Inflatable Gorilla Sues Google Over Copyright?
from the inflatable-insanity dept
The latest in bizarre copyright lawsuits comes to us thanks to Eric Goldman, who tells the story of the inflatable gorilla company, Scherba, that is suing Google. Why? Because it claims to have a copyright on its inflatable gorillas, seen here:Still, the bigger question for me is what exactly does Scherba believe it's "lost" here, that it needs to sue Google? It's not as if the ad is somehow going to be a substitute for actually buying inflatable gorillas.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, inflatable gorilla
Companies: google, scherba
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
While copyright only covers specific expressions, trademarks tend to have greater breadth and might therefore apply to a larger set of all possible forms of inflatable gorillas. Should Scherba be the only company allowed to make these gorillas? Except in cases where it would constitute copyright infringement, my view is that it shouldn't be. Trademarks should be reserved for things like logos and other identifying marks rather than the design of the products themselves (except, perhaps, in cases where the product's appearance has nothing to do with its purpose).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The point is "what exactly does Scherba believe it's 'lost' here, that it needs to sue Google?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thank you for your feedback, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But, again, we digress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
He made the copyright/trademark point, and even if you don't care about it, others do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why people think Trademark is IP
Like if you wanted to do a documentary and The Simpsons was playing on a TV in the background? Yeah, that was a trademark claim, but what's the difference (to the sueee) what the claim is based on? You only have a potentially plausible defense walking into it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nintendo vs MGM all over again?
It's going to be funny if this one actually does go to court.
MGM sued against Nintendo back in the 80s for the exact same thing. Donkey Kong truly is an icon today in his own right.
Didn't know that Scherba forgot its history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
promo?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: promo?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: promo?
If you decide to go the sell sell sell route, your salespeople have to actually do their jobs.
If you decide to go the sue sue sue route, you pay a law firm to take care of it and hope that the settlement or judgment in your favor covers both the cost and something extra for the bruised ego.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: promo?
and that's the problem with today's businesses. They'd rather PAY money on a shot that they MIGHT make more back, instead of use FREE advertising. This type of practice is NOT capitalistic it is imperialistic; they are NOT the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: promo?
That's right boy. This is manifest destiny. God told us we could screw you over in the way we run our business. It's why Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers at the temple. He didn't want competition. Now be a good little red and say something commie-like so I can get the John Birch Soc... I mean, say something terrarist-like so I can get the Tea Party to protest you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gorilla Marketing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
3D versus 2D
From what I can gather, their only case would be if Google used some sort of pop-up 3D gorilla in the add...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 3D versus 2D
Yeah, but then you get into 'derivative works.' That's the worst part of copyright as it currently stands (barring the lengths, of course.) Artists (commercial or otherwise) need to be able to riff of the giants they stand upon, as they did before them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 3D versus 2D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free publicity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free publicity
Will they CAPITALIZE (i.e. capitalism) on it and make a profit?
Or will they try to TAKE money AWAY from another company? (i.e. imperialism)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.ameramark.com/inflatable_character_animals.htm
http://www.1800greatad.com/cu stomballoons.htm
If you can buy these things to advertise your business, then I'm not sure exactly what the issue would be here. If they bought it and stuck it on top of their corporate offices, would Scherba still be complaining?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Photographing and republishing = copying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]