A lot of people have been wondering how legal creating Growing Around is, so let's get this out of the way to stop any and all confusion. Yes, it is legal.
Growing Around is not a sequel to
Flip-Flopped. It's not a fanfiction, and it does not take place in its world or uses its characters. It's not a revival or remake. I suppose you could call it a spiritual successor though. Copyright law protects works, not underlying ideas. This does not use any of the characters from
Flip-Flopped. It doesn't use the setting. It doesn't even really use the same idea any more. Copyright infringement is when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner. A derivative work? This is defined by an expression that includes major, copyright-protected elements of the original, previously created work. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality to be original and thus protected by copyright.
The point is kind of to get as far away from the original version as possible. Let's put it this way, the full-made movie
Opposite Day is much more similar to
Flip-Flopped than
Growing Around, and that is allowed to stand on its own as its own product. Beyond that many cartoons have been "inspired" by the biggest cartoons of their time. How many Ren & Stimpy rip-offs were out there in the nineties and early 2000's? How many Regular Show and Adventure Time rip-offs are there out there today? Bubsy had many problems, but being in the legal wrong for flat out ripping off
The Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog were not one of them. We are in the legal right here.
Also, I'd like you to read this:
hollylisle.com/how-to-legally-…
But didn't I say blah blah blah? Let me mark it in stone here,
Growing Around is a spiritual successor to
Flip-Flopped, not a revival, reboot, fan-fiction, or rip-off.
Trust me, I didn't do this without thinking.