4 ms·

For the sake of argument, I could see Disney trademarking a specific derivative or version of the mythological Loki... but then the look and actions of that cha

by mikece 5y ago

For the sake of argument, I could see Disney trademarking a specific derivative or version of the mythological Loki... but then the look and actions of that character would need to always stay within a tightly defined scope in order for it to be distinguishable -- and protected under copyright -- from the ancient character of myth. Honestly, I wish Marvel/Disney would lose all challenges like this and that, absent something unique to make it different from the character of ancient myth, that all of Marvel's imagery of that character automatically enters the public domain due to prior art.

shadowgovt 5y ago
There have been past instances of creators using public domain characters losing such suits to try and claim their character was an independent creation not subject to public domain protections (King Kong's history is probably the most famous, with both Universal killing RKO Picture's exclusive rights by arguing public domain and Nintendo killing Universal's exclusive rights with a similar argument when Universal tried to claim Donkey Kong was a violation of their IP). ... but my memory's telling me the law was changed some time after the Donkey Kong suit to strengthen a company's ability to create independently-protectable derivative work from public domain material. Unfortunately, I lack details.
coliveira 5y ago
Then the task is simple for Disney: just make enough movies based on Loki that most reasonable human features are displayed there.
Cd00d 5y ago
Doesn't Loki shape shift though? (Gaiman is my only reference)
- runarberg 5y ago
  Yes, he does. One of the weirder stories has him turn into a mare to separate a builder from his horse help (that builder was promised ridiculous rewards that the gods couldn’t possible give him, if he finished on time). Loki succeeds, however not without being impregnated by the stallion. Loki later gave birth to Sleipnir which became the horse of Óðin.
  - krapp 5y ago
    Ironically, there's another story where a giant steals Thor's hammer and refuses to return it unless he gets to marry the goddess Freya (which, of course, she refuses to accede to.) Instead of the obvious solution of having Loki shapeshift into Freya and do some mischief, they decide to dress Thor up in a wedding gown and pass him off as Freya, with Loki having to explain to the giant why "Freya" has a beard and guzzles mead by the gallon and her eyes seem to burn red like hateful coals. Needless to say, it works, because giants are stupid, and Thor gets his hands on his hammer again, and hijinks ensue. And by hijinks I mean a bloodbath. And giants have a lot of blood.
boublepop 5y ago
If Disney can trademark a “special derivative” of Loki. Can I trademark a “special derivative” of Mikey Mouse that’s just the same character but wearing green and staring in my animated movie? There really should not be any discussion here. Disney cannot hold trademarks on Norse gods. They have copyright protection on specific drawings, movies etc, but that should be the limit of that.

by mikece 5y ago

shadowgovt 5y ago

There have been past instances of creators using public domain characters losing such suits to try and claim their character was an independent creation not subject to public domain protections (King Kong's history is probably the most famous, with both Universal killing RKO Picture's exclusive rights by arguing public domain and Nintendo killing Universal's exclusive rights with a similar argument when Universal tried to claim Donkey Kong was a violation of their IP). ... but my memory's telling me the law was changed some time after the Donkey Kong suit to strengthen a company's ability to create independently-protectable derivative work from public domain material. Unfortunately, I lack details.

coliveira 5y ago

Then the task is simple for Disney: just make enough movies based on Loki that most reasonable human features are displayed there.

Cd00d 5y ago

Doesn't Loki shape shift though? (Gaiman is my only reference)

runarberg 5y ago
Yes, he does. One of the weirder stories has him turn into a mare to separate a builder from his horse help (that builder was promised ridiculous rewards that the gods couldn’t possible give him, if he finished on time). Loki succeeds, however not without being impregnated by the stallion. Loki later gave birth to Sleipnir which became the horse of Óðin.
- krapp 5y ago
  Ironically, there's another story where a giant steals Thor's hammer and refuses to return it unless he gets to marry the goddess Freya (which, of course, she refuses to accede to.) Instead of the obvious solution of having Loki shapeshift into Freya and do some mischief, they decide to dress Thor up in a wedding gown and pass him off as Freya, with Loki having to explain to the giant why "Freya" has a beard and guzzles mead by the gallon and her eyes seem to burn red like hateful coals. Needless to say, it works, because giants are stupid, and Thor gets his hands on his hammer again, and hijinks ensue. And by hijinks I mean a bloodbath. And giants have a lot of blood.

boublepop 5y ago

If Disney can trademark a “special derivative” of Loki. Can I trademark a “special derivative” of Mikey Mouse that’s just the same character but wearing green and staring in my animated movie? There really should not be any discussion here. Disney cannot hold trademarks on Norse gods. They have copyright protection on specific drawings, movies etc, but that should be the limit of that.