3 ms·
> Certainly you'd be in the clear if it was titled Fat, Honey-Loving Bear Stories. If you're publishing the original book, you'll be able to use the original t
by bdowling 5y ago
> Certainly you'd be in the clear if it was titled Fat, Honey-Loving Bear Stories.
If you're publishing the original book, you'll be able to use the original title because you'll be using the name not as a trademark, but as a descriptive term for the book.
For derivative works, you will probably want to make up your own name that you can use as a unique trademark to identify your derivative. (See, e.g., the recent Sherlock Holmes derivative works: Sherlock, Elementary, Enola Holmes.)
- dragonwriter 5y ago> If you’re publishing the original book, you’ll be able to use the original title because you’ll be using the name not as a trademark, but as a descriptive term for the book. You seem to be arguing that it would be descriptive fair use, but the probability of confusion prong of the descriptive fair use test seems likely to be problematic, especially in an active franchise with newer works under the trademark that are actually exclusive to the trademark owner by copyright as well.
- bdowling 5y agoIf you cite the test you’re referring to, then I’ll tell you why it doesn’t apply to the title of a literary work in the public domain.