PDA

View Full Version : Lawsuit: copyright law for automobiles




aGameOfThrones
01-07-2013, 10:10 AM
While George Barris is preparing to sell his original 1966 Batmobile at the upcoming Barrett-Jackson auction in Scottsdale, another custom builder is attempting to stave off a copyright lawsuit. Mark Towle has been building Batmobile replicas through his business, Gotham Garage, for years, and has sold off two versions of the famous '66 TV car and at least one recreation of Bruce Wayne's ride from the 1989 film. His efforts have earned him a two-year legal battle with Warner Brothers subsidiary DC Comics, with the publisher claiming its copyright protection extends to "the overall look and feel" of the Batmobile and that Towle has violated those copyrights.

Towle's attorney, meanwhile, argues that DC Comics is attempting to rewrite copyright law by applying the protections to automobiles, which "do not qualify as sculptural works and are thus not eligible for copyright protection." If a judge decides the design elements found on the Batmobile are useful, the case will likely go Towle's way, as functional elements cannot be protected under US copyright law. But DC Comics contends the Batmobile is intellectual property and that Towle has profited from the company's efforts.

The custom builder says that a victory for DC Comics could "completely upend existing copyright law," and open the door for manufacturers to copyright any number of useful elements found on their products. What's more, anyone building a tribute to famous cars from the television or movie industries could find themselves in legal hot water.

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/05/batmobile-lawsuit-may-have-ramifications-for-customizing-industr/

heavenlyboy34
01-07-2013, 10:52 AM
Another IP fail. Thanks for sharing. :)

acptulsa
01-07-2013, 11:21 AM
Well, that's pretty bizarre, as auto design isn't covered by copyright but rather by design patents. I presume ol' Kustom Kar genius Chuck Barris didn't apply for one of those back in '65-'66 when he took the torch to the '65 Grand Prix. And who can blame him? All he was doing is trying to execute the drawings of Stan Lee and his cohorts in three dimensions. Barris pulled off the execution, but he didn't provide the inspiration.

As for why the 1989 design didn't receive a design patent, well, that is bizarre. Warner Brothers was snoozing, and I think they should lose.

1966-'69 was a long time ago. If I were the judge, I think I'd declare the whole thing to be in the public domain.

TonySutton
01-07-2013, 11:36 AM
It is silly for WB to do this. The cars this man builds brings more notoriety to the brand. It is like free advertising.

The lawsuit makes consumers dislike the brand.

WB is not too bright.

jkr
01-07-2013, 11:42 AM
copyright doesnt defend form, they should hire ME to do a design patent...

acptulsa
01-07-2013, 11:59 AM
copy write doesnt defend form, they should hire ME to do a design patent...

You might get more nibbles if you learn the difference between a copywriter (who writes copy) and copyright law...

jkr
01-07-2013, 12:07 PM
You might get more nibbles if you learn the difference between a copywriter (who writes copy) and copyright law...

yes,
thank you!