[Groop]Copyright law....?
Vaughn Seward
vaughn@sewardconsulting.com
Mon, 07 May 2001 09:55:21 -0600
Gary, you've raised an interesting point...is the
"other guy" violating a copyright law because of which of the
following possible reasons:
1. He is selling a fake Groo drawing (that would be fraud). However, he
never claimed it to be an original Sergio drawing (in fact he says he
drew it himself). He is just selling a drawing of Groo (many of us in the
groop also drew similar kinds of drawings last year in that
contest).
2. Selling merchandise and associating it with the "Groo" name,
without permission? Would it then be okay if he got Sergio's
permission? Would it also be okay if he didn't mention the word
"Groo"?
3. Selling something that looks like a copyrighted item (an original
Sergio drawing of Groo in this case). Some might debate how good a
similarity it is but that is likely besides the point (or is
it?).
I can't think of any other possible reasons right now. I'm sure ME will
clarify things for us nicely.
~Vaughn Seward
At 2001/05/07 08:17 AM, you wrote:
The chronicles guy probably meant
for the price to be $12.99, not $1299.00. That's why he closed the
auction already. The other guy apparently knows less about
copyright law than even the average person (which ain't much). If
Mark (who knows more about copy right law than most lawyers) will
probably zip a quick e-mail to the guy and THAT auction will be closed as
well. Yay!! Way to Go Groop!!! -Gary G.