Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger
I don't think it's that much of a difference though.
Taking it at a really basic level, if you are writing a synopsis of something that happened in a book , you're going to include what happened in the book. If I write an entry in a reference book about a story where the Kraaags invade the planet Zoooooop in 2456 , then obviously I have to say what happened in the book.
I'm more bothered about how television stations , film studios , record companies & major book publishers are going to react to this if it turns out she wins. I just think the whole thing sets a dangerous precedent for writing reference material about these subjects.
|
It's a case in America, against an American company regarding American Copyright laws. If she wins this case it won't make jack **** difference to Doctor Who because that's based in Britain and obeys British copyright laws. Plus I don't think the BBC (paid for by license payers) would have much incentive to stamp out fan material. It's non comparative. Star Wars won't be affected much because Lucas rubs himself off over every bit of fan material that pops up, the market is drenched in non-canon material, whereas it won't make a difference to the Star Trek franchise because anything relating to it that isn't paying heavy royalties gets shot down automatically anyway.
This court case won't make a difference in the grand scheme of things because it won't affect the mindset of the original creators. If they wanted to sue over things, they'd already be sueing.