Re:Houston, We Have A Public Domain Problem
by shadowmint on Wednesday June 25, 2014 @12:54AM
(#7942307)
The sole source.
It really comes down to that doesn't it?
You're the sole source of art you produce, but what you're saying is that you suddenly, by creating a character, gain the exclusive unlimited right to be the only person ever to create any possible creative work with that character.
You're basically patenting the 'idea' of a character, such that no one else can use any variation on that idea.
That's the problem, and it's the problem with patents too; they 'lock up' ideas so they can't be used without licensing / permission; but no just the original idea; all the closely related derivative ideas too.
In practice it's pretty easy (and common) for large holders of these creative patents (for lack of a better word) to do what the Doyle Estate was doing (read here if you're not familiar http://free-sherlock.com/) to troll and shake-down people using the IP; even for relatively unrelated creative works.
Personally, I feel it should be managed more like brands; if I sell shoes with a Nike logo, it's obviously infringement.
...but if I start telling shoes with a logo from some company that hasn't traded shoes in 15 years and their trademark has expired, tough luck to them. You're not a practicing entity anymore; let someone else use that IP instead of leaving it locked up forever.
It really comes down to that doesn't it?
You're the sole source of art you produce, but what you're saying is that you suddenly, by creating a character, gain the exclusive unlimited right to be the only person ever to create any possible creative work with that character.
You're basically patenting the 'idea' of a character, such that no one else can use any variation on that idea.
That's the problem, and it's the problem with patents too; they 'lock up' ideas so they can't be used without licensing / permission; but no just the original idea; all the closely related derivative ideas too.
In practice it's pretty easy (and common) for large holders of these creative patents (for lack of a better word) to do what the Doyle Estate was doing (read here if you're not familiar http://free-sherlock.com/) to troll and shake-down people using the IP; even for relatively unrelated creative works.
Personally, I feel it should be managed more like brands; if I sell shoes with a Nike logo, it's obviously infringement.
...but if I start telling shoes with a logo from some company that hasn't traded shoes in 15 years and their trademark has expired, tough luck to them. You're not a practicing entity anymore; let someone else use that IP instead of leaving it locked up forever.