Question about Copyright

[Rawien]

:smalleek: I was reading the Giants FAQs and I fully understood the ..dont post my comics elsewhere/intellectual property rules.. and I would never dream of doing that anyway! :smallwink: But I did have a question I wasn't sure about .. Does Mr. Burlew own the idea of drawing these characters as sticks? My sister and I wrote a short story that we were inspired/thought it would be fun to do in this style (with a lot of references to credit the Giant anyway), but I dont want to break one of his rules. I suppose what I'm asking is does it say anywhere/is suggested that comics cant be done and is against the rules to be similar to his style, even with proper credit/links back given?

Thanks! :)

P.s. Im really sorry if this is in the wrong forum!

Edit: Also :smalltongue: Is there a place I could post to ask permission from the Giant himself, even if it is 100% okay? I would feel better in any case. :)

[Roland St. Jude]

To ask him directly, try PM.

This is not legal advice, but I wouldn't worry too much about stick figures that you've drawn yourself that are not his characters, places, or story.

If you've taken his images or are using his characters, places, or story, no amount of crediting helps.

[Rawien]

Thanks very much Roland! I'll PM him in just a moment! :smallredface: I was almost 99.9% certain that it wasnt a copyright infringement or anywhere near it, but I dont want the Giant to get upset! x.x

[InaVegt]

Just as one cannot copyright an idea, one cannot copyright a style. So, even though it's a very nice thing to ask him beforehand, he's got no legal ground for stopping you from doing it without asking.

One another note, there are already several webcomics with art similar to the Giant's, with images posted on site, with no complaint of his.

+Gezina.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

Just as one cannot copyright an idea, one cannot copyright a style. So, even though it's a very nice thing to ask him beforehand, he's got no legal ground for stopping you from doing it without asking.
However, if the style is very close to his, it can be considered just plain courtesy to ask anyway. :smallwink:

[notoriousVT]

I have my own copyright question (no need to make another thread). What is the rule about making avatars from comics? I have a nice one from Erfworld, but I don't know if can use it...

[Green Bean]

I have my own copyright question (no need to make another thread). What is the rule about making avatars from comics? I have a nice one from Erfworld, but I don't know if can use it...

I recommend you read this. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29092)

[Shhalahr Windrider]

I have my own copyright question (no need to make another thread). What is the rule about making avatars from comics? I have a nice one from Erfworld, but I don't know if can use it...
Rob and Jamie are a bit more liberal with their creations, having released Erfworld under a Creative Commons license. There's a thread on fan content in the Erfworld forum that goes into slightly more detail.

As an avatar, perhaps the biggest obstacle is that the version of the Creative Commons license they use requires attribution (you can see this on the first page of Erfworld (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0001.html)). In most cases, a note in your signature should probably suffice, but it's best to clear such issues with Rob and Jamie directly before doing anything just to make sure you're totally in the clear. In other words, PM those two before taking any of my advice.

Keep in mind that this only goes for the Erfworld comics. The Giant has explicitly stated that he prefers members not use any of his art art directly.

[Lingerance]

Just as one cannot copyright an idea
They can patent it though.

[Alias]

They can patent it though.

Not in theory. In practice the buffoons at the US patent office have become so lax in their duties and stamping everything with approved that I'm pretty certain you can patent nose-picking if you use fancy enough words in the proposal. The situation has become so bad that in a recent Supreme Court ruling the justices estimated that as many as 2/3rds of all patents granted in the last 10 years cannot withstand legal challenge.

Idiots at the USPO aside, this is how it is supposed to work: You can patent a process. Not an idea mind you, but a process - usually a machine but methods can also be patented. The one expection is mathematical formulae. Computer software patents fall into a grey area since, ultimately, all computer software is a mathematical expression. Also, there are only so many ways that things can be done in a computer environment.