As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Penny Arcade - Comic - Tart As A Double Entendre
Dog
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Penny Arcade - Comic - Tart As A Double Entendre
Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.
Unknown User on
+1
Posts
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).
I can only imagine that email address has long since been shut down, lol.
But he's Batman.
Oh man, I missed the grimdark Rainbow Brite. I'd watch that.
They talked about this comic in the Q&A at PAX south
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.
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.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
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?
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.