Copyrights

[Mittzu]

ok, this developer will have problems because this is a CTRL+C & CTRL+V of Mickey Mouse animations and games.

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Originally posted by diebitch:

Everyone saying how dumb the op is and that he should kill himself is just an under-aged moron jumping on a bandwagon. While I disagree that the animation is a total copypaste from MM, the point about suing is legit. Especially in the era when people are trying to sue everyone they can.

How are you going to sue someone for utilizing a widely known aesthetic?

If not for aesthetic, then for clearly borrowing character looks and movements from the existing cartoons (Captain boss looks and movements, Flower boss hand movements, just to name a few). Not saying it's going to happen, but the risk is still there.

[A Spooky Ghost]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

How are you going to sue someone for utilizing a widely known aesthetic?

If not for aesthetic, then for clearly borrowing character looks and movements from the existing cartoons (Captain boss looks and movements, Flower boss hand movements, just to name a few). Not saying it's going to happen, but the risk is still there.

You think people were copyright gestures and movements in the middle of a cartoon in the 30s?

That's not how it works.

[Mittzu]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Everyone saying how dumb the op is and that he should kill himself is just an under-aged moron jumping on a bandwagon. While I disagree that the animation is a total copypaste from MM, the point about suing is legit. Especially in the era when people are trying to sue everyone they can.

Thanks :)

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

You think people were copyright gestures and movements in the middle of a cartoon in the 30s?

That's not how it works.

Then you don't know what an intellectual property is. Yes, people were copyrighting i.p's in the 30s, and most of those copyrights are still valid to this day.

[A Spooky Ghost]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

You think people were copyright gestures and movements in the middle of a cartoon in the 30s?

That's not how it works.

Then you don't know what an intellectual property is. Yes, people were copyrighting i.p's in the 30s, and most of those copyrights are still valid to this day.

you don't know what an intellectual property is do you

hint: these are original characters.

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Originally posted by diebitch:

Then you don't know what an intellectual property is. Yes, people were copyrighting i.p's in the 30s, and most of those copyrights are still valid to this day.

you don't know what an intellectual property is do you

hint: these are original characters.

Explain to me how the Captain boss is an original character.

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Originally posted by diebitch:

Then you don't know what an intellectual property is. Yes, people were copyrighting i.p's in the 30s, and most of those copyrights are still valid to this day.

you don't know what an intellectual property is do you

hint: these are original characters.

BTW, Donkey Kong was also an original character, and look what happened to Nintendo.
hint: they got sued.

[A Spooky Ghost]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

you don't know what an intellectual property is do you

hint: these are original characters.

BTW, Donkey Kong was also an original character, and look what happened to Nintendo.
hint: they got sued.

and won

[A Spooky Ghost]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

you don't know what an intellectual property is do you

hint: these are original characters.

Explain to me how the Captain boss is an original character.

show me the animation short he's lifted from. the exact frames.

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Originally posted by diebitch:

BTW, Donkey Kong was also an original character, and look what happened to Nintendo.
hint: they got sued.

and won

And? They got sued didn't they?

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Originally posted by diebitch:

Explain to me how the Captain boss is an original character.

show me the animation short he's lifted from. the exact frames.

Strawman. I didn't say anything about the exact frames. But he looks very much like Bluto from Popeye as I'm sure you're aware. Regarding the Flower boss hands, here: https://youtu.be/VNttqN1wUMY?t=3m35s @3m35s
Again - these two are just from the top of my head - there's a lot more.
Still going to assert that noone can sue them over this?

[A Spooky Ghost]

You don't think it's relevant that your examples actually be successful claims of copyright? I mean, Nintendo got back all their money, and damages and attorney fees.

Show me where Captain Silver is pursuing a woman like Olive Oyl and fighting a guy like Popeye. Then you might have a case. But Bluto was in the navy. Captain Silver is a pirate that fights a cup. Until then you should read up on how copyright laws work and why the case against Nintendo ended the way it did.

edit: you do also realize swing you sinners is in the public domain right

[diebitch]

Ok, Swing You Sinners is in the public domain. What about other cartoons that aren't?
Captain might not pursue a woman, but he is clearly based off Bluto. And he's a pirate (bad version of navy), and he's a villain fighting a protagonist. Stop pretending he's not.

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

You don't think it's relevant that your examples actually be successful claims of copyright?

No I don't. Because the fact that Universal started the lawsuit showed that they were confident enough they would win. And you can't guarantee that Disney, Paramount, Melange Pictures and other copyright holders of older cartoons that Cuphead is inspired by (which is clearly obvious), won't think the same.

That's why op's concern is not as dumb as some are pretending to think.

[BardmanJ]

ok guys you can chill now OP already closed the thread... (Well at least he tried)

[A Spooky Ghost]

Originally posted by diebitch:

Ok, Swing You Sinners is in the public domain. What about other cartoons that aren't?
Captain might not pursue a woman, but he is clearly based off Bluto. And he's a pirate (bad version of navy), and he's a villain fighting a protagonist. Stop pretending he's not.

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

You don't think it's relevant that your examples actually be successful claims of copyright?

No I don't. Because the fact that Universal started the lawsuit showed that they were confident enough they would win. And you can't guarantee that Disney, Paramount, Melange Pictures and other copyright holders of older cartoons that Cuphead is inspired by (which is clearly obvious), won't think the same.

That's why op's concern is not as dumb as some are pretending to think.

You need more than the most vague similarities to actually win a case over copyright infringement.

And so what if Universal was "confident" it would win? How many times do you think a corporation goes ahead with a lawsuit if it's not certain it has a solid case? Don't you think the numerous other rubber hose animations making references would get hit if this were the case?

There's a ton of them out there. Stamp your feet all you like but if copyright law were that easily abused Simpsons would have been sued for Itchy and Scratchy, or Family Guy for the "Disneyfied" segment complete with musical number.

[diebitch]

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

You need more than the most vague similarities to actually win a case over copyright infringement.

Those aren't vague similarities. The guy looks like Bluto, he is from the same era and has similar treats. That's already more than enough to be concerned.

Originally posted by A Spooky Ghost:

Stamp your feet all you like but if copyright law were that easily abused Simpsons would have been sued for Itchy and Scratchy, or Family Guy for the "Disneyfied" segment complete with musical number.

Bad examples - Disneyfield and Itchy&Scratchy are parodies.

There's a difference between just using the animation style and using the animation style combined with borrowing treats from the existing copyrighted characters. And nothing you wrote makes Cuphead safe from someone trying to capitalise on these facts.