Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
klingon_language_copyright [2017/01/05 21:00] – [Language Creation Society] Carlos Pedraza | klingon_language_copyright [2017/01/08 20:55] – adds LCS statement in response Carlos Pedraza | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
=== Substantial Similarity === | === Substantial Similarity === | ||
- | The issue of whether a language can be copyrighted was first dealt with by Klausner in his May 9, 2016, order rejected Axanar' | + | The issue of whether a language can be copyrighted was first dealt with by Klausner in his May 9, 2016, order rejected Axanar' |
Klausner ruled the language issue was beside the point; Paramount' | Klausner ruled the language issue was beside the point; Paramount' | ||
- | The same reasoning appeared to be behind Klausner' | + | The same reasoning appeared to be behind Klausner' |
+ | |||
+ | === Disputing Copyright Claim === | ||
+ | |||
+ | In its reply to the judge' | ||
+ | |||
+ | > Paramount went beyond mere similarity by claiming copyright over the Klingon language. In doing so, they went too far, and claimed something that didn’t — couldn’t — belong to them: an entire language.(([[http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | While acknowledging the judge' | ||
+ | |||
+ | === Paramount ' | ||
+ | |||
+ | The statement went on to characterize the studios' | ||
+ | |||
+ | > The Court seemed persuaded by our position, writing that the Klingon language “may not be individually original and copyright protectable”. In its recent response to Axanar’s motion that the jury not be told about Klingon, [[https:// | ||
---- | ---- | ||
**Keywords** {{tag> | **Keywords** {{tag> |