (from the Ford Futura concept car) sold at the 2013 Barrett-Jackson Scottsdale auction for $4.3 million.

A Batmobile replica seems to go for anything up to $150K, depending on how good it is.

People know what the real things are and the difference in what they are worth to them are, as one can see, is remarkably different. Also, trying to pass off a replica as the real thing is fraud, a real crime.

Re:It should... but what about Ecto-1

[FlyHelicopters]

There goes cosplay.

No, you're allowed to make your own costume for your own private use.

That is "fair use".

What you aren't allowed to do is make 50,000 of them and sell them. That requires permission.

Re:Cars can now be copyrighted?

[SuricouRaven]

Since 1998. It's in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, oddly enough.

There are five titles in the act. Everyone who reads slashdot knows of the 'safe harbor' provisions and the anti-circumvention provisions - titles II and I respectively. The less-well-known title V extends copyright protection to cover the design of boat hulls.