![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Oh, TWoP, we hardly knew you. Okay, we knew you as Mighty Big TV for a while. But anyhow, they're in trouble. I went to buy some TWoP merchandise in support, because I love the Slashville -- er, Smallville -- recaps, and because I can always use more coasters. Really, because my husband is paranoid about leaving marks on our new table. I like the designs, though I wish the coasters had the snarky slogans on them too. I would have bought the big WWSD? poster with the bats on it, but I feared making students uncomfortable if I put it up in my office, so I ended up with Post Snark, Ergo Propter Snark, which has the benefit of being pro-voting (it's the West Wing-related one, and I despise the WW recapper but like the design).
If the site survives, it would make an interesting case study for the trademark course I hope to teach someday. Clearly, they're attempting to profit, in part, off of recognition of the underlying intellectual property. But there's been so much value added that consumer confusion seems minimal -- even in an age of postmodernism, I doubt anyone thinks that the TV studios sponsor the recaps and related merchandise. Trademark dilution, that creepy concept slowly expanding to take over trademark law entirely, doesn't require confusion, however, which is the main reason it's evil. But that's a story for another day.
Anyway, TWoP is sexy fun, and I hope it survives. It's promising to recap "Birds of Prey," and I think I'll definitely need the snark to watch that show. I've been watching the preview ads, and when the random law enforcement-type guy asks the costumed girl something along the line of, "Don't you have any weapons?" I feel the need to shout out, "Other than *those*?" (pointing to seriously exposed cleavage). I think she actually says "I am the weapon," which is close to the right response, but still.
If the site survives, it would make an interesting case study for the trademark course I hope to teach someday. Clearly, they're attempting to profit, in part, off of recognition of the underlying intellectual property. But there's been so much value added that consumer confusion seems minimal -- even in an age of postmodernism, I doubt anyone thinks that the TV studios sponsor the recaps and related merchandise. Trademark dilution, that creepy concept slowly expanding to take over trademark law entirely, doesn't require confusion, however, which is the main reason it's evil. But that's a story for another day.
Anyway, TWoP is sexy fun, and I hope it survives. It's promising to recap "Birds of Prey," and I think I'll definitely need the snark to watch that show. I've been watching the preview ads, and when the random law enforcement-type guy asks the costumed girl something along the line of, "Don't you have any weapons?" I feel the need to shout out, "Other than *those*?" (pointing to seriously exposed cleavage). I think she actually says "I am the weapon," which is close to the right response, but still.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
Re: Are you sure I don't know you?
I think you're probably right about the fair use issues with the TWoP summaries. They're heavily couched in criticism and opinion, sort of like TV Guide or Entertainment Weekly but with more depth (or, uh, less depth, as the case may be). It's more the way that the recaps are just that: recaps. They read as transcripts of the shows in a way, and that is the angle I saw as more problematic. It's not just commentary, it's a blow by blow account of copyrighted works, sometimes using the exact language of the shows. That brings you to stickier copyright issues and the nitty gritty of fair use, things that I haven't really dealt with since school (I do mostly patent work).
As for the TWoP icons, if *those* violate trademarks, then I'd probably implode. Then again, I always find it very difficult to argue that anything can be confusingly similar to a known mark because I like to believe that people are smart enough to know the difference between a stylized Buffy logo and a big tilted head of garlic that nobody could really sue on except maybe The Lost Boys. (Kidding. The Lost Boys are just the only big vampire clan I can think of. *g*) It's a similar thing as in the Mattel case. I always have a hard time understanding how most things could not be understood to be about a trademarked product/service but clearly not be associated with the trademark owner or do anything other than draw more attention to and widen the distinction between the marks. And that, in a nutshell, is why I don't think I could ever only do trademark law. I'd implode.