Character Matters

The estate of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is suing Netflix, Nancy Springer, the director of the Netflix movie and others for copyright infringement owing to depictions of the character of Sherlock Holmes which are still protected by copyright.

Legal blogger Duncan Calow for DLA Piper discusses an author's copyright in a character, and why it can be difficult to borrow (and exploit) someone else's character.

Here:
https://mse.dlapiper.com/post/102gagn/not-so-elementary

Or here:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=cf642867-b625-4531-8fbc-0012b489067a

Legal bloggers for RK Dewan & Co cover the same copyright infringement lawsuit from another angle, and also explain how and why the cold Sherlock (no longer in copyright) became the kinder, gentler Sherlock (still in copyright).

Here:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/documents.lexology.com/4232f53f-8c46-49e0-b509-69dfbfd32a7f.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAVYILUYJ754JTDY6T&Expires=1594496980&Signature=fAA8LyJyC1VQ%2FAkEKhuOGMIi55s%3D

Or here:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6f94afa6-3e18-42c1-8e1c-8a45d6497ee4

Apparently, there are some law firms who shall be nameless, who are alleged to infringe copyright on their own blogs or websites. One would have thought that a law firm would a) know better and b) have more character.

Legal blogger Karen E. Rubin, for Thompson Hine LLP on the blog looks into it and offers great advice on how to decorate your blog legally, albeit not as cheaply as snagging someone else's photo or video from a social media site.

Here: https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/2020/07/5079/#page=1

If you look at the blog's tags or labels, you can extrapolate which lawfirm & lawfirm is the defendant.

Less titillating, but perhaps the most interesting, copyright-related, legal blog of the week might be that of Venable LLP from Lee S. Brenner.  If you ever wondered what are the legal limits of First Amendment Speech, apparently a court of appeals has drawn the line: the First Amendment does not protect misleading commercial speech.

Read more:
https://www.closeupsblog.com/2020/07/court-of-appeal-affirms-no-first-amendment-protection-for-misleading-commercial-speech/#page=1

If you claim something in an advertisement that is more likely to deceive than to inform (accurately), you should take this to heart. Prevaricating for profit is not protected speech. Perhaps, the issue is even more egregious given the business name of the accused.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/

Of This And That....

This is my take on topical matters, mostly to do with copyright --as is my wont-- but with a few petty rants thrown in for good measure.

I'll save "the petty" for last.

For readers of this blog, it is possible that you may be considering use of images to decorate your own blogs, book trailers, vlogs, or even book covers. You probably are aware that everything on the internet is not necessarily "in the public domain" and free for all to use. If you are interested in the potential extent of your liability, consider visiting stockphotorights.com and check out their FAQ pages. They really are excellent.

"But, what," you may ask, "about Old Masters and photographs of Old Masters?" You might also do an internet search of "slavish" reproduction or copying. These may help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.

http://blogs.library.duke.edu/scholcomm/2013/06/14/museums-can-get-copyright-right/

If you are a celebrity, or are thinking of exploiting a photo you took of a celebrity, check out "image rights" as a search term.

While on the subject of blogs and vlogs, have you considered getting a trademark for your Blog name? (I did for my "space snark" blog on the assumption that one day, "snark" will be considered a positive.) It is not a cheap process, but this article on Lexology.com explains the advantages.

If you are an alien romance author (or any other kind of author... but I have to get my metadata in) who is trying to build up a following, beware of paying for Likes and Tweets. When social media was new-and-all, it seemed like everyone was bribing others to like them and to talk about them. Now, there is enough of it that a government agency sees the possibility of a revenue stream for the Treasury coffers. So, beware!

Isn't it odd that, when one spots one incorrect spelling on a site that ought to be reputable, more examples crop up in rapid succession? On April 7th I spotted a "recieve" on an official Amazon page (the Associates Central sign up page). I wrote to Jeff Bezos (kudos to Jeff for reading his incoming mail) and received a reply from someone named Bhaskar who assured me that it would take a bit more time than usual to look into the problem. Bhaskar promised to write back to me with more information. Well, it has been ten days, and the difficult research into how to spell receive correctly... has so far eluded them.

Mind you, it's probably not as simple as one might think. One of the most prestigious educational establishments in the country sent me a fund raising mailing, promising me that if I donated an obscene amount, I would "recieve" an ornament.

I blame the popular news media and their live streaming transcription services. One cannot be immediate and excellent as well. Editing takes time.

All the best,
Rowena Cherry