![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Feb. 5th, 2003 01:12 pmPlease, if you ever plan to submit a fic to FA in the future, read this, even if you're a veteran submitter. It will make your fanfic-life easier and will speed the plough in terms of uploading your fic.
Feb. 5th, 2003
(no subject)
Feb. 5th, 2003 03:39 pmThis is probably
Not what Alex wanted, but
It makes lawyers smile.
Discussion topic of the day: Someone posted the images shown ( here ) to HPfGU-OTChatter, so![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
praetorianguard, gwendolyngrace and I started wondering if we could ask the artist to display the little people in the Gallery at Nimbus - 2003 without running afoul of copyright laws. praetorianguard and I both believe that the parody defenses would apply, as the little people do poke fun at both the merchandising of the HP books and the books themselves.
Then, we started talking about trademark. And LEGOs. And genuine fans engaging in commentary about the books by creating and photographing scenes LEGOs engage in interpersonal contact with other LEGOs, and similar commentary and occasionally satire in the form of recording images of HP action figures, similar to the way the courts have allowed parodies of and commentary about the BARBIE product via photos of the dolls in clothing never produced by Mattel.
So now I'm here, wondering whether it's possible to tarnish the VOLDEMORT mark with such artistic expression, even presuming there was a commercial motive twinned with the artistic expression (such as the sale of a book containing the images).
Lawyers o'the fandom? What sayeth you?
Not what Alex wanted, but
It makes lawyers smile.
Discussion topic of the day: Someone posted the images shown ( here ) to HPfGU-OTChatter, so
praetorianguard, gwendolyngrace and I started wondering if we could ask the artist to display the little people in the Gallery at Nimbus - 2003 without running afoul of copyright laws. praetorianguard and I both believe that the parody defenses would apply, as the little people do poke fun at both the merchandising of the HP books and the books themselves. Then, we started talking about trademark. And LEGOs. And genuine fans engaging in commentary about the books by creating and photographing scenes LEGOs engage in interpersonal contact with other LEGOs, and similar commentary and occasionally satire in the form of recording images of HP action figures, similar to the way the courts have allowed parodies of and commentary about the BARBIE product via photos of the dolls in clothing never produced by Mattel.
So now I'm here, wondering whether it's possible to tarnish the VOLDEMORT mark with such artistic expression, even presuming there was a commercial motive twinned with the artistic expression (such as the sale of a book containing the images).
Lawyers o'the fandom? What sayeth you?
