- Joined
- Aug 2, 2022
There is a deference between copyright and actually considered fair and just between rational people.
sonichu is chris's life story, written, drawn and popularized by him. to say the entirety of it doesn't belong to anyone because many of the characters are spoofs of copyrighted works. I think is a very legalistic way and dare i say autistic way of looking at the world of creative expression, mind you this is not a parody like spazkids old animated series or the reviews of DStecks. which would be totally acceptable.
would you extend this line of reasoning to chris's actually original characters like reldnahc? should they be removed to maintain total purity in the eyes of the court of copywrite law?
what about chirs the character within the comic? surely he owns the intellectual property for the fictitious version of himself?
Sonichu is not a spoof or transformative. He runs and acts like sonic in his cartoons and looks like a downy Pikachu that lives in a pokeball at times. He didn't have rights to use either characters nor names.
It's like if I steal ragus tomato based pasta sauce recipe and steal goya's spaghetti recipe and put it into a can. Since both source materials we're just blatantly copied, it is not transformative. Now if I have proof on working out the recipes and it so happens to be just like the two big companies then there's an argument of transformative. It's like how you can't copyright the general idea of a car.
Bionic is the closest of being an original. Hell, in the first comic, he shows the hedgehogs from the sonic franchise and the pokemon being joined together.
Now if he said sonichu was born out of Chernobyl radiated soil and piss from deer that drank acid rain then yes, the OC is created very distant from the source material.
Actual real world example: how 50 shades of gray first draft was edited not to be like the source, twilight.