WWTBAM Bored

Blogger Popehat was asked
"If a 1 is 'I banged any chick I ever just winked at' and a 10 is 'I can recite hamlet in the original klingon,' how much of a Trekkie are you?"

This is how Popehat introduced a post about Paramount's legal claims to the Klingon Language
Randazza amicus brief is a beautiful piece of work https://popehat.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... Curiae.pdf

https://popehat.com/2016/04/28/marc-ran ... gnificent/

I think the brief is probably correct, but how did this become an actual issue worth playing out in court? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:I think the brief is probably correct, but how did this become an actual issue worth playing out in court? --Bob

Paramount would love to collect royalties on anything published in Klingon. It would be the linguistic equivalent of the copyrights on characters like Sherlock Holmes and Winnie-the-Pooh, and songs like Happy Birthday to You.

A more batlh (honorable) justification is to protect the integrity of the copyrighted creations. Imagine if authors could portray Holmes as a drug addict, or make up silly lyrics to Happy Birthday to You!

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:I think the brief is probably correct, but how did this become an actual issue worth playing out in court? --Bob

Paramount would love to collect royalties on anything published in Klingon. It would be the linguistic equivalent of the copyrights on characters like Sherlock Holmes and Winnie-the-Pooh, and songs like Happy Birthday to You.

A more batlh (honorable) justification is to protect the integrity of the copyrighted creations. Imagine if authors could portray Holmes as a drug addict, or make up silly lyrics to Happy Birthday to You!

Wait, I thought Holmes was a drug addict.

Or did I miss a joke?

jarnon wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:I think the brief is probably correct, but how did this become an actual issue worth playing out in court? --Bob

Paramount would love to collect royalties on anything published in Klingon. It would be the linguistic equivalent of the copyrights on characters like Sherlock Holmes and Winnie-the-Pooh, and songs like Happy Birthday to You.

A more batlh (honorable) justification is to protect the integrity of the copyrighted creations. Imagine if authors could portray Holmes as a drug addict, or make up silly lyrics to Happy Birthday to You!

The reason why authors can do what they want with Sherlock Holmes nowadays is that Holmes is now in the public domain. That's the reason why someone could write Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. While the Holmes character was protected by copyright, authors had to obtain clearance from the Doyle estate. Nicholas Meyer did so before publishing The Seven-Per-Cent Solution.

In recent years, other authors have written new James Bond and Nero Wolfe stories, all with the permission (and doubtless payments to) the authors' estates.

Now, a few of the last Doyle Holmes stories are still under copyright and those can't be copied or any elements that were first introduced in those stories. A good example of this in connection with another work is The Wizard of Oz. That novel is in the public domain, but elements that were introduced in the 1939 movie are owned by Warner Brothers. That obviously includes "Over the Rainbow," but it also includes the ruby slippers, which were silver in the original book but changed for the movie because the studio thought that would look good in technicolor. So when you see works made without Warner approval, like the current TV show Once Upon a Time (which by the way is owned by Disney and so uses characters from Frozen, Mulan, 101 Dalmations, The Little Mermaid, Brave and the like), the slippers are silver.

Check out the article about the Sherlock Holmes copyright issues on my website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com/silve ... elect.html

I have an Official Klingon Dictionary which I can't put my hands on right at the moment. I wonder if Paramount got money out of that little publication.

SportsFan68 wrote:I have an Official Klingon Dictionary which I can't put my hands on right at the moment. I wonder if Paramount got money out of that little publication.

You'll find my last name in it.

Bob Juch wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I have an Official Klingon Dictionary which I can't put my hands on right at the moment. I wonder if Paramount got money out of that little publication.

You'll find my last name in it.

Right between "asset" and "assiduous"?

smilergrogan wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

SportsFan68 wrote:I have an Official Klingon Dictionary which I can't put my hands on right at the moment. I wonder if Paramount got money out of that little publication.

You'll find my last name in it.

Right between "asset" and "assiduous"?

Actually, both words apply to me.