> woodelf
>
> actually, if you want to really puzzle over all of this, re-read the
> copyright law on what consitutes "derivative work".

It is probably more practical to look at how judges have interpreted the
copyright statutes, since the judges will look at the caselaw as much as
anything when making a decision.  It goes a long way towards answering your
question of "what is derivative", but it also leaves a fair bit up in the
air.  Quite deliberately, I think.  Regarding your "sequel" question, I
suggest you take a look at Anderson V. Stallone, for translation into a
different media type, Picket v. Prince might be useful, and regarding
whether or not a game as a whole can be copyrighted when its individual
elements might not, Atari Games Corp. v. Oman might be helpful.

The Anderson v. Stallone case is an oft-cited example of this, where the
Rocky character was used without permission to create a new work of fiction.
The judge ruled that the new work was the joint property of both authors,
and that neither could use the work without the permission of the other. (I
don't have a link for this one, but I know Ryan has it).

In the Ferdinand Pickett v. Prince case, the judge ruled that the symbol
used by Prince to represent himself (a copyrighted 2-d visual artwork) could
not freely be used by others to create a 3-d interpretation (in this case, a
guitar).  The judge ruled in favor of Prince even though the new 3-d work
represented a substantial contribution of original material (converting the
2-d art into a 3-d guitar).

Atari v. Oman involved the game Breakout, where it was held by the copyright
office that the audio and video elements of the game were too simplistic to
warrant protection.  After a Supreme Court review of the Feist Publications,
Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service case (copyright of telephone books) in which
the court stated that the creative input need not be particularly impressive
to be worthy of protection, the court ruled that while the individual
elements could not be protected on their own, the entire work as a whole
contained enough creative input to deserve protection.  This is also seen in
the greeting card industry, where the text of a card might not deserve
protection on its own but the card as a whole does.

I found a great site on the net that has a lot of copyright cases summarized
with comments on the implications of the decisions.  I strongly recommend it
to anyone who wishes to enter into a gray area of the OGL.

http://allrise.com/copyright/SubjectMatter.html

also

Ferdinand Pickett v. Prince:
http://www.kentlaw.edu/student_orgs/jip/copy/ferdinand.htm

Atari Games Corp. v. Oman
http://www.lawstudents.org/copyright/cases/979F2D242.html

-Brad

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to