Question about copyright

iSteampunk

So I was wondering when a webcomic such as Penny Arcade sells collections of it's comics in book form, are they allowed to include comics that contained copywritten characters or material as well? I know it's one thing for them to post the comics due to fair use laws and parody yadda yadda yadda I am just curious about how that works into the actual selling of those comics down the road.

admanb

Fair use remains in effect for commercial products, it's just more likely to get closely analyzed.

The Lovely Bastard

It'd mostly fall under parody law, and, honestly, copyright is only ever enforced heavily when the owner of it tries to flex its muscle

I mean, sure when something is completely blatant about it, the hammer will fall down, but copyright law really relies on the owner of the copyright to get the ball rolling

Nova_C

Stuff like characters from games showing up in a comic falls under the parody part of fair use. For example, even if Blizzard wanted PA to not use Nova's likeness in their comic, Blizzard wouldn't have a case.

Real people are a bit more complicated because of libel, but libel is libel whether it's on the web or in a book. If any of the people Gabe and Tycho made fun of in the strip wanted to sue, it'd have happened already.

I imagine with the kind of pull PA has in the gaming communicty, owners of the characters, or the people they parody, are just glad for the free publicity.

FyreWulff

Copyright laws are in effect no matter the medium in which they are presented, and whether you're getting it free or paying for it.

oldsak

Also, realize that when they post comics online it is still commercial use as they sell ad space.

Hevach

Parody protection isn't ironclad. Penny Arcade had that run-in with American Greetings a while back. The apparent issue was that they used Strawberry Shortcake to parody American McGee, which may or may not have fallen outside of parody protection. Weird Al got sued in the 90's which I understand is why he goes out of his way to get written permission.

It also has a lot to do with whether it's worth litigating or if you can afford to litigate in the first place. American Greetings might not have had a case, but when they decided to throw their weight around they could still get their way.

AngelHedgie

Hevach wrote: »

Parody protection isn't ironclad. Penny Arcade had that run-in with American Greetings a while back. The apparent issue was that they used Strawberry Shortcake to parody American McGee, which may or may not have fallen outside of parody protection. Weird Al got sued in the 90's which I understand is why he goes out of his way to get written permission.

It also has a lot to do with whether it's worth litigating or if you can afford to litigate in the first place. American Greetings might not have had a case, but when they decided to throw their weight around they could still get their way.

Oh, they had a case. Look up Geisel v. Penguin sometime - that ruling is pretty clear as to why.

Aioua

AngelHedgie wrote: »

Hevach wrote: »

Parody protection isn't ironclad. Penny Arcade had that run-in with American Greetings a while back. The apparent issue was that they used Strawberry Shortcake to parody American McGee, which may or may not have fallen outside of parody protection. Weird Al got sued in the 90's which I understand is why he goes out of his way to get written permission.

It also has a lot to do with whether it's worth litigating or if you can afford to litigate in the first place. American Greetings might not have had a case, but when they decided to throw their weight around they could still get their way.

Oh, they had a case. Look up Geisel v. Penguin sometime - that ruling is pretty clear as to why.

For your convenience.