Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Copyright Office Refuses Registration for 'Fresh Prince' Star Alfonso Ribeiro's "Carlton Dance" (hollywoodreporter.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

The U.S. Copyright Office is skeptical about Fresh Prince of Bel-Air actor Alfonso Ribeiro's ownership claim over the signature "Carlton Dance," which became famous after a 1991 episode of the Will Smith series. From a report: In correspondence last month that was surfaced on Wednesday in California federal court, Saskia Florence, a supervisory registration specialist in the Office's Performing Arts Division, told Ribeiro's attorney that registration must be refused because his claimed "choreographic work" was a "simple dance routine."

[...] Take-Two Interactive, publisher of the game NBA 2K, is now seizing upon the refusal in support of the argument that movements for the "Carlton Dance" are not protectable. Ribeiro is suing Take-Two as well as the publisher of Fortnite over special features that allow game players to have their avatars perform the dance. In a dismissal brief, Kirkland & Ellis attorney Dale Cendali makes some of the same arguments she did earlier in the week in an attempt to reject a similar lawsuit over Fortnite from the rapper 2 Milly. But there are particular contentions specifically directed at Ribeiro's claim.

61 comments

  1. I can see by mandark1967 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Take Two's attorneys doing the Carlton Dance as they head into court to get the lawsuit dismissed with prejudice...

    --
    Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
    1. Re: I can see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outstanding and the first post too!

  2. Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Next card to play is the race card!

    1. Re:Simple move Carlton by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Being that it is suppose to be a parody of white men dancing, that would probably get really muddy.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it a parody? That dance is the most accurate portrayal of white dancing ever produced.

    3. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that he admitted in multiple interviews that he stole the dance from the 'Dancing in the Dark' music video. So, even if it WERE copyrightable, he wouldn't be able to do so.

    4. Re:Simple move Carlton by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... we can dance?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope.

    6. Re: Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Depends on your definition of "dance". And your definition of "can". And your interpretation of "we".

    7. Re:Simple move Carlton by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wait a minute... we can dance?

      Well . . .

      Ah we can dance if we want to, we can leave your friends behind

      Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance

      Well they're are no friends of mine I say, we can go where we want to, a place where they will never find

      And we can act like we come from out of this world

      Leave the real one far behind,

      And we can dance

      Etc: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      But after watching that video . . . maybe we should just leave it be.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    8. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... we can dance?

      If you want to...

    9. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that he admitted in multiple interviews that he stole the dance from the 'Dancing in the Dark' music video. So, even if it WERE copyrightable, he wouldn't be able to do so.

      He is an actor who was hired to play a character on a TV show. Even if his so-called "dance" is copyrightable, the copyright would belong to NBC who owns the TV show where it was first performed. Of all the stupid, bullshit copyright lawsuits, this is one of the stupidest.

    10. Re: Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding me? that is way batter then I can dance.

    11. Re:Simple move Carlton by pgmrdlm · · Score: 2

      Not according to Genesis we can't. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
    12. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that he admitted in multiple interviews that he stole the dance from the 'Dancing in the Dark' music video. So, even if it WERE copyrightable, he wouldn't be able to do so.

      He is an actor who was hired to play a character on a TV show. Even if his so-called "dance" is copyrightable, the copyright would belong to NBC who owns the TV show where it was first performed. Of all the stupid, bullshit copyright lawsuits, this is one of the stupidest.

      I agree that it is a stupid lawsuit. However, who would own such a copyright (if it is copyrightable) is debatable. I'm thinking along the lines Dana Carvey and the Church Lady. It is possible for the actor/creator to own rights and not the broadcasting company.

    13. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...everybody look at your pants

    14. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possible yes, but the default absent a signed agreement to the contrary spelling out exactly who owns what or proof of a prior perfomance to establish an earlier first date of publication, would be to consider it a 'work for hire' as he was an actor hired to work on a television show when he performed the dance for said show.

    15. Re: Simple move Carlton by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

      Seems pretty cut and dry, the way you explain it.

    16. Re:Simple move Carlton by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Just let it be..

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    17. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      but SAFELY....

    18. Re:Simple move Carlton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually often actors own the performance of the character.
      Only the actual recording is owned by the movie company.

  3. I have copyrighted posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone from here on will be sued and then tarred.

    1. Re:I have copyrighted posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeXQBHLIPcw

    2. Re:I have copyrighted posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's probably for the best.

    3. Re:I have copyrighted posting by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Sorry, prior art.

      P.S. Yes, we are mixing different IP domains, but the OP started it.

  4. no bomb us more mom us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    truth+mercy=justice

  5. Moves and Routines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    tl;dr copyright: Dance routines can be copyrighted, IE the choreography of a dance number in a musical, or music video. Dance *moves* cannot be copyrighted.

    1. Re:Moves and Routines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Without weighing in on whether I think this dance should or should not be copyrighted, what exactly is the point where a "simple routine" becomes a "choreographic work"? It's like the heap problem. 1 grain of sand is not a heap, nor is 2, 3, or 4 grains of sand. But a dump truck full of sand, that is definitely a heap. At what point it became a heap though, is anyone's guess.

    2. Re:Moves and Routines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's certainly beyond doing the same move over and over. You defined it - this is one grain of sand.

    3. Re:Moves and Routines by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      That question applies to most copyrighted work, not just dancing, whether it be a portion of a novel, or the text of a piece of software code.

      At some small size we say there is no copyright. As some larger size judges allow fair use, while recognizing that the larger work can be copyrighted. As some still larger size we find a violation in which the possibility of damages would be discussed with a judge.

      The lines have not be drawn for dancing so clearly, but the general principle is not new.

    4. Re:Moves and Routines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would a reasonable person pay to watch it? If yes, it's a choreographic work.

      Of course, now you have a different problem to solve.

    5. Re:Moves and Routines by lmnfrs · · Score: 1

      Dance *moves* cannot be copyrighted.

      But, if a device is invented for a move it can be patented.

    6. Re:Moves and Routines by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The choreography of a Radetzky march "dance"?
      How new does the music have to be?
      New dance, old music?
      New music and a new dance?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re: Moves and Routines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And apparently anything in tech or remotely Associated to tech can get copy protection Even extremely obvious designs like rounded corners (it seems that especially Apple loves to abuse the flawed US patent system?)

      But a specific danne can not.... Very interesting

      On the other hand, if they claimed that the dance was somehow able to help with frustration related to IT use or using a playground, then any random person would get it copyrighted right away ... No questions asked

      Kinda makes you wonder

      The US patent office has looked like a joke in the rest of the World for the Last 50 years or so

      In Europe you actually need to INVENT something to get a copyright and you can not just find random obvious shit and get a copyright by using screenshots of someone Elses prior art (ms supposedly used an old linux screenshot to copyright virtual desktop... What a joke)

    8. Re:Moves and Routines by neoRUR · · Score: 1

      Yes and all music is just 7 notes. So a song is..those notes in different variations. but you cant copyright the notes.

  6. The name by Topwiz · · Score: 1

    The name of the dance could belong to NBC but not the dance itself.

  7. Issue is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If an actor from a TV show that went off the air 22 years ago can not claim ownership of a brief movement of his body paid for, written, edited, and directed by other people than the entire concept of copyright is broken.

    1. Re:Issue is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Celebrities often get a little too full of themselves and forget that they are just workers for hire.

    2. Re:Issue is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Union workers too. Even more full of themselves.

    3. Re:Issue is by mark-t · · Score: 1

      True, although it happens to be the case in this instance, that the "Carlton Dance" was Ribeiro's own innovation. All the script mentioned at the point where he first did it was "Carlton dances". Nobody at the time initially expected that it would be anything particularly special or memorable, but its surprising popularity after it was first performed by him on the show led to it being nicknamed the "Carlton Dance" soon after, and it was repeated several times throughout the series. The first time, however, those moves were genuinely the actor's own idea to use in the show. (although he openly admits that he pilfered the idea from how he saw Courtney Cox was dancing in a Bruce Springsteen video).

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    4. Re: Issue is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why shouldn't they be, though? Millions of idiots have elevated these paragons of unskilled labor to exhaoted heights. Drooling morons or no, you get that many of them hanging on to your remedial ideas, you start thinking you're more intelligent than you are. After all, you have more fools than you can count clapping and simpering as you try to abuse copyright, bring back polio, or even commit sedition.

  8. Dancing with Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darn that examiner. It was quick and easy writing a program that iterated over the permutations and combinations of every joint's range of motion of a human armature, clustering and then dumping it to an animation application alongside a script that fills out the application form, generates a check image, and submits it to a manifest mailing firm for printing and enclosure for postal delivery to the Patent Office for copyright protection. $35 million ought to cover it, but the ROI from suing everybody on the planet should be considerable. :- )

    ... then we go after those damn Hamsters. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WpMlwVwydo )

  9. Let Ribeiro Win by Jaime2 · · Score: 1

    It would be great if the copyright office declared dances copyrightable, and then the DOJ aggressively pursued attendees of wedding receptions for doing the Chicken Dance, the Electric Slide, and the Macarena. Remember, everything copyrightable is protected by default.

    1. Re:Let Ribeiro Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would the DOJ pursue them? It's up to the copyright owner to claim infringement.

    2. Re: Let Ribeiro Win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. Because the government always puts its nose in places it shouldn't be. Especially if their friends are rich.

  10. Wrong type of protection by mark-t · · Score: 3, Informative

    Individual dance movements themselves cannot generally be copyrighted as far as I know, although I believe that entire dance performances may be. The "Carlton Dance" is not a specific entire dance, however, it is only a single specific and very simple dance movement. While entire dances can be copyrighted, as far as I am aware, individual dance movements themselves cannot be. That said, this sort of thing might ordinarily fall under trademark protection because it has a specific name associated with it.

    But even there, I expect that there is already some danger of trademark dillution in that area, and such protection may be refused on those grounds.

    In reality, IP protection for this should have been applied for before the first episode that utilized it had publicly aired. Copyright, however, would never be applicable, because while it might generally be referred to as the "Carlton Dance", it's technically not really a dance, but simply the execution of a particular gesture.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    1. Re:Wrong type of protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      On top of that, he waited over twenty years to claim copyright. That's a little too long to wait to claim protection.

      Trademark could work since it can be associated with his personal "brand", and it could be dropped or taken up at any point, no real time limit.

    2. Re:Wrong type of protection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also he said he stole it.

  11. What to do when your career has tanked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This.

  12. This would be like Jim Carrey... by nuckfuts · · Score: 1

    trying to copyright the head bob.

  13. Hmm, is this really that interesting?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Msmash, Why the fuck is this here????

    How the fuck is this news 4 nerdz??
    how the fuck do you even exist ?
    do you constantly suck dick for coke?

    do you identify with the following youtube link?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    do you have an ear inFuckedsuction?

    Seriously, why do you exist here??
    Go waste the resources of someone else, elsewhere, Like yahoo, the National Inquirer, the STAR, I mean the Crap publications go on and on.. Perfekt for your type (or lack thereof) Journalistic Skills..

    Dumb Bitch..(I'm sorry thats rude) Im just so pissed that I wasted some resource on the digestion of this crap.

    1. Re:Hmm, is this really that interesting?? by Shikaku · · Score: 2

      The issue came up because a video game (a thing for nerds) sold a dance routine as part of the game. The game is free to play, and that game is Fortnite but the dance is being sold.

      There's some interesting law discussion with law nerds here too. In other words, the only thing that needs to not exist is your ad hominem.

    2. Re:Hmm, is this really that interesting?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      first off you stupid Phuck,
      this article HAS NO RELEVANCE HERE.
      So quit Sucking her cock..

      this is NOT a Gamer Site..
      Your Ignorance, which I must add is quite obvious here, should be directed elsewhere..

      That said, This should be posted in either a law Site or a Gaming Site, Not here.. Pls refer to the history of Slashdot to support my argument here..
      Otherewise Shut-up, sitdown, quit being stupid and influenced by Dumb-Bitch Entities.

      Get off you soap-baux and please re-insert your head into your fully packed anus..

      thanks,

         

    3. Re:Hmm, is this really that interesting?? by pslytely+psycho · · Score: 1

      Fuck off. Your "opinion" is not more valid than anyone else's here.

      The fact that you seem to unable to discuss your "opinion" is a reasonable manner simply exposes you as the fraudulent troll that you are.

      As to the history of Slashdot, we have long had articles about politics, history, science, society and such since the beginning.

      So you are a liar and a fraud.

      Now begone, we are done with you.

      --
      Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
  14. Everything must be owned by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Everything must be owned, and nothing can be spoken, sung, screamed or uttered without payment being made.

    Like that dipshit Anish Kapoor who wants everyone in the world to pay him for trying to take a picture of his misshapen blob of art in Chicago.

    Look up "vanta black" to see what a shitbag he is.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  15. Its the footloose dance by wolfheart111 · · Score: 2

    Carlton was imitating the dance from footloose... so this makes no sense.

    --
    [($)]
    1. Re:Its the footloose dance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was the one Courtney Cox did in that one Springsteen video. Thought I even heard him say so once in an interview.

  16. Welcome to America.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Make yourself comfortable..

  17. Wouldn't it be NBC who owns it? by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Or whoever created the Fresh Prince show? Not Ribiero?

  18. He's spoken about it himself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interviewer: Where did the Carlton dance come from?

    Alfonso: Watch that Bruce Springsteen video where he pulls Courtney Cox up on stage. I just do the same dance she did.

    He's on the record about the prior art which he copied for the Carlton dance.

    I kinda feel bad the for him. Just like everyone else on that show who wasn't Will Smith, he faded into obscurity. He should at least have a reality show of some type, or a cooking show or something.

  19. This has been tried before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...with the Electric Slide https://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/blogs/electric-slide-really-copyrighted-ill-ask-ban but the guy lucked out.

    From that article, as it was published after 1978, it technically can be copyrighted, and you don't have to register the copyright.

    I think Take-2 are being a-holes - if they had asked Alfonso for permission, he probabaly would have said "yes, but make it free."