sad, sad day in comic land

I thought satire/parody was not subject to copyright infringement.

Damn... that's terrible, I kind of want to write a letter to the agencies in question, but I suppose it wouldn't do anything. (I also second NutellaonToast's comment, as well as their suggestion for a tasty snack)

Will you keep doing mashups for those comics not owned by Creators or United? Or is this the end?

Dan, yuppers, I'll keep doing mashups of the other comics. But right now, I kinda lost my mojo.

According to my wife—who is a lawyer—they don't have a leg to stand on. It is satire and fully protected under fair-use.

Too bad they don't realize that satires and spoofs have created interest in otherwise moribund strips.

Hi Dean,

They're just trying to scare you because they are probably guessing that you don't have the resources to fight them. I.e., they are bullying you.

en.wikipedia.org/.../..._v._Acuff-Rose_Music,_Inc.

I'm thinking your case would be even stronger, since you are not directly profiting from your parodies -- that is, you're not selling them. But that's a guess.

Copyright law is murky and you are probably well-advised to tread carefully unless you are willing to risk a legal struggle. But this sucks.

Best,
Tim

Norm Macdonald is right behind you there comic guy. Just point me toward their lawyer's dead rotting cats and I'll take care of the rest.

I hope this won't mean the end of Death Cat.

Yikes! If they're after you can Queen bats:[ be far behind?

I enjoy the mashup strips you post greatly, but understand if you just don't want to devote your waking hours to a fight against anachronistic copyright enforcement.

Please do keep us audience folks informed what you go on to do next, if this does end up getting squashed under Big Syndicate.

Well that blows! But really, how long did you really think you could go on making their comic strips actually funny without pissing them off....

With all due respect, if you got the notices from the syndicates it's not at all certain that it is the artists who dislike your mashups. They could be fine with it and have no knowledge of the syndicate's actions.

Here's a great comic on fair use that will explain it.
http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/zoomcomic.html

My question is, how much do United Features and Creators Syndicate owe you. You've been promoting their products for years for free. Sadly I've even started following Mark Trail and Mary Worth because of sites like yours. Come on! cash in, send them a bill!

You do an excellent job taking tired out strips and injecting them with real, biting humor. What a shame that these corporations figure they are powerful enough to deprive you of your rights and the rest of us with a good laugh. Keep up the great work in whatever form you can!

You know, "LOL" gets tossed around a lot these days, but seriously and from the heart: this site makes me laugh out loud (joyfully!) more than anything else I read. Thank you for all your hard work, and thanks for the laughs. And now selfishly I add, don't quit!

Call up Mad Magazine to defend you. Seriously... check wikipedia.

Well that is just stupid! Do you make a profit from them?

we should seriously all write letters/emails to these companies voicing our disapproval

here are the email addresses I found. (probably not a great idea to angrily argue copyright law with them. I just stated my unhappiness and how this site and others like it made me into an avid comic strip reader)

Creators Syndicate:
info@creators.com, msugrue@creators.com, maveldman@creators.com

United Features Syndicate:
dgregory@unitedmedia.com

Come on people! Dean needs our help! There must be a good copyright attorney among us!

Dean,

I hope you end up doing whatever makes you happiest. Legally, I really think you're okay. "Fair Use" is very clear. But who wants to fight?

Thanks so much for what you do.

This makes me sick.

Hay Dean, here's an idea:
I'd be happy to put my name on the site; for I have nothing to loose
if I got sued.

I can certainly understand your hesitancy. Though you are absolutely within your rights to publish satire, the emotional and financial toll that would be exacted from you in defending your rights would be enormous.

And, in the most general and non-specific cases, this is what corporate attorneys are often hoping for: that no one will be financially able to challenge their assertions. This is why a certain annual celebratory song is still treated as "copyrighted" as is a famous mammal's image.

Generally and non-specifically speaking, copyright law does expressly forbid, with fines and damages, meritless claims of infringement. But again, to win, one needs a lot of money, time, and patience.

Mother of Mercy! Sir, your stuff is hilarious. I hope that you take a look into some of the legal resources people are offering in the comments so that you can continue your particular brand of entertainment for many years.

I am a firm believer in fair use. Cartoonists sueing for copyright infringement for using their strips to be doctored or altered is like George Lucas sueing every time somebody mentions "Star Wars" or McDonald's sueing every time somebody mentions golden arches. If what you're doing is illegal, then it must be illegal to copy a comic with my printer and write on it. The only way these cartoonists should be able to sue is if people who do this try to misrepresent themselves as the cartoonist.

Totally fair use as parody- ignore the cease and desist letters and call it a day. Remember they also have limited resources to harass people- cease and desist letters are cheap and often work to intimidate people- taking it further costs money which I am sure they need for higher value targets. They are fully aware that they have no basis for this, but are hoping that you will be buffaloed into stopping.

Dean,

How about contacting the Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org/) or your local ACLU for their take on the emails and possible assistance?

That's really harsh and I'm sorry for all the stress this must be causing you. I think that these two syndicates are trying to bully you into complying. Legally they probably don't have a case against you but they can afford a lawsuit and I can only assume you can't.

Your only choice now is to do mash-ups of comics made prior to 1923. Take that Little Nemo!

How awful. Your web site is really the only reason I ever see half of these syndicate's shitty cartoons in the first place.

I hope, once you're past your initial despair and woe, that you find access to a nice big free lawyer, and tell these syndicates to shove their letters up their collective asses.

@theotherjesse -
I could dig some vintage mashups

I like Tiki Carol's idea too . . . is there some way you can just unaffiliate yourself with the site yet still make parodies "anonymously"? I'm sure there are lots of people willing to take this extremely minor legal burden upon themselves and be webmaster in-name-only

Just a note backing up what everyone else is saying--you're well within your legal rights, this isn't the artists controlling their work, it's the corporation, etc. Do what you see fit, obviously, but know that the syndicates are lying to you.

My initial reaction was "parody is fair use!", but its a little more complicated than that. The problem Dean has, and I talked to him about this in private, is if he claims fair use and decides not to take them down, the next step the lawyers will take is contacting his host. At that point the whole site would probably be shut down. They know that GoDaddy isn't going to risk a law suit, no matter how frivolous, for the 5 or 10 bucks a month Dean pays them. I mean it really sucks that the lawyers contacted him like this, but it could have been much worse. At least we have the remaining syndicated comics to mock, and it buys some time for Dean to think of any legal defenses if he chooses to go that route.

and man, I'm gonna miss Ferd'Nand so much

The DCR is behind you!

Lame. Parody and satire is safe from lawsuits, unless you've just taken the comics and put your name on them without making them funny, you should have nothing to worry about.

Does Josh Fruhlinger get hassled for this?

espensor, I wrote Josh for advice, and he replied that altering the comics is seen as different from writing about them. Reviewing the comics appears to be acceptable.

I won't give any advice on how to proceed, but I wanted to add that this is one of the better sites on the internet and that the people who sent those emails to you, assuming they are who they say they are, are just bullies and cowards trying desperately to cling to the last shredding remnants of their failing business model. In ten years, print papers will be gone and largely forgotten, and what they're doing here only makes it easier to say "good riddance".

I cannot tell you how sad this makes me! Sorry that the big bad legal dudes are giving you trouble, but I totally understand the ruined mojo and unwillingness to fight over it. Boo!

The people who make these comics definitely don't understand satire.
Otherwise, their comics would be funnier.

While I think the syndcates are extremely stupid to go after Dean like this, they may have a legal right to do so. Mad Magazine totally redrew their satire. Josh does not alter the actual content of the strips, he presents them just as they are. And while he points out the crappiness or inconsistancies of a strip, he is simply stating a point of view (protected by the Constitution) not actually altering a copyrighted work.

Rats.