Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
tardigrades_dismissal_motion [2019/03/13 17:50] – [No Substantial Similarity] Carlos Pedrazatardigrades_dismissal_motion [2019/09/20 13:12] (current) – [No Substantial Similarity] Carlos Pedraza
Line 48: Line 48:
 <WRAP 90% center> <WRAP 90% center>
  
-  * The Tardigrade hug sequence pointed to as proof of infringement is a [[yout>ikHgCwM84LY|13-second video]] posted on YouTube in July 2017, two months before Discovery’s premiere but long after the show had been developed and filmed.+  * The Tardigrade hug sequence pointed to as proof of infringement is a [[yout>ikHgCwM84LY|13-second video]] <wrap hi>posted on YouTube in July 2017, two months before Discovery’s premiere but long after the show had been developed and filmed</wrap>.
   * “The only ‘similarities’ between the game and Discovery, says CBS, “is that both tardigrades are enlarged and can move through space. Space-faring tardigrades — including enlarged fictional tardigrades — are, of course, not original to Plaintiff.”   * “The only ‘similarities’ between the game and Discovery, says CBS, “is that both tardigrades are enlarged and can move through space. Space-faring tardigrades — including enlarged fictional tardigrades — are, of course, not original to Plaintiff.”
   * Other purported similarities are too generically described to qualify for copyright protection, according to the motion.   * Other purported similarities are too generically described to qualify for copyright protection, according to the motion.
Line 57: Line 57:
  
 [{{:two_tardigrades.jpg?direct|//Do these two versions of tardigrades evince the same ‘aesthetic appeal’? <fs x-small>Click image to view full size</fs>.//}}] [{{:two_tardigrades.jpg?direct|//Do these two versions of tardigrades evince the same ‘aesthetic appeal’? <fs x-small>Click image to view full size</fs>.//}}]
 +{{anchor:substantial_similarity}}
 <wrap lo>**What is Substantial Similarity?** \\ <wrap indent>According to the American Bar Association, in [[:copyright_infringement|copyright infringement]] cases courts traditionally test for substantial similarity using "a subjective, factual analysis called the ‘audience test,'" whose goal is to see if ordinary observers, unless they set out to detect the differences between the works, "would regard their aesthetic appeal as the same."</wrap>(([[http://www.americanbar.org/groups/young_lawyers/publications/the_101_201_practice_series/part_2_elements_of_a_copyright.html|An Overview of the Elements of a Copyright Infringement Cause of Action, — Part II: Improper Appropriation]], by Jason Sloane, retrieved 12/08/16.))   \\ <wrap indent> Moreover, the audience test "asks whether the defendant wrongly copied enough of the plaintiff’s protected expression to cause a reasonable lay observer to immediately detect the similarities between the plaintiff’s expression and the defendant’s work, without any aid or suggestion from others."(([[http://www.americanbar.org/groups/young_lawyers/publications/the_101_201_practice_series/part_2_elements_of_a_copyright.html|An Overview of the Elements of a Copyright Infringement Cause of Action, — Part II: Improper Appropriation]], by Jason Sloane, retrieved 12/08/16.)) </wrap></wrap> </WRAP> <wrap lo>**What is Substantial Similarity?** \\ <wrap indent>According to the American Bar Association, in [[:copyright_infringement|copyright infringement]] cases courts traditionally test for substantial similarity using "a subjective, factual analysis called the ‘audience test,'" whose goal is to see if ordinary observers, unless they set out to detect the differences between the works, "would regard their aesthetic appeal as the same."</wrap>(([[http://www.americanbar.org/groups/young_lawyers/publications/the_101_201_practice_series/part_2_elements_of_a_copyright.html|An Overview of the Elements of a Copyright Infringement Cause of Action, — Part II: Improper Appropriation]], by Jason Sloane, retrieved 12/08/16.))   \\ <wrap indent> Moreover, the audience test "asks whether the defendant wrongly copied enough of the plaintiff’s protected expression to cause a reasonable lay observer to immediately detect the similarities between the plaintiff’s expression and the defendant’s work, without any aid or suggestion from others."(([[http://www.americanbar.org/groups/young_lawyers/publications/the_101_201_practice_series/part_2_elements_of_a_copyright.html|An Overview of the Elements of a Copyright Infringement Cause of Action, — Part II: Improper Appropriation]], by Jason Sloane, retrieved 12/08/16.)) </wrap></wrap> </WRAP>