Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Unrelated Question?

I have a question about the law for you guys that I can't seem to find but I figured you guys would know.

I want to spray paint a pokemon on my car, Kabutops to be exact, along with his number and his name. I want to know if I can get in trouble with nintendo if I do this. I'm not sure myself because I'm not going to be making a profit or anything, my I remember my friend had a Disney character on his car and he went through a ton of crap to make sure Disney didn't get his butt.

Thanks for any input.
Artist's beware has moved!
Do NOT repost your old bewares. They are being archived.


( 27 comments — Leave a comment )
(Deleted comment)
Jul. 13th, 2008 12:17 am (UTC)
Actually, I heard a report of just that- Disney or someone suing a daycare over a mural. :(
Jul. 13th, 2008 12:47 am (UTC)
THREE daycares.

"The Walt Disney Company forced three daycare centers (Very Important Babies Daycare, Good Godmother Daycare and Temple Messianique) in Hallandale, Florida, to remove five-foot-high murals of Disney cartoon figures from their walls under the threat of legal action."
Jul. 13th, 2008 07:51 am (UTC)
Didn't they repaint them for $1, though?
Jul. 13th, 2008 07:54 am (UTC)
That I don't know! I remember reading the original articles a long time ago, and there was no mention of the repainting, nor did I ever hear that they did.
I searched for the articles today, and just came up with that quote on a Disney "did you know" sort of fact site.

I couldn't find the original articles, but then again, i didn't spend a whole lot of time looking.
That'd be cool if Disney DID repaint them for a $1.
However, I'm a very bad person for believing that Disney doesn't have that sort of compassion in them to do that. ;)
(hey, I'd love it if I was wrong!)
Jul. 13th, 2008 08:01 am (UTC)
Here's how I heard it:

Disney had to sue, and get the images destroyed, because otherwise they'd be at risk of laches. But, realising that it was unkind (or, depending on how you view their actions, bad publicity), they agreed to send mural painters over to do it legally at a cost of $1.

Now, that said, I do think the daycare centers should have known better. But - as is made painfully clear to me just about every week - few people really understand copyright or trademark laws.
Jul. 13th, 2008 10:38 am (UTC)
I've tried reading a lot about copyright and never heard of laches. o_o I gotta look into that more!
Jul. 13th, 2008 11:42 am (UTC)
A lot of people never heard about laches, and they get really pissy when artists "nitpick" over their materials but this is the reason why they do.
Jul. 13th, 2008 05:36 pm (UTC)
Well, it's a general concept, but it's most famously applied to trademarks, in part because it's one of the few ways to challenge an established mark. It's why Anthrocon had to talk sternly to the Steel City Diner about proper licensing when they started coming out with Anthrocon T-shirts - they might otherwise lose their service marks in shirts (strictly speaking, AC doesn't own a registered trademark in the area of t-shirts, but they can claim that they have unregistered trademark rights because it's the actual act of affixing a mark to a product for sale or a service that establishes the right to use it).
Jul. 14th, 2008 09:38 pm (UTC)
What I heard was whoever painted the original mural was paid to do it, therefore making money off of Disney's characters.
Jul. 14th, 2008 09:45 pm (UTC)
That's quite likely to be true, and they would probably be treated less well than those who had asked them to do it.
Jul. 12th, 2008 10:31 pm (UTC)
Purely based on law? Yes.
Are you likely to? No.
In addition to the fact that they'd have to first find out and track you down, they're likely to just consider it free advertisement. Especially Japanese companies are lax about fan antics.
Jul. 12th, 2008 10:46 pm (UTC)
yeh I heard that too, here, its not to good. its not free advertising.

when people get tatoos of "disney owned characters" do they get a cut of the pay?

then same with warner brothers. or do tatoo palors have a liceance fee to do such?
Jul. 12th, 2008 10:58 pm (UTC)
Tattoo parlors are often shady places period, they often just yank work from the internet without regard of the original owners or keep work that people have had custom made for their own tattoo.

If people go to a tattoo parlor they need to make damn sure that the people who work there have basic ethics and principles.
Jul. 14th, 2008 01:34 am (UTC)
ah one of my relitives has a tigger tatoo.

(unrealted my mom's cowoerker wants a faerie and my mom told her i could design it. should I charge her and how much?)
Jul. 12th, 2008 10:45 pm (UTC)
I know this isn't Japan and all, but I'm thinking that if certain artists in Japan can get away with publishing racy fan comics (doujinshi, obvs) of Pokemon characters, you'll probably be fine with painting a Pokemon on your car for no profit. Heh.
Jul. 13th, 2008 12:46 am (UTC)
...Is that a Rosie Life wink?
Jul. 13th, 2008 12:02 am (UTC)
Disney is famous (and notorious) with their copyrights. When I was teaching, I had to work things out with Disney to photocopy a playbook of theirs that went out of print that MONTH. I could not get any from any supplier because all of them ran out of "Alice In Wonderland!" And did I have to jump through hoops and timelines for 8 copies!

Legally, one is bound not to infringe on the rights of published works. But then, it's not for profit and only personal benefit. But it is going to be public since it will be on your car. And like Thally said, "They'd have to first find out, then track you down." My thought would be "Out of sight, out of mind."
Jul. 13th, 2008 01:13 am (UTC)
when in doubt... ask the people in question...

that spells out their views on intellectual property... but if you contact corporate and ask if you can do a free ad on your car, who knows? the worst that could happen is they say no.
Jul. 14th, 2008 02:40 am (UTC)
Er... That page appears to mainly focus on Roms, not the artistic depiction of the likeness of their characters from first party games.
Jul. 17th, 2008 03:22 am (UTC)
mainly, yes... as that hurts their business more directly... but the page does mention characters' likeness and their status... if they had a page that focused only on that, i would have pointed to that instead... but they included all intellectual property info on that one page, you just have to be able to pick out where they state copyright laws on character images... even if it's brief.
Jul. 13th, 2008 02:46 am (UTC)
Nintendo seems to support that kind of thing. I think you can even get stuff for submitting images to Nintendo Power.
Jul. 13th, 2008 04:44 pm (UTC)
lol I was about to mention NP. :3 As a subscriber to the mag I get to see all the funny stuff people will do for the love of nintendo.
Jul. 13th, 2008 07:52 am (UTC)
If you do ask, and they say no, don't do it - you'll face triple damages for willful infringement.
Jul. 13th, 2008 07:48 pm (UTC)
Reading through all of the comments and legal BS you'd have to go through: is it really worth all the trouble?
Jul. 14th, 2008 01:10 am (UTC)
I recall seeing a VW Beetle that was modded to look like a Pikachu. Think it was an official advertisement though... >.>
Jul. 17th, 2008 10:38 am (UTC)
i think nintendo loves this kind of stuff, i remember a few years back in nintendo power, they posted photos of people that decorated their cars with zelda paintings and such.
( 27 comments — Leave a comment )


A_B icon
Commissioner & Artist, Warning & Kudos Community
Artists Beware

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com