Asklemmy

47445 readers

558 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

Should IP enter the public domain? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 week ago by wuphysics87@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm speaking of creative works in particular. I'm generally in favor of the media entering the public domain when the artist dies, but when something enters the public decay, shit gets weird. Having Spongebob as IP keeps him on rails for who he is as a character. Change that, Spongebob as a character is changed by the public that could make the original unrecognizable. What's the line when a derivative work becomes it's own IP? What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There are 3 main forms of IP: patents (not relevant here), copyright and trademarks. Without consent of the holder, copyright only runs out on a time basis but what you're calling IP falls into the "trademark" category, which don't run out if continuously used by the holder. Some trademarks have become genericized and therefore invalid but this is a concern with product names, not fictional characters. There is no precedent in which fanon became so popular it overruled a trademark, because it can't be published officially (it is easy to sue a single artist, it's impossible to stop millions of people from calling any moving stairs "escalators" despite the former OTIS trademark).

Did you mean fanon "so different a trademark doesn't apply"? That would be a different character entirely.