Author Topic: ©Cook'd and Bomb'd  (Read 3950 times)

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #30 on: February 03, 2004, 07:38:32 PM »
Well, yes, it would have to be about something different. But look on imdb.com and see the amount of films which have duplicate titles (for example, 'Gladiator', made twice in the space of a couple of years, one about boxing, the other about, um, a gladiator)

Ambient Sheep

  • A boy who was tangled in his life forever
©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #31 on: February 03, 2004, 07:41:28 PM »
Quote from: "The Unicorn"
Well, yes, it would have to be about something different. But look on imdb.com and see the amount of films which have duplicate titles (for example, 'Gladiator', made twice in the space of a couple of years, one about boxing, the other about, um, a gladiator)

I do take your point and I have to say that I don't understand exactly where the line is drawn.  I suspect that in this case the argument would be that the word "Gladiator" is a single English word and thus not copyrightable / trademarkable, whereas CE3K is a very long and specific title.

I wish I knew too.

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #32 on: February 03, 2004, 07:46:32 PM »
Hmm, I'm not sure though, because it would mean you'd have to copyright every word in the dictionary, which is impossible, and also stupid. Obviously characters and storylines can be copyrighted, but I'm not sure about names.
I definetly read in a film magazine that film titles can't  be copyrighted though.

As a side note, Spike Lee recently tried to sue the TV show 'Spike TV' as he said they were trying to cash in on his name. What a cunt.

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2004, 09:51:14 AM »
Quote from: "Vermschneid Mehearties"
Heh.

"Me and the McDonalds people...We've got a bit of a..misunderstanding

Those who'll get it will get it and those who won't won't.


Sexual Chocolate!!

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #34 on: February 04, 2004, 10:51:57 AM »
Haven't 'Toys'R'Us' Trademarked the 'R'US bit? And they sue people who try and open shops like Doorknobs'R'Us.

In fact, they'll probably be after me very soon for posing that. See ya!

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #35 on: February 04, 2004, 11:18:55 AM »
I believe that Elvis Presley and John Lennon are copyrighted, not just the signatures.

So if you were to open say Elvis Presley's Quiffery, you may well be sued.

MojoJojo

  • Member
  • **
  • Between a cow college and a MetaLab.
©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #36 on: February 04, 2004, 11:44:29 AM »
I don't think their names could be copyrighted. That would mean you would need to get permission to put there names in a book or something. They could be trademarked, but even then you would have a fair chance of getting away with Elvis Presley's Quiffery, on account that Elvis didn't cut hair. A singer describing himself as "The New Elvis" could be expect to the lawyers though.
[/quote]

©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #37 on: February 04, 2004, 11:55:01 AM »
Think of Yoko's Lennon line of children's clothing, I would accept that his signature is a brand (how goddamn fucking shameful), but I would imagine that she has also copyrighted his name to protect it.

Similar I suppose to the less talented offspring of Picasso and the car named after him featuring his signature.

Didn't Posh Spice recently lose a case against some football supporters who's nickname is the Posh something or other?

Johnny Yesno

  • Injecting the rivers with stainless steel fish
    • Lines Horizontal
©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #38 on: February 04, 2004, 12:50:45 PM »
Quote from: "elderford"
Didn't Posh Spice recently lose a case against some football supporters who's nickname is the Posh something or other?


That was Peterborough United, aka "The Posh".
Fuck! I answered a football question! I hate football... but I knew something about it that someone else in the world didn't know already. Blimey! I need a lie down...

imitationleather

  • "The French... are famous... for their kissing"
    • http://last.fm/user/ImiLeathr
©Cook'd and Bomb'd
« Reply #39 on: February 04, 2004, 05:27:42 PM »
Quote from: "weekender"
Wasn't imitationleather convinced that some bloke in the Guardian was stealing a load of thread ideas for his column?


Yes, I was. In Charlie Brooker's column a few weeks after they were mentioned in Verbwhores he wrote lengthy reviews of Turn On Terry and Friendly TV, saying things that pretty much exactly echoed what was said on here. I thought it was odd because these are both very obscure programmes that get next to no viewers. He probably wasn't copying us, but it did demonstrate that he has a really easy job that any of us could do.