Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Penny Arcade - Comic - Tart As A Double Entendre

DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
edited January 18 in The Penny Arcade Hub

imagePenny Arcade - Comic - Tart As A Double Entendre

Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.

Read the full story here


Unknown User on
H3Knuckles

Posts

  • PeartatoPeartato Registered User regular
    I HAVE QUESTIONS

    cB557
  • ShowsniShowsni Registered User regular
    Peartato wrote: »
    I HAVE QUESTIONS

    Turns out the Strawberry Shortcake people didn't like the Penny Arcade depiction. They reference this comic in some later ones (see here: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/06/15/reprise ), and you can find the original floating around on the web still (try Googling Penny Arcade Strawberry Shortcake).

    H3Knuckles
  • KredKred Registered User regular
    Huh, interesting that they would cave to this. Fair use is well established for stuff like this. In one article it says that lawyers for American Greetings argued that parody was covered under fair use, but this was satire which enjoyed no such protection. I find that laughable, but who knows how it would play out in court.

    I can only imagine that email address has long since been shut down, lol.

  • TubeTube Administrator, ClubPA admin
    We have actual lawyers we ask about stuff like this

    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    H3Knuckles
  • dennisdennis Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    We have actual lawyers we ask about stuff like this

    But he's Batman.

    cB557McFodderKoopahTroopahAndy JoeTychoCelchuuu
  • YoungFreyYoungFrey Registered User regular
    I believe the legal distinction here is that they weren't parodying Strawberry Shortcake, they were using Strawberry Shortcake as a vehicle to make fun of American McGee's Alice. Therefore it wasn't protected by Fair Use.

    HevachH3Knuckles
  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    I'm more curious about why this thread got reposted yesterday.

    You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
  • homogenizedhomogenized Registered User regular
    edited January 20
    Spambot trawling through old comment sections, probably. Or a reader going on an archive binge.

    homogenized on
    H3Knuckles
  • CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Showsni wrote: »
    Peartato wrote: »
    I HAVE QUESTIONS

    Turns out the Strawberry Shortcake people didn't like the Penny Arcade depiction. They reference this comic in some later ones (see here: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/06/15/reprise ), and you can find the original floating around on the web still (try Googling Penny Arcade Strawberry Shortcake).

    Oh man, I missed the grimdark Rainbow Brite. I'd watch that.

    Aegeri
  • Moridin889Moridin889 Registered User regular
    I'm more curious about why this thread got reposted yesterday.

    They talked about this comic in the Q&A at PAX south

  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited January 21
    YoungFrey wrote: »
    I believe the legal distinction here is that they weren't parodying Strawberry Shortcake, they were using Strawberry Shortcake as a vehicle to make fun of American McGee's Alice. Therefore it wasn't protected by Fair Use.

    There was a Doctor Seuss parody some years back that got shot down on similar grounds, and another one going on right now that seems to have passed the point of losing but waiting to see how bad.

    Parody protection is pretty narrow even without all the other whittling away at fair use that has happened over the years. Weird Al gets written license before he does anything, and way more of those prime time animation jokes get cleared with copyright holders than you would ever believe. A lot of that stuff isn't protected and wouldn't fly otherwise. There's been a few artists who get angry about Weird Al's take on their songs, but it's no fair use that keeps them from suing, it's the license contract they signed before he sang his first word.

    Hevach on
  • KredKred Registered User regular
    dennis wrote: »

    But he's Batman.

    Exactly, I had my lawyers ask their lawyers about it.

    One of the main tests for fair use in a parody is whether it's transformative. I.E., using it in a way that is totally different from the tone and intent of the original work. I'd say they passed that test pretty well. And then turned around and did exactly the same thing in a later comic with Rainbow Brite. For that matter a lot of the comics over the years have lampooned various games, movies, etc... in a similar way. Heck, they slammed Monster for making overpriced surge protectors and Monster is well known for being sue happy. They once sued Monster energy drinks just for using the word. Then there was the full on war with Jack Thompson, also known for suing the crap out of anyone that pisses him off.

    Hence my surprise they caved on this one.

    Here's some light reading on a very similar case. http://www.ipinbrief.com/when-is-a-parody-a-protected-fair-use-under-copyright-the-law/

  • dennisdennis Registered User regular
    Kred wrote: »
    dennis wrote: »

    But he's Batman.

    Exactly, I had my lawyers ask their lawyers about it.

    One of the main tests for fair use in a parody is whether it's transformative. I.E., using it in a way that is totally different from the tone and intent of the original work. I'd say they passed that test pretty well. And then turned around and did exactly the same thing in a later comic with Rainbow Brite. For that matter a lot of the comics over the years have lampooned various games, movies, etc... in a similar way. Heck, they slammed Monster for making overpriced surge protectors and Monster is well known for being sue happy. They once sued Monster energy drinks just for using the word. Then there was the full on war with Jack Thompson, also known for suing the crap out of anyone that pisses him off.

    Hence my surprise they caved on this one.

    Here's some light reading on a very similar case. http://www.ipinbrief.com/when-is-a-parody-a-protected-fair-use-under-copyright-the-law/

    Just to be clear, that was a joke. You're not Batman, and tube is right. Real lawyers with real legal experience gave them real advice.

  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    Also, keep in mind that the original comic came out in 2003, well over a decade ago and before PA had the clout and legal acumen they have now. Even if they could have won a lawsuit, they didn't necessarily have the time and funds to be worth fighting it.

    You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
    Kayne Red RobeRingocB557CambiataLeon2309Rhesus PositivedennisH3Knuckles
  • Eat it You Nasty Pig.Eat it You Nasty Pig. tell homeland security 'we are the bomb'Registered User regular
    Which is how these things normally go; fair use being an affirmative defense means that most small operators simply do not have the resources to contest trademark suits

    NREqxl5.jpg
    do you lack faith, brother?
    or do you believe?
    H3Knuckles
  • OctoberRavenOctoberRaven Plays fighting games for the story Skyeline Hotel Apartment 4ARegistered User regular
    YoungFrey wrote: »
    I believe the legal distinction here is that they weren't parodying Strawberry Shortcake, they were using Strawberry Shortcake as a vehicle to make fun of American McGee's Alice. Therefore it wasn't protected by Fair Use.

    Wait, so what about Robot Chicken using their... we'll call her Silly Goose Puddin' to be rules-friendly... but using their Strawberry Shortcake-based character in an Amityville Horror parody?

    Currently Most Hype For: Cyberpunk 2077 and Death Stranding
    Currently Playing: Dragon Ball Xenoverse
  • ShowsniShowsni Registered User regular
    I'm more curious about why this thread got reposted yesterday.

    Any old comic you comment on in the archives will automatically get a thread made for it, if it doesn't already have one - it's likely Peartato was just going through the archive and left a comment on the comic.

Sign In or Register to comment.