Talk:Chris and copyright

Some hints
Great topic to cover, and undoubtedly interesting. (Especially for me, since I'm interested of intellectual property issues...)

Anyway, I wrote a random rambling analysis of Chris's copyright and ToU pages while I was high on caffeine, sugar and Halo 3. I don't know how useful it is, but should serve as inspiration to whoever wants to expand the article. I'll tackle this article too once I get a few more doses of the three aforementioned products. --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 19:25, 30 September 2009 (CEST)
 * Seriously, this is decent stuff people. Try and incorporate some of this into the article. --Champthom 13:13, 19 December 2009 (CET)

Parody
Parody and this seem to cover pretty much the same thing (How Sonichu is impossible, wouldn't hold up in court, etc). So should we shrink down the info parody and move it here? (why do I have such a boner for merging articles?) --Jump 23:29, 30 September 2009 (CEST)
 * Merge sounds good. Chris's lack of clue about intellectual property runs much deeper than just "parody", but the talk about his "parody" confusions wouldn't really warrant a separate article. So let's just put it all in this article, shall we? --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 23:34, 30 September 2009 (CEST)
 * I guess so. While I do think the page is fine as it is, a merge does sound good. --EdtheHedgehog1894


 * I think the Parody page kinda became a "Chris and copyright" article, so might as well have one with a proper general focus on copyright. --Champthom 02:15, 1 October 2009 (CEST)
 * Perhaps. --EdtheHedgehog1894


 * Chris seems to use the terms parody and copyright in two different manners. It's a parody when someone accuses him of stealing and it's copyrighted OC when someone parodies his creations. Therefore I think that two seperate pages cover the subject better. --Hayate666 10:58, 8 October 2009 (CEST)
 * Parody covers why Sonichu can't be a parody, while Copyright covers how little Chris understands copyright law. They need tidying, but they can exist separately. The 'Chris' Views' section too closely resembles Parody, I think. --OFSheep 20:51, 17 October 2009 (CEST)

House vids
My memory is a bit hazy, but I remember someone mentioning somewhere that Chris (or his parents) had filed DMCA complaints on the house videos to take them down. Real or malarkey? --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 13:30, 2 October 2009 (CEST)
 * It happened but I'm guessing it's the work of some troll and not actually Chris. If Chris actually knew how DMCA worked, he'd do the same with TheCWCvilleLibrary and have the entire archive shut down by filing copyright claims. --Champthom 18:26, 2 October 2009 (CEST)

Wait wait wait...
I just swung by the ED page, and they have a fund thing for buying a copyright for the term Sonichu. I'm not saying they're actually using that money for that (it wouldn't at all be out of the realm of possibility for said donations (if there even are any) to be going into someone's pocket), or that Chris didn't look at the article and scramble to buy before they did. I'm just asking if we're certain that it was bought by Chris; and if it was what prompted him to finally get off his lazy ass and put up the money. --LizardPie 22:11, 6 November 2009 (CET)
 * I'm taking a flying leap and assuming US Copyright Office will send some sort of copies of the documentation on the registration to the person who applies for copyright registration, so someone should ask Chris if he registered the thing and if he got any word back from the Copyright Office. Anyway, the application appears to be for "electronic files", so, unless I read this horrenduously wrongly, Chris has essentially blown money on getting protection for some specific image files and their derivatives. Images created in 2000, according to the application. Let me guess, if the office was actually checking the veracity of the claims, something in this picture wouldn't stand closer scrutiny. Now, it's Chris's job to get crushed like a bug in court when he submitted erroneous claims. --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 00:31, 7 November 2009 (CET)

What "copyright" means in this case
I basically made an account entirely to post this, and it'll probably be my only contribution: this "copyright" means roughly fuck all. You can't copyright a word. Check page 3 of this document. A copyright protects individual pieces of creative work - a book or TV episode or story or single piece of art. If he copyrighted his Sonichu logo then all that does is prevents other people from using the Sonichu logo. What he's actually wanting to do here is trademark the word "Sonichu," which would then prevent any other creator from bringing out products under the "Sonichu" name in the areas where the trademark is filed (for instance, artwork or video games or children's clothing or adult entertainment devices). I suppose this qualifies as another form of fail, doesn't it? Dr x 15:52, 15 November 2009 (CET)
 * We don't have any idea what the heck Chris actually submitted to the copyright office, so we don't know what he actually registered. But like you say, no matter what the did here, he failed. All this means that he asserts that he made a piece of artwork in 2000, in case he sues someone or gets sued (because US copyright registration is useless unless you're in either of those scenarios - copyright itself is automatic and requires no registration). He has no trademark. He most certainly doesn't have copyright on the character, it being a derivative work and all that. --wwwwolf (wake me when you need me) 19:32, 15 November 2009 (CET)

New Captain's Log
From CWCipedia"

This needs to be incorporated into this page - that pretty much Chris fought to get a copyright and is now like "Fine, do whatever you want, I just want the credit" which might lead one to speculate that the copyright was more of an ego thing ("I have PROOF that I am the TRUE, ORIGINAL CREATOR OF THE ELECTRIC HEDGEHOG POKEMON, SONICHU AND ROSECHU") than actually wanting protection. It's sorta like how he wants to prove he's straight. --Champthom 00:25, 27 November 2009 (CET)
 * Yeah, I think when you get down to it he only really got it because he saw it as a way to "win" the war with Liquid Chris. Anyway, I stuck that on the page with some interpretation, but I'd be happy to see it changed or moved around if anyone thinks of a way to improve it. Dkaien 00:48, 27 November 2009 (CET)

Too much already
...He's already done enough to be sued in the UK for infringement/libel as it is.

And legal help here is extortionate. --YawningSquirtleRedux
 * It's a nice thought, but the costs of suing Chris far outweigh the benefits. Corporations can't afford to do things for the lulz.--Beat 01:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, even though Chris has an illegal copyright on Sonichu, he's our problem, not theirs. --CWCAttack 03:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Here's an idea
Can't we use cafepress to our advantage? If a "fan" were were convince Chris to get an image of Sonichu printed on...let's say a t-shirt and then put it up for sale Chris would be screwed. The only thing stopping Nintendo or Sega from suing Chris is that he isn't making money off of Sonichu. Since the comic will never be published by any self respecting publisher, this may be the best way to hit Chris where it hurts. --Caboose -1 04:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, let's convince Chris that cafepress is a good business investment. --BreadGod 04:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Nintendo and Sega would never try to go after Chris because it would be extremely bad PR. Chris is relatively "safe" unless he begins making MILLIONS. Clydec 05:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Cafepress got the same philosophy than Youtube; Copyright infringement? They pull the merchandise out. It will not work out. Griffintown 12:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, Chris is actually trying to sell the comics now. -- Revolver Octopus 11:07, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Is that enough? I mean any company trying to produce it all will pull it over a cease and desist anyway. Chris lacks the resources to print it himself. I guess that would be deterrent enough. --YawningSquirtleRedux 12:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Chris knows (kinda) what he's doing is illegal
I believe that Chris has some inner knowledge that what he's doing is copyright infringement, being as that he's very quick to change the subject whenever it's brought up. During the Father call, When Matt brings up the fact that Chris would need permission form Sega to produce Sonichu, he quickly jabbers out some BS about him already have talked to Sega, but provides no details and quickly launches into another BS talk about his "fame". More telling, is the 1st call with Alec: Chris originally tries to pressure Alec to drop his series because he could "sue" him, but when Alec asks if he has permission from Sonic or Nintendo to produce Sonichu, he immediately assures him that everything's alright and that he shouldn't contact them in a very nervous tone. When Alec push's it further, explaining to Chris that the his "copyright" is more or less useless, he immediately tries to drop the subject... I believe that he also mention in one of his mailbag's that he has letters form both Sega and Nintendo telling him that he has permission, but that he's "misplaced them"...

On some level, Chris knows what he's doing is illegal, but his ego and grandiosity make him feel entitled to rip them both off, as he views Sonichu as his lifework, and any slight to Sonichu is a direct slight to him. It would be interesting to see what happens when his copyright is directly challenged by a legitimate source (aka, Nintendo, Sega, or any other source he's ripped off). Being that Chris spends all of his money on video games, porn and whatever useless eBay junk that catches his eye, I seriously doubt he would be able to afford serious legal counsel, and would learn very quickly the penalties of copyright infringement... --SargentPickles 00:05, 4 April 2010 (EST)

An Example In The Making...
I don't know how many of you tend to follow news from other franchises, especially ones involving Chris, but this one has really caught my attention, especially seeing as this is almost a textbook example of what may happen if Chris tries to sue and use his copyrights.

For those who don't want to read the article, he's the long and short of it:

Ken Penders, former head writer of the Sonic comics, has decided to lay claim on characters, story lines and other stuff he created for the comic and wants SEGA and Archie to stop using them. Even more, he wants all comics pulled out and the cessation of all reprints involving "his" characters. While many fans are up in arms, afraid that their comic is doomed (as well as the uncertain fate of a Sonic RPG that came out awhile back), current head writer Ian Flynn has basically told them "SEGA and Archie has it. Chill." What some people are thinking (And this is most likely gonna be what SEGA and Archie are gonna do) is point out that, because Ken created these characters for the comic they own, not only are these characters and such Archie's, but also SEGA's. As well, these characters are derivatives of Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, etc.

tl;dr He has no case. Especially since he waited five years after leaving. And even if he somehow does win, it's gonna be majorly Pyrrhic; he would only win the names of the characters, he'd have to make a whole new universe as SEGA would refuse to let him use their characters for his "new" series. And the characters in the comics? They'd just be given new names!

The same would be for Chris on some level. Even if he won on some level, he would still lose. He would have no case because of what they are.

I know, I basically ranted about something stupid like this, but I just think this is interesting and its nice to see a what if scenario play out.--Blazer 03:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)