Keyboard Cat and Nyan Cat are now relevant again.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/34102
Warner Bros. and 5th Cell, the companies behind Scribblenauts, are being sued for their use of two popular internet cat memes in the Scribblenauts games.
Keyboard Cat and Nyan Cat are the two memes in the Scribblenauts games that are the basis for the copyright infringement suit. The creator of Keyboard Cat, Charles Schmidt registered the video that features his now deceased cat Fatso with US Copyright Office in 2010 and has trademarks pending at the US Patent & Trademark Office. Likewise, Nyan Cat creator Christopher Orlando Torres registered a copyright on the Nyan Cat animated GIF in 2011 and has a trademark application pending.
The Scribblenauts series used representations of both cats without permission, starting with Keyboard Cat in the original 2009 DS game Scribblenauts. The most recent Scribblenauts game, Unlimited, contains both memes and is available on the 3DS and Wii U.
King, Holmes, Paterno, and Berliner, LLP are representing the two cats in a combined lawsuit seeking statutory damages, willful infringement enhancements, and attorney fees. However, Keyboard Cat may not be fully eligible due to its late copyright registration. The plaintiffs seek a sales injunction of Scribblenauts games until the suit is resolved.
The case is Schmidt, et al. v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., et al., CV13-02824-JFW.
The copyright laws in America are incredibly easy to abuse.MICROSOFT is collecting royalties from factories who MANUFACTURE android phones, I think we are well beyond broken...
this American life on NPR did a great investigation on Pantent trolls
The laws recently have changed but not nearly enough.
The copyright laws in America are incredibly easy to abuse.MICROSOFT is collecting royalties from factories who MANUFACTURE android phones, I think we are well beyond broken...
this American life on NPR did a great investigation on Pantent trolls
The laws recently have changed but not nearly enough.
Foxxcon is nothing more then a middleman, they manufacture the phones and likely flash them with whatever software was given to them in this case. Why should they be sued over these things when they are basically following directions from somebody else whom microsoft already gets royalties from...The copyright laws in America are incredibly easy to abuse.MICROSOFT is collecting royalties from factories who MANUFACTURE android phones, I think we are well beyond broken...
this American life on NPR did a great investigation on Pantent trolls
The laws recently have changed but not nearly enough.
Because Microsoft says they are violating patents that they own, and the companies would rather pay royalties than fight it in court.
Because Foxconn is the manufacturer of the devices, meaning they are violating the patents too. It's like if a video game violates your copyright, you sue the developer and the publisher.should they sue At&t and the other carriers as well? Who makes the accessories? Should they sue otterbox for making cases for the infringing products? Should they go after Wal-Mart for selling these phones?
I am not ruining another thread with our bickering...
eh true... i would rather not kick a dead horse thoughI am not ruining another thread with our bickering...
Too late.
If those Android patents are all software related, then Microsoft should go after the source, which is Google, not the phone manufacturers.and they are and i moved this discussion elsewhere...
I find it amusing that most posters here are taking Warner Bros. side on this. Keyboard cat and Nyan cat, as silly as they are, we're interesting and noteworthy enough to be included in the Scribblenauts game, and the content creators weren't solicited for permission, so they're suing WB because of it.
How ridiculous is it if it were my little pony or Garfield being used without permission? I think people are being flippant about this because they're "just Internet memes".
As for Nylon Cat...i fixed a typo... you're welcome...
I find it amusing that most posters here are taking Warner Bros. side on this. Keyboard cat and Nyan cat, as silly as they are, we're interesting and noteworthy enough to be included in the Scribblenauts game, and the content creators weren't solicited for permission, so they're suing WB because of it.
How ridiculous is it if it were my little pony or Garfield being used without permission? I think people are being flippant about this because they're "just Internet memes".
Here's the thing, the creater of Keyboard Cat didn't even copyright it until AFTER it had been used in the first game.
As for Nylan Cat, it didn't become popular until someone else took it and put it on YouTube with music. The original meme was not popular before then.
There is also the fact that neither one of these guys cared when thousands of people and websites used it, they only became interested when somebody with money used it. Also, you don't see Toei Animation or Funimation suing over people using Vegeta and the "It's over 9000" line. They are suing because they want money, plain and simple. They never would have gotten money from people on messageboards using them, but they think they can get money from Warner Bros. using it. And why would the Keyboard Cat guy wait 4 YEARS to sue?
Actually marty, there are advanatges to filing a copyright with the USPTO:none of those = extra protection for your copyrighted works.
as soon as you create something 'original,' you own the copyright. You can file your copyrighted creation with the government, but it's not necessary (and it doesn't grant you any extra protection). Writers/Comic book artists/programmers used to mail themselves copies of their work so the USPS would put an legal date on an unopened letter or package containing the work because it was cheaper than filing anything with the US copyright office. Sealing envelopes with a notary's seal on it was another common, cheap method of legally obtaining an official date on materials. Email things to yourself provides about the same amount of protection.While it's true that you automatically gain copyright, just mailing something to yourself (though it's touted as a popular cost-effective method) doesn't provide any legal proof of date in the US (http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp).
Funny. I guess I knew people mailing themselves packages containing their own works for no reason (the same comic book writers/artist also filed their copyrighted material, too).as soon as you create something 'original,' you own the copyright. You can file your copyrighted creation with the government, but it's not necessary (and it doesn't grant you any extra protection). Writers/Comic book artists/programmers used to mail themselves copies of their work so the USPS would put an legal date on an unopened letter or package containing the work because it was cheaper than filing anything with the US copyright office. Sealing envelopes with a notary's seal on it was another common, cheap method of legally obtaining an official date on materials. Email things to yourself provides about the same amount of protection.While it's true that you automatically gain copyright, just mailing something to yourself (though it's touted as a popular cost-effective method) doesn't provide any legal proof of date in the US (http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp).
none of those = extra protection for your copyrighted works.
