i wouldn't advise trying it!... if you're not a literary attorney, horus, it's not a good idea to be so sure about such a tricky area of the law and make beginners think it's ok to do what may well not be... for matters like this, when in doubt, it's always best to consult a literary attorney and not just writing site members, regardless of how helpful we're trying to be [and yes, that includes me ;-) ]...
I agree but just to be a smart ass, Batman is an English surname and found in some other languages and placenames as well. The city of Melbourne, Australia was founded by John Batman and was nearly dubbed "Batmania" actually. So he's right, actually. You could name your main character Edward Batman and that would be fine assuming it wasn't in any way referencing the superhero. I think the deal is don't even try to veil an act of plagiarism or try to find loopholes in copyright law because you'll get caught. But there are legitimate limits and fairness in play too
Well, I did alot of reading on trademarks and the gist of it is they're in place to avoid product identity theft, by having one product resemble another too closely. It doesn't grant ownership of a word. An example of where trademark kicks in is if you sell a razor in a package that resembles Gilette's, but name the razor "Gulette". You didn't even use the same word but your product is made to resemble another brand. This general resemblance protection makes trademarks much more secure than simply denying everyone else to use a specific word. Think about it. There's a gazillion brands that use common words. "Intel" would be one. Likewise, there's a gazillion brands that use the same word. You can make a hairdryer and name it Intel but you can't do it with a microchip.
If the trademarked name is associated with fiction, then the use of that trademarked name in a work of fiction may be adjudged an infringement of the trademark. Whether such a judgment is indeed found depends on how the name is used and whether it appears likely to be confused with the trademarked entity. Trademark infringement a minefield. If there is any question wheter you are infringing on someone's trademark, you had best consult an attorney. It will cost you a lot less if you do so before you are sued. By the way, this thread really didn't start out as a copyright/tradmark question. The topic is about including ephemeral references to pop culture in a work of fiction. We should return to the original topic.
I took Operaghost's words to heart in this thread: https://www.writingforums.org/showthread.php?t=26057 Operaghost said: A lot of these phrases are actually pop culture references and i don't think anyone will seriously consider legal action, after all its not plagarism as such as you are using it out of contxt and simply making reference to a popular saying/catchphrase, which is something that happens in everyday life, (i qoute shakespeare and alic in wonderland all the time) it would be plagarism however if your story happened to feature within a computer generated world in which your mc is some kind of messiah who then utters "there is no spoon," There's two phrases in my book which I've taken from video games. If you never played the video game, these phrases still make perfect sense on their own. But if you played it, it's an extra joke/meaning. Is it legal or not to do this or is it crossing the line? I basically do it in reference or as a joke to the reader if they've played the game. I mean, they do it in video games as well. A lot of world of warcraft characters are named after real life celebrities with just a letter changed. They also take take popular pop culture quotes from movies; songs; and books, and just change it around a bit. What's fair use? Are they allowed to do this, and are we are allowed to do this if they are doing it to us?
FYI, quoting work in the public domain is allowed. All of Shakespeare's works, as well as Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland published in 1865, are in the public domain. (I might be mistaken, but I believe there are no video games or computer programs in public domain--any computer programs old enough to be in the public domain would be all 1s and 0s. ) There have been cases where extremely short phrases have been copyright violations. I read of one, although I don't recall what the phrase was. I've never heard the phrase "There is no spoon," which may well be copyright protected, but I'd recommend against having a hero use "Spoon!" as a battle cry, as that may be a copyright violation on the character The Tick. On "There is no spoon": Is this a video game where you're sitting in a restaurant trying to get better service from the waiters? I can't think of many other settings where you'd say, "There is no spoon." May be when you're looking to buy a cutlery set, the salesperson tells you why this particular set is discounted? I confess, I don't see the significance of there being no spoon... or why a messiah would be so concerned about this, unless the messiah is having problems eating the soup. Charlie
if the second question is your guess about what 'fair use' is, that's not it... read up on the exemption here: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html for all to do with copyright and trademark laws, go here: http://www.copyright.gov/laws/
Back to the original topic... A novel I am working on now has a recurring theme of the image of a wolf/ves that appears whenever the main character becomes hung up on the significance of a past relationship. Many will see that as something pulled from nowhere but my own mind, but I know at least one of my friends, and probably several other fans of the not-so-popular Josh Ritter will see the influence from this song immediately. I think it's a good thing.
I have a few little easter-eggs, but most of them are so obscure that even the people reading them would wonder if i truly meant them to be references. As an example, I have a character named Narpa, who crafts weapons. This is a reference to the original Metroid game, in which one of the tricks on the password screen was to enter NARPAS-SWORD. It was commonly known as the 'narpa's sword' code because of the way it was cut in half by the game's password entry system, but it actually stood for NAR Password. (NAR is rumored to stand for 'not a real' password, or 'Nintendo American Region' password- a debug code.) I also have a character named Satthys, which is an acronym of a starfox 64 quote (and not even that popular of a quote, to be honest).
Yeah, it's the Wachowski brothers' attempt at sounding deep and spiritual, by ripping off basic principles of Buddhism.
Sort of like the way that hack Shakespeare ripped off the Bible, mentioning God and stuff like that. (The Bible ripped off the oral traditions and earlier writings.) Then again, everything that mentions God rips off the Bible and previous writings... going back to hieroglyphics. And don't get me started on all the stories about people murdering other people, clearly rip-offs of Cain and Abel. Charlie
I know that pop culture can date something, but if the story is clearly set in a particular period then that shouldn’t matter, look at things such as Shakespeare, which actually included references audiences of the day would have got, or things like Jane Austen which are clearly set in a particular period in history, and whilst not pop culture references includes many of the attitudes of the day. Sure it could be argued that this in fact dates them but it doesn’t make them any less valid as texts. I myself use some pop culture references in my novel I am writing, primarily because it is set at a particular point in time, and also as one of my main characters is a comic book geek, and so does make reference to popular culture, sure in thirty years time it may seem extremely dated but it is a novel about modern society and so clearly needs to be set at a particular point in time. (Incidentally you can get whole novels which are pop culture references, check out Ben Elton’s Dead Famous or Chart Throb for instance, both of which are thinly veiled takes on Big Brother and the X factor)
Oh dear, not these semantics again. My point was that people went all "wow" about a concept (taken straight out of common religion), as if the Matrix was saying anything new and profound by that sentence. Honestly, the only thing I thought was profound was the stupidity of the A.I. as they for some reason decided to use humans as batteries, instead of cows or horses or whatever other harmless animal that would never have the brainpower to escape and rebel.
No..........I'm pretty sure it's safe to call a religion. Or maybe christianity is just a philosophy that involves knee-bending exercises.
I do sometimes, but mostly to amuse myself. I wrote a sci-fi story where the MC is basically abducted and wonders if a parasite is going to burst from her ribcage when her stomach growls from hunger.
It's sarcasm. Please forgive me that. What I meant to say, in plain language, is that mentioning God is not ripping off the Bible, and that discussing or alluding to Buddhist philosophy is not ripping off Buddhism. For many not familiar with Buddhist philosophy, it was new. I think it is fairly profound--I rather think that's rather the point. I didn't recall the particular line, I had to google it, but I remember the theme of the movie in general, and I thought it was well-executed, albeit "not new," just as they say, everything under the sun is "not new." Not meaning to razz you though. I just remember liking the movie--and I like movies (and novels, etc.) that incorporate philosophy. Back to topic--now that I know what the line is from, I'd recommend against using the line, about 1/10th of the reason being copyright and 9/10ths of the reason being, there are many, many much better ways to allude to the philosophy than to say, "There is no spoon." Inside its original context, it may have worked, but outside its original context, it doesn't... and frankly, if you want to be a writer, you want to challenge yourself to find new ways to present old philosophy, if you find that philosophy meaningful enough to include as your book's theme. Charlie
