Generic terms and copyright

Omnutia

While copyrighting/trademarking a propper noun for a character makes sense, what about words like vampire, surrogate and droid? Words which encapsulate and communicate a specific idea very well, but, due to increasingly litigious creative culture, some can't be used freely.

For instance, if I'm writing some sci-fi, and have a character who regularly uses a remote body, should I stick to the off-brand "Remote body." or go with "Surrogate." the term that already carries with it the necessary connotations?

Also, how can we establish understood off-brand nouns i.e. coming up with a name and expressing specific intent that it can be used freely?

Apreche

Come up with your own proper nouns. Even relatively recent books like Prince of Nothing came up with tons of their own proper nouns.

zehaeva

I do not believe that you can copyright a proper noun, that I believe is reserved for trademark.

Assuming the above trademarks are limited to business uses and even then applicable only in certain contexts (See the Apple Corps. vs Apple Computers Trademark fight back in the 80's and early 90's), if I recall correctly. So long as you don't call your book "The Surrogate" it shouldn't be too bad.

You could explain that the "Remote Body" or "ReBo" ("RemBod", "ReBod", "RemBo"? sorry couldn't help myself) acts as a surrogate for the person.

Repeat this a few times you have a firm establishment between how the "ReBo" is basically the same thing as a "surrogate" and then you can rely upon your new banding!

Obligatory IANAL

Matt

droid actually is a protected word. It's a shortened version of android, first used by George Lucas in Star Wars. I believe Motorola had to pay him to name their phone Droid.

Apreche

Underwear Perverts is a relevant tale.

Nuri

You can't copyright a word or words. Copyright is not the same as trademark. Copyright is for protecting specific, tangible works in fixed media. A certain combination of many words might be subject to copyright if it is published soemwhere (books, stories, papers, webpages, etc), but not words, speech, or common phrases.

Trademark, on the other hand, is totally different. It protects words and logos. You can't trademark a commonly-used word and then enforce that trademark against anyone who uses it. You can only enforce it in very specific circumstances IF you are even allowed to TM it. Take Apple, the computer company. Apple doesn't go around suing everyone who uses the word "apple" in their writing or sales because they don't have that right. They can only enforce against something that could cause reasonable confusion in the market, like another computer-related company releasing something called Apple.

In most literary/comic cases, you won't even be allowed to trademark a word like vampire, but if you were allowed to, your enforcement capabilities would be very limited.

zehaeva

droid actually is a protected word. It's a shortened version of android, first used by George Lucas in Star Wars. I believe Motorola had to pay him to name their phone Droid.

Droid is Trademarked by Lucas, not Copyrighted (Copywrit?).

One could argue that because the Droid phone has nothing to do with the figurines/films/books/comics/etc of Lucas films that they do not overlap. Just like when in the 80's and 90's you said "I bought a new Apple Computer" you knew it didn't come from the Apple Corps. (This got horribly crazy when Apple got into IPods and such.)

Wyatt

Here is a case where a guy invented a word and trademarked it for commercial use.

Three-peat is is a portmanteau of the words three and repeat, which has been trademarked for commercial use by retired basketball coach Pat Riley in commercial uses; the active trademarks in force are registered under numbers 1552980, 1878690, and 1886018. (A fourth registration, #1977620, expired in 2003). It is used either as a verb or noun used in American sports to refer to winning a third championship in a row.

You can also trademark a phrase. Nike own "Just Do It". They're the only ones who can use it in sports clothing, commercial, and other crap. Donald Trump has the trademark "You're fired!" for use on his clothing, games and casinos. Scrym could try to trademark "Lets do this." They would be restricted in which areas they could enforce their trademark. Clothing and broadcast maybe, but they couldn't sue you every time you used the phrase.

trogdor9

One could argue that because the Droid phone has nothing to do with the figurines/films/books/comics/etc of Lucas films that they do not overlap.

If I understand correctly, since "droid" is a made up word, this isn't the case. Apple, on the other hand, is a word that already existed and refers to a fruit. You can't start a computer hardware company called cocaCola Computers and say "Oh, well, it doesn't refer to soda, so we're allowed to do this."

zehaeva

Is not Droid short for Android?

Jason

Movie names are somewhat exempt from trademark confusion. In fact, we use them in the newspaper industry all the time. You get a picture of two feuding actors and caption it "Star wars."

My favorite personal use of this was a picture of several hundred Oberlin College students scrounging the banks of Plum Creek for invasive species that were harming the local ecology. I captioned it, "My big, fat creek weeding."

trogdor9

Is not Droid short for Android?

It doesn't matter where the word came from, it's still a new word. The word didn't exist before Star Wars. Many of the droids in Star Wars don't even match the definition of the word android - R2D2 isn't remotely human-like.

Churba

My favorite personal use of this was a picture of several hundred Oberlin College students scrounging the banks of Plum Creek for invasive species that were harming the local ecology. I captioned it, "My big, fat creek weeding."

You're my new favourite newspapery sort of person.

Matt

newspapery is now my new favorite adjective

Nuri

Movie names are somewhat exempt from trademark confusion. In fact, we use them in the newspaper industry all the time. You get a picture of two feuding actors and caption it "Star wars."

My favorite personal use of this was a picture of several hundred Oberlin College students scrounging the banks of Plum Creek for invasive species that were harming the local ecology. I captioned it, "My big, fat creek weeding."

Isn't that covered by Parody fair use, though? That's not because they are movie names as opposed to company or product names. It's because you're parodying the trademarked usage.

Jason

No, it has to do with film titles. You can't trademark a film title under the current law. You can protect the idea it represents, though.

So for instance, I can use the term Star Wars all I want (like Reagan did for his anti-missile program), but the moment I try to attach it to any content that can be considered George Lucas' IP, I'm open to a lawsuit.

Nuri

No, it has to do with film titles. You can't trademark a film title under the current law. You can protect the idea it represents, though.

So for instance, I can use the term Star Wars all I want (like Reagan did for his anti-missile program), but the moment I try to attach it to any content that can be considered George Lucas' IP, I'm open to a lawsuit.

Then what was the reasoning for the suit that made Avatar: The Last Airbender change to The Last Airbender? I thought it was some kind of IP claim.

TheWhaleShark

Then what was the reasoning for the suit that made Avatar: The Last Airbender change to The Last Airbender? I thought it was some kind of IP claim.

Was it actually a suit? I thought they just changed the name of their own volition to avoid confusion.

Nuri

Then what was the reasoning for the suit that made Avatar: The Last Airbender change to The Last Airbender? I thought it was some kind of IP claim.

Was it actually a suit? I thought they just changed the name of their own volition to avoid confusion.

I was under the impression that a threat was at least made to file suit. I don't think anything went to court, but the threat must have had a basis in something. It may not have been a sound basis, but I'm just asking what the basis was. I could be totally wrong though. That's why I'm asking and not telling.

Wyatt

I with WISH a suit was file, and that movie was never released.

Nuri

I with a suit was file, and that movie was never released.

Are you typing with peanut butter on your fingers?

Wyatt

I with a suit was file, and that movie was never released.

Are you typing with peanut butter on your fingers?

That stuff is nasty.

Sail

What movie?