Copyright and Internet and non-Internet

The Guvnor

I've a number of queries on this.:)

Does copyright have a timeframe - I was told 20 years?

Take a scenario - a famous scence from a movie is used as the basis for a poster however it is just the setting and the actual poster would be a fresh new sketch with a different albeit similar character etc.

Is this something that would be seen as infringing on copyright? It's not the original but also not hard to see the original was used as the inspiration etc.

Thanks.

D3sperado

Different copyright periods apply depending on the work in question, but generally protection runs for a period of 70 years following the death of the author, hence James Joyce's books only coming out of copyright this year....

The poster scene example you give is a little difficult to answer in the abstract. The first point is whether the scene itself gets copyright protection? (the answer to this is probably not, but possibly) Secondly, is the parody infringing this copyright? In the US there is a defence of Fair Use which allows a much greater free reign on this and is the reason shows like the Simpsons and Family Guy etc constantly do this sort of stuff. The story in Ireland and the UK is very different and we don't have a Fair Use defence along these lines and it is much easier for the copyright holder to stop such use (although this may not be possible through copyright law as it may or may not actually exist in the scene itself.....)

Another thing to consider is that this type of parody could constitute the tort of "Passing Off", there is a case where a company was prevented from using a parody of the "thats not a knife" scene in Crocodile Dundee as there was a risk that the general public might think there was an association or some form of endorsement between the two.

Also trade mark law might come in to this depending on what was used in the poster.

I don't really understand what you mean by internet in the thread title There shouldn't be any difference in theory whether this is done on the internet or not but I suppose from a practical perspective it's generally not worth the rights holder's time or money chasing these things down.

krd

The Guvnor wrote: »

Is this something that would be seen as infringing on copyright? It's not the original but also not hard to see the original was used as the inspiration etc.

There is a thin line between being "inspired" by something, and ripping it off.

Like if you did a poster, where you had a character in a dinner jacket, holding a gun in a James Bond pose, you would have the franchise holders on your balls quicker than you could say "ah we've been expecting you, Mr Bond franchise holder...let me take you on a tour of the facility "

You might get a cease and desist order. Or they may order you to surrender all your material and art work to them.

US fair use, allows for parody. But there's only so far you can take it. The copyright holder may not think it's funny. And if they can convince a judge you're diminishing the value of the original art work. They can stop you.

The Guvnor

Thanks a lot for the replies!

It helps a lot.

Surprised really about the passing off vis a vis a man in a dinner jacket etc.

I asked about the internet as I felt the net was more international and therefore may not be as clear cut on legal matters as it would be offline as a poster in Dublin city centre etc.

The Guvnor

On the US fair use how does this play out when say FGuy etc. is shown over here?

If you take a poster as an example:



Vs


This level of similarity could or would be an issue?