{"id":372,"date":"2016-08-01T00:01:14","date_gmt":"2016-08-01T06:01:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/?p=372"},"modified":"2016-07-31T22:46:41","modified_gmt":"2016-08-01T04:46:41","slug":"who-would-have-thought-mrs-white-was-trademarked","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/2016\/08\/01\/who-would-have-thought-mrs-white-was-trademarked\/","title":{"rendered":"Who Would Have Thought Mrs. White Was Trademarked?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week, I started to write a piece in which the characters of the Cluedo board game were discussing Mrs. White\u2019s demise<\/a>, but then I discovered that the characters\u2019 names are all trademarked. I don\u2019t have the resources to check if my piece would have been an infringement of those trademarks, and if so, to obtain a licence, so I ceased and desisted. A pity really; I\u2019m sure it would\u2019ve been a real corker.<\/p>\n

Instead, here is an entertaining and informational rant about political correctness, trademark and copyright restrictions.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s becoming increasingly difficult to know what a person can write without incurring the wrath of\u2026 someone<\/em>. Don\u2019t get me wrong\u2014I appreciate the concepts and principles behind the laws, and I hope to benefit from them as my writing becomes better known\u2014but the limitations are becoming ever more onerous. The need to differentiate one\u2019s own creations from another\u2019s is becoming both more pressing (due to greater awareness of rights) and more difficult (due to the sheer volume of material being created).<\/p>\n

Political Correctness<\/h1>\n

I\u2019ve written a couple of pieces involving seagulls (1<\/a>) (2<\/a>) recently, and when a third opportunity<\/a> came up, I did an internet search for \u201cseagull steals coins and newspaper\u201d to try and get some different angles on the story. Turns out the little devils (oops\u2014that might be a politically incorrect epithet) have no concept of ownership at all. Apart from the seagull that stole a bag of one pound coins and a newspaper on a ferry in England, reports and videos abound of seagulls stealing doritos, sandwiches, fish, crisps (potato chips to western Atlanticans), chips (french fries to western Atlanticans), nuts, GoPros, false teeth, golf balls\u2026 the list goes on.<\/p>\n

Faced with such infamy, I don\u2019t know if it would be ethical or politically correct to continue to use seagulls\u2019 kleptomaniac tendencies (and\/or inability to distinguish between edible and inedible objects) as the basis for a humorous article. Seagull advocacy groups everywhere would be up in arms if I did, I feel sure.<\/p>\n

Several professional comedians, among them John Cleese and Jerry Seinfeld, have spoken out<\/a> about political correctness making it difficult to be funny. Cleese is quoted as saying, \u201cAll humour is critical. If you start to say ‘Ooh we mustn’t criticize or offend them,’ then humour’s gone.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s right and proper that we shouldn\u2019t use race, disability, sexual orientation, nationality or other traits in a malicious way to get a laugh. However, jokes that would at one time have involved blondes, Irishmen, Newfoundlanders, Belgians, Poles, traffic wardens, bylaw officers, nerds, geeks and the like, now either cannot be told or have to be couched in abstract or other-world terms.<\/p>\n

\u201cHow do you confuse a Martian? You put three shovels against the wall and tell him to take his pick.\u201d<\/p>\n

The joke loses its impact due to the disconnection of the situation from the stereotype it was originally aimed at. But at least it\u2019s considered inoffensive.<\/p>\n

Until we discover that there is<\/em> life on Mars (wouldn\u2019t David Bowie have been thrilled!) and that the male of the species is, in fact, a brick short of a load.<\/p>\n

\u201cDid you hear about the ant that thought a meteor was a brick-built prostitute?\u201d<\/p>\n

The joke was originally told in a cockney accent, where \u201cmeteor\u201d could plausibly be mistaken for \u201cmeaty whore\u201d. Ants are thought to be quite intelligent in their own little way, and they\u2019re not known for speaking in a broad cockney accent, so the joke (poor though it is to start with) dies completely. Changing \u201cant\u201d to \u201csloth\u201d or \u201cdonkey\u201d or \u201clemming\u201d really isn\u2019t going to resuscitate the joke.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m an ex-Brit. I\u2019ve heard jokes about Brits, and I don\u2019t recall being offended. A Pakistani once told me a joke about Brits; it played on his compatriots\u2019 belief that Brits are an odoriferous bunch. I laughed. I\u2019ve been called a whinging pommy bastard by an Antipodean. I laughed. I worked with a French guy of Algerian extraction, who had many ways to taunt rosbifs. I was intrigued\u2014and I laughed.<\/p>\n

All three of those examples are from encounters in the 1980s. I don\u2019t know if these verbal brickbats were hurled with malice aforethought, but I saw no reason to complain to the police or the Race Relations Board or my dad.<\/p>\n

I was looking through a two-volume set called \u201cThe Complete Far Side\u201d as part of my preparation for another piece. (If you don\u2019t know about The Far Side, read here<\/a>.) It struck me that what was acceptable in the 1980s might not get published today, due to political correctness. Road kill, kids in jars, hunters about to become food, guns, bombs, cows plotting the overthrow of the farmer\u2014so much insensitive material!<\/p>\n

One cartoon (from 1986) caught my attention: in a town full of cows, bulls (or maybe steers\u2014the cartoon is not \u201canatomically complete\u201d) are working at road repair, and one is clearly wolf-whistling at a pretty heifer that\u2019s walking by. Juxtapose this with the news <\/a>that Nottinghamshire (England) Police are now classifying wolf-whistling as a hate crime, and you\u2019ll see that something is out of whack.<\/p>\n

The Oxford Dictionary defines a wolf whistle thus: \u201cA whistle with a rising and falling pitch, directed towards someone to express sexual attraction or admiration.\u201d Am I being totally insensitive by todays\u2019 standards<\/em> or is a whistle of admiration really a hate crime?<\/p>\n

I\u2019m pretty sure I can predict the arguments in favour. \u201cUncouth louts leering at pretty females in a most ungentlemanly way; their intended message is not admiration\u2014it\u2019s sexual interest pure and simple\u201d might be a typical statement.<\/p>\n

But is that attitude and sentiment not classist; judgemental; presumptuous? Who are these people to judge others? I\u2019m not a wolf-whistler, and never have been, but I\u2019ve never regarded the blowing of a wolf-whistle as anything more than an expression of admiration for or appreciation of a well-turned-out appearance. Maybe I\u2019m na\u00efve, but I fail to see why anyone should be offended by the giving of such a compliment, let alone regard it as a hate crime.<\/p>\n

Now\u2014if a wolf-whistle is accompanied by leering calls inviting the young lady to attend upon the callers in some unladylike fashion, then that is undoubtedly unwanted attention and should be treated as sexual harassment or something similar. But a whistle?<\/p>\n

Perhaps it is me that\u2019s na\u00efve. After all, it\u2019s called a wolf whistle, and wolves aren\u2019t known for their subtlety or appreciation for the finer things in life. In fact, they\u2019re known more as accomplished predators, hunting in packs. Perhaps when the whistle was given that name, a wolf whistle was a predatory action.<\/p>\n

Ouch! 320 words about wolf-whistling! I hadn\u2019t intended to be so specific!<\/p>\n

Trademark<\/h1>\n

Trademark is another impediment to creativity, although I can appreciate the reasons. For example, Disney would likely take a dim view of Mickey and Minnie being placed in less than wholesome scenarios by a third party writer. Likewise, Harry Potter shouldn\u2019t really be placed in a situation where he\u2019s combatting the menace of Darth Vader (however well-intentioned) unless the respective trademark owners grant permission (which I doubt would be given.)<\/p>\n

The piece I had started to write that imagined the Cluedo characters reacting to the demise of Mrs. White would not have harmed sales of the board game one iota. Yes, I was using the characters\u2019 backstories to put words in their mouths and give them character-appropriate reactions. But I was casting aspersions on the moral integrity of Dr. Black\u2019s wife, and conjectured on the possibility of Dr. Black and Mrs. White having been more than employer and employee. And that might have offended the game\u2019s trademark owners. And since parody and satire are grey areas for me, I decided to steer clear.<\/p>\n

I wonder if I should trademark my seagull characters?<\/p>\n

Copyright<\/h1>\n

So much has been written about copyright that I\u2019m pretty sure I have little if anything to say that\u2019s new. But here\u2019s one thought.<\/p>\n

Copyright law has not kept pace with technology, and the heavy-handed efforts of certain mega corporations to eradicate copyright abuse did little to convince the population-at-large to respect copyright. Innocuous use of copyrighted material (such as music playing in the background during a recorded interview or someone wearing a recognizable logo while being filmed) is, if I understand correctly, strictly speaking, illegal. If that\u2019s the case, then TV and film production companies must spend a fortune trying to stay out of trouble.<\/p>\n

Surely, in our connected world, governments or third party organizations can come up with a micro payment collection service that would allow (for example) film makers to not worry about a coffee shop\u2019s logo being in the background, or a clothing logo being worn by an interviewee.<\/p>\n

If the fee were pennies, people would pay, I\u2019m sure. (assuming the payment facilitators didn\u2019t ding you a couple of bucks\/quid\/euros\/whatever per transaction for the privilege.) And those pennies would add up, as would the savings from creating ever more complex and intrusive methods of mechanically protecting copyright.<\/p>\n

Summary<\/h1>\n

So many people are self-publishing now. Whether it\u2019s writings, or drawings or paintings, or music or photographs, people are able to do it, both online and on physical media. The downside is that there\u2019s a lot of dross being published (including, some would say, my verbal voidings). The upside is that there\u2019s a lot of good stuff out there that would never have seen the light of day when the record companies, publishing houses and Hollywood had the monopolies.<\/p>\n

With self-publication comes the increased risk of infringing copyright, trademark, libel, and (apparently, if I wolf-whistle at a book signing in Nottinghamshire) hate crime laws. There\u2019s also that whole political correctness thing which, in an effort not to offend, makes the edge of edginess (i.e., the line between acceptable and unacceptable) retreat further and further into blandness.<\/p>\n

I still have faith in the pendular nature of attitudes and fashions, although, as age wearies me and the years condemn me, I wonder if I\u2019ll live long enough for the pendulum to swing back to an age of enlightenment in which people don\u2019t<\/em> take offence by proxy and do<\/em> realize that not all jokes and razzing are malicious.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last week, I started to write a piece in which the characters of the Cluedo board game were discussing Mrs. White\u2019s demise, but then I discovered that the characters\u2019 names are all trademarked. I don\u2019t have the resources to check if my piece would have been an infringement of those trademarks, and if so, to obtain a licence, so I… Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[77],"tags":[138,140,10,137],"class_list":["post-372","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rant","tag-copyright","tag-humourlessness","tag-political-correctness","tag-trademarks"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/372","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=372"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/372\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=372"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=372"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=372"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}