Phoenix Comicon Badge Art Being Ripped Off

Phoenix Comicon 2012 Badge Ruth Carter

Picture from my 2012 Phoenix Comicon Badge

I recently wrote a post about copyright, fair use, and fan fiction and I did an analysis of Marty Freetage’s artwork that was on the badges for Phoenix Comicon this year. It was an awesome parody of Angry Birds and The Avengers. Parodies are generally permissible under the fair use doctrine and I thought Marty’s work was original enough that the copyright holders for Angry Birds and The Avengers probably wouldn’t come after him or Phoenix Comicon for copyright infringement.

Shirt on Gabilife.com

This week I was surprised to see a t-shirt for sale on Gabilife that looks exactly like Marty’s picture. A lot of people on Facebook posted that Gabilife used Marty’s work, changed the background, and stuck it on a shirt. Whoever owns the copyright in the badge art has good reason for believing that their Gabilife is infringing on their work.

This story gets more complicated by Gabilife claims to be a company in India. It raises the question of what are the possible recourse options to make them stop selling the shirt. If they have a presence in the United States, whoever owns the copyright could go after Gabilife for infringement as if they were a US-based company.

Gabilife’s terms state “Pursuant to Title 17, United States Code, Section 512(c)(2), notifications of claimed copyright infringement under United States copyright law should be sent to Service Provider’s Designated Agent.” I searched the agent list on the US Copyright website and I didn’t see a listing for Gabilife or Gabi. That makes me wonder if they just copied someone else’s terms and conditions without registering an agent.

If owned the copyright for the original badge art, I’d register the copyright in the artwork immediately. A copyright holder maximizes their options for recourse if they register their copyright within 3 months of publication or 1 month of learning of the infringement, whichever happens first. If this art hasn’t been registered, that window could still be open.

If the work was registered in time, I’d sue them for copyright infringement if it was a US company. If the company doesn’t do business in the US, there’s probably no point to suing them. If suing them would be pointless, I’d either send a DMCA takedown notice to the email address listed on their site and to their snail mail address. If I wanted to be really bold, I would send them a licensing agreement and a bill that states that they agreed to the licensing agreement by using the artwork without permission.

I wouldn’t expect them to pay me, but it would be validating.

So what is the take away message?

  1. Register your copyrights shortly after creating an original work, especially when you’re as awesome as Marty.
  2. If you suspect someone is ripping off your work, contact a copyright attorney in your community (like me!) to help you strategize and execute your response.

Feel free to connect with me via TwitterGoogle+Facebook, and LinkedIn.
Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

 

Fan Fiction, Copyright Law, and Fair Use

Phoenix Comicon 2012 Badge Ruth Carter

My 2012 Phoenix Comicon Badge - Artwork by Marty Freetage and Bill Farmer Color

I spoke at Phoenix Comicon last week on fair use and fan fiction. I had a great group of people in my audience with who had ideas of turning novels into graphic novels and who wanted to know more about the legalities of things like the Phoenix Comicon badges. This year’s badge featured a parody of Angry Birds and The Avengers.

Speaking at Phoenix Comicon 2012, Ruth Carter photo by Devon Christopher Adams

Speaking at Phoenix Comicon 2012, photo by Devon Christopher Adams

Fair use is a defense against claims of copyright infringement. What generally occurs in these situations is you use someone else’s work in a project, the original copyright owner sues you for copyright infringement, and you respond with an argument that you used the copyright owner’s work but that your use was transformative enough to qualify for protection under the fair use doctrine. The court considers four factors to determine if your use of another’s work is protected by fair use.

  1. Purpose and character of your use of another’s work
  2. Nature of the copyrighted work
  3. Amount and substantiality of the copyrighted work used
  4. Effect on the market

These cases are evaluated on an individual basis. There’s no mathematical equation to determine if you’re protected by fair use. The main factor the court considers is whether your work becomes a substitute for the other person’s work. Parodies are generally transformative enough to qualify for fair use. Let’s look at the fair use factors in regards to the Angry Birds/Avengers badge.

  1. Purpose and character: Phoenix Comicon is a commercial venture, but attendees are paying to attend the con, not specifically to buy the art on the badge.
  2. Nature of the copyrighted work: Both Angry Birds and The Avengers have been previously published. One is a game, the other is a movie. The original copyright owner is generally favored if the work was not previously published.
  3. Amount and substantiality used: The looks of the birds and the Avengers were copied. The looks of both were required for the audience to understand the parody.
  4. Effect on the market: It’s unlikely that someone will seek out Angry Bird art or Avenger art and accept this as a suitable substitute. No one will use this picture as a substitute for the video game or the movie.

Was this badge protected by fair use? Probably, but I’m not a judge and it’s not my call to make.

When it comes to fan fiction, an artist isn’t going to get in trouble if the copyright owner doesn’t know about your work or if they don’t mind that their fans create their own work. If you’re really worried about getting in trouble, you can always ask the copyright owner for permission or a license to use their work.

Fan fiction and fair use are fact specific issues. When in doubt, consult an attorney.

Feel free to connect with me via Twitter, Google+, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
Please visit my homepage for more information about Carter Law Firm.

Phoenix Comicon Preview – Fan Fiction and Copyright Law

Superman vs. Hulk by JD Hancock

I am so excited for Phoenix Comicon, coming up Memorial Day weekend at the Phoenix Convention Center. It’s the 25th anniversary of Star Trek: The Next Generation, and a lot of the cast is going to be there. I’ve been a card-carrying Trekkie for almost 20 years and The Next Generation was the show that started it all for me.

I’m also super excited that I’ve been invited to speak at Phoenix Comicon this year. My talk is on Thursday evening at 7pm in room 127A of the North Building. The organizers gave my talk a really fancy name, “Adapting Licensed Properties to Comics,” but don’t let that confuse or scare you. I’m going to be talking about how copyright law applies to fan art, fan fiction, and slash fiction. We can also get into issues about sci-fi or comic inspired tattoos, and any other copyright topics we have time to cover.

I think fan art and fan fiction is fantastic and should be encouraged because it makes us keep falling in love with our favorite comics and shows over and over again. But if you create your own sci-fi or comic inspired art work or fiction, you should know about the copyright implications that apply to you. I’m going to talk about how fair use works and I’m going to tell a story about how an independent artist was able to create a Wizard of Oz decorative plate and copyright it. It can be done – if you know how to do it right.

My talk has the benefit of being right before the Semi-finals of the Phoenix Ultimate Geek Smackdown (PUGS). Come see me on Thursday at 7pm and stay for PUGS in room 121 at 8pm!

Here’s the recap:
Who: Me
What: Speaking at Phoenix Comicon – “Adapting Licensed Properties to Comics” – aka Copyright and Fan Fiction
Where: Phoenix Convention Center, North Building, room 127A
When: Thursday, May 24th – 7pm

8 Questions to Ask Before Posting a Blog

No I'm Blogging This by Andre Charland

No I'm Blogging This by Andre Charland

I taught a class this week at Gangplank, an awesome collaborative co-working space in Chandler, on some of the legalities of blogging. It was part of Gangplank Academy. As I was going through my notes in preparation of this class, it occurred to me that there are some critical questions every blogger should ask themselves before publishing a new blog post.

1. Is all the information in your blog verifiable?

2. Is every statement that isn’t verifiable indisputable?
Statements like “My knee hurts like it’s going to rain tomorrow” and “My favorite color is blue” may not be verifiable, but there’s no one who can say those statements aren’t true.

3. Do you accuse anyone of committing a crime?
It’s one thing to say, “My neighbor gives me the creeps,” but you might get sued if you say, “In my opinion, my neighbor’s a pedophile.”

4. Are you sharing any information that you learned in confidence?
When you break up with your partner, don’t write a blog post sharing all the personal information you learned during the relationship like their weird fetishes and habits.

5. Are any of your statements misrepresentations or half-truths?

6. Do any of your statements insinuate anything that isn’t true?
If you write a blog about how you don’t like seeing drug users in the park and you include a photo of a person lying in the grass with their eyes closed, they may be unhappy and sue you if they’re not a drug user but were only taking a nap.

7. Is all your information public? Are you writing about a topic where your subject might have an expectation of privacy?
Your neighbor has no expectation of privacy in how he looks naked if you saw him at a public nude beach. He does if you had to creep up to his house and peer through the cracks in his closed blinds to see him.

8. Is all your information from reputable sources?
If you copy or repeat someone’s defamatory statement, even if you didn’t know it was false, you might get sued for defamation.

I love bloggers who push the envelope and sometimes it’s hard to know when you’re crossing the line. When in doubt, consult a lawyer who is a media expert and always follow my rule: “Never put anything online that you wouldn’t put on the front page of the newspaper.”

Bloggers Beware: Lessons from the Crystal Cox Case

92/365: Done? by PlayfulLibrarian

92/365: Done? by PlayfulLibrarian

This post was originally published on The Undeniable Ruth in December 2011. 

Many of us got into blogging because we like having a proverbial soapbox we can jump on to share our thoughts with the universe. The recent Crystal Cox case has made me wonder how many bloggers know the legal risk they take when they share their views.

For those of you who missed it, Crystal Cox is an “investigative blogger” in Montana who writes a blog called Bankruptcy Corruption. In one of her posts, she called Kevin Padrick, an attorney in Oregon, “a thug, a thief, and a liar.” Padrick sued Cox for defamation and won . . . $2.5 million!

The interesting thing for bloggers to note is that Cox lives and writes in Montana but she was sued in Oregon and Oregon law applied to the case.

If you write about other people, you open yourself up to the possibility of being sued for defamation or invasion of privacy. These cases are generally based on state laws. The good news is that there isn’t much variation between the laws. The bad news is that there are exceptions.

The really bad news is that the person who claims to have been injured by your blog gets to sue you in the state where they were injured, which is usually their home state. And it’s their home state law that applies. So, if you’re a blogger in Mississippi, and you write about someone in Alaska, and they sue you for defamation, you have to go to Alaska to defend yourself and hire an attorney who can defend you in Alaska. (Another lesson from the Crystal Cox case: don’t be your own attorney!)

Let’s look at the shield law, one of the laws Cox tried to use to defend herself. This is the law journalists invoke to prevent a court from forcing them to reveal an information source. There isn’t one national shield law. There are 40 different state shield laws, and some states don’t have a shield law. Cox tried to use the shield law to defend herself; and in another state, her argument may have held water. But unfortunately for her, the Oregon shield law specifically states that you can’t use the law as a defense in a civil defamation case.

Another challenge surrounding the legalities of blogging is that sometimes the laws are old, really old, as in the-internet-wasn’t-invented-when-the-law-was-written old. In a lot of these cases, the court has to decide how the laws apply to these new situations didn’t exist before we had the internet. You and the other side can propose your interpretation of the law, but there’s no guarantee that the court will accept your interpretation. And you might get really lucky and get a judge who barely knows how to turn on their computer and has no concept of what a blog is.

Someday the laws will be updated to account for the internet and blogging practices. Even when that happens, we will still have to be conscientious of the fact that each state has its own laws, and that we run the risk of being sued in any of the 50 states depending on who and what we write about.