[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.