1 00:00:00,320 --> 00:00:27,720 Speaker 1: Ridiculous History is a production of iHeartRadio. Welcome back to 2 00:00:27,760 --> 00:00:31,760 Speaker 1: the show Ridiculous Historians. Thank you, as always for tuning in. 3 00:00:32,280 --> 00:00:33,839 Speaker 1: We want to start with a shout out to our 4 00:00:33,880 --> 00:00:38,360 Speaker 1: super producer, Slash Legal Beagle or check this out Legal Eagle, 5 00:00:38,720 --> 00:00:40,199 Speaker 1: Max Williams. 6 00:00:41,040 --> 00:00:46,159 Speaker 2: Caca Silly Goose, a silly gander of the Michigan variety. 7 00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:48,760 Speaker 1: And what's good for the goose is of course good 8 00:00:48,760 --> 00:00:51,960 Speaker 1: for the Max. So we uh so you're no. I'm 9 00:00:51,960 --> 00:00:55,520 Speaker 1: Ben And this is part two of an exploration of 10 00:00:55,560 --> 00:01:00,680 Speaker 1: the sometimes ridiculous history of intellectual property. In part one, 11 00:01:00,920 --> 00:01:05,560 Speaker 1: nol I had made the offhand reference to legal bagal, 12 00:01:06,120 --> 00:01:10,240 Speaker 1: and I found the etymology. It's kind of uncertain, but 13 00:01:10,319 --> 00:01:14,360 Speaker 1: it seems like sometime in the nineteen forties an attorney 14 00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:17,920 Speaker 1: wrote a book called The Little Lawyer and Legal Advisa 15 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:22,080 Speaker 1: where he used the term legal egle, and it transformed 16 00:01:22,120 --> 00:01:22,920 Speaker 1: over time. 17 00:01:22,680 --> 00:01:28,000 Speaker 2: To legal bagal rhyming, am I right, yeah, fun, yeah. 18 00:01:27,680 --> 00:01:32,000 Speaker 1: I wonder if someone's got a patent on that. Previously, 19 00:01:32,120 --> 00:01:35,280 Speaker 1: we gave everybody a lot of background on the ancient 20 00:01:35,480 --> 00:01:38,600 Speaker 1: history of IP and how it you pointed out something 21 00:01:38,640 --> 00:01:43,640 Speaker 1: I really appreciated A lot of the modern legal definitions 22 00:01:43,680 --> 00:01:47,360 Speaker 1: of intellectual property started in Italy, but then Italy picked 23 00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:51,280 Speaker 1: up the improvements that the United States made and that's 24 00:01:51,320 --> 00:01:56,760 Speaker 1: where we get our modern day definition of intellectual property. 25 00:01:56,840 --> 00:02:01,720 Speaker 1: I mean, first, let's talk about what the what benefits 26 00:02:01,880 --> 00:02:06,160 Speaker 1: would it have like if you came out with if 27 00:02:06,200 --> 00:02:09,560 Speaker 1: you came out with an album, I came out with 28 00:02:09,680 --> 00:02:14,960 Speaker 1: a novel, or let's say Max events new a new 29 00:02:15,000 --> 00:02:18,600 Speaker 1: device used in curling. Let's see I'm relevant to all 30 00:02:18,600 --> 00:02:23,680 Speaker 1: our interests here. Then what benefits would we have from 31 00:02:23,919 --> 00:02:24,920 Speaker 1: IP laws? 32 00:02:25,520 --> 00:02:28,320 Speaker 2: Exactly? Quite a few. And we've already sort of gotten 33 00:02:28,360 --> 00:02:31,760 Speaker 2: into this a good bit. But you know, once it 34 00:02:31,800 --> 00:02:35,120 Speaker 2: gets a little more kind of ensconced in the law, 35 00:02:35,880 --> 00:02:41,480 Speaker 2: we really do see these protections start to become really clear. Uh, 36 00:02:41,560 --> 00:02:47,040 Speaker 2: the idea of market value. Intellectual property rights allow creators 37 00:02:47,080 --> 00:02:51,200 Speaker 2: to generate businesses, you know, based on their original ideas 38 00:02:51,240 --> 00:02:56,000 Speaker 2: and the licensing of those ideas, the sale of products 39 00:02:56,120 --> 00:03:00,240 Speaker 2: that are based in unique ideas, and also the kind 40 00:03:00,280 --> 00:03:06,200 Speaker 2: of proliferation and commercialization of those products, goods, and services 41 00:03:06,560 --> 00:03:10,880 Speaker 2: that they are able to benefit from because of those protections. 42 00:03:11,280 --> 00:03:16,239 Speaker 1: One hundred percent. And the big thing here is the 43 00:03:16,400 --> 00:03:22,560 Speaker 1: protection so you can prohibit other people from financially benefiting 44 00:03:22,840 --> 00:03:27,680 Speaker 1: off of your ideas if they violate ip laws. So 45 00:03:27,760 --> 00:03:30,560 Speaker 1: you can take people to court if they're making money 46 00:03:30,600 --> 00:03:34,160 Speaker 1: off your ideas in a way that violates these laws, 47 00:03:34,240 --> 00:03:37,560 Speaker 1: you can file a court case, like if you are Max, 48 00:03:37,640 --> 00:03:43,360 Speaker 1: the inventor of the new curling device and someone else 49 00:03:43,400 --> 00:03:48,800 Speaker 1: starts just making those without compensating you, then you can 50 00:03:49,040 --> 00:03:52,040 Speaker 1: sue them, and if they are found guilty, the court 51 00:03:52,280 --> 00:03:57,240 Speaker 1: will give you a financial reward, or you might have 52 00:03:57,320 --> 00:04:02,320 Speaker 1: to get a certain person of whatever those folks are 53 00:04:02,680 --> 00:04:03,480 Speaker 1: profiting with. 54 00:04:03,720 --> 00:04:06,800 Speaker 2: You know, that's right. And it also we talked about, 55 00:04:07,160 --> 00:04:11,120 Speaker 2: you know, the ability to market and sell these services 56 00:04:11,200 --> 00:04:15,240 Speaker 2: or goods. It also through that control of these ideas 57 00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:19,560 Speaker 2: allows you the power to help raise financing or raise funding, 58 00:04:19,760 --> 00:04:23,120 Speaker 2: you know, for your business or idea because you hold 59 00:04:23,160 --> 00:04:27,040 Speaker 2: an exclusive right you know, to those ideas. And with 60 00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:28,880 Speaker 2: that in mind as well, it also gives you the 61 00:04:28,920 --> 00:04:33,440 Speaker 2: ability to benefit from exports, because if a country can't 62 00:04:33,480 --> 00:04:35,880 Speaker 2: just make their own version of a thing because that 63 00:04:35,920 --> 00:04:40,359 Speaker 2: intellectual property is already tied to another business, then the 64 00:04:40,400 --> 00:04:43,960 Speaker 2: only option there is to import that good rather than 65 00:04:44,240 --> 00:04:48,400 Speaker 2: create something regionally, because they you know, they would be 66 00:04:48,520 --> 00:04:49,520 Speaker 2: infringing on. 67 00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:53,920 Speaker 1: That copyright protection. And here's the kicker. This stuff, as 68 00:04:53,920 --> 00:04:57,240 Speaker 1: I said in part one, is imperfect, and these laws, 69 00:04:57,240 --> 00:05:01,880 Speaker 1: while well intentioned, kind of an inherently create their own 70 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:06,719 Speaker 1: issues just by existing. A general term is only useful 71 00:05:06,839 --> 00:05:11,240 Speaker 1: if it subsumes related concepts. So let's start with the 72 00:05:11,320 --> 00:05:16,479 Speaker 1: idea they stole my intellectual property. That concept by itself, 73 00:05:17,200 --> 00:05:21,080 Speaker 1: without supporting evidence, is kind of uninformative. The general term 74 00:05:21,440 --> 00:05:26,720 Speaker 1: intellectual property is such a umbrella term it obscures more 75 00:05:26,760 --> 00:05:31,120 Speaker 1: than it illuminates. If you allege copyright infringement, you have 76 00:05:31,240 --> 00:05:36,360 Speaker 1: to identify exactly what it is that is being infringed 77 00:05:36,480 --> 00:05:41,960 Speaker 1: upon and exactly how it's being infringed. Right, So take 78 00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:46,120 Speaker 1: patent law. If someone says this person stole my invention 79 00:05:46,680 --> 00:05:48,920 Speaker 1: in some way or some part of my invention, then 80 00:05:48,960 --> 00:05:51,600 Speaker 1: you have to say, okay, does this quote unquote new 81 00:05:51,640 --> 00:05:55,719 Speaker 1: invention straight up copy the design of the older one? 82 00:05:56,200 --> 00:05:59,839 Speaker 1: And when you look at trademarks, you have to say, like, okay, 83 00:06:00,120 --> 00:06:06,359 Speaker 1: are these golden arches purposefully close to the McDonald's golden arches? 84 00:06:06,400 --> 00:06:09,520 Speaker 1: Are they meant to trick people into thinking they're eating 85 00:06:09,560 --> 00:06:10,760 Speaker 1: at McDonald's somehow? 86 00:06:11,000 --> 00:06:13,840 Speaker 2: Well? And that also, you know, sort of begs the 87 00:06:13,920 --> 00:06:18,880 Speaker 2: question like is it reasonable to think that a consumer 88 00:06:19,000 --> 00:06:22,919 Speaker 2: would be tricked in that way? Is that even possible 89 00:06:22,960 --> 00:06:26,760 Speaker 2: with like the ubiquity of what McDonald's is and how, 90 00:06:27,000 --> 00:06:30,400 Speaker 2: you know, just all encompassing it is, like, I don't 91 00:06:30,400 --> 00:06:33,600 Speaker 2: think it's a reasonable assumption that someone could be tricked 92 00:06:33,640 --> 00:06:36,280 Speaker 2: into thinking they're eating at McDonald's when in fact it 93 00:06:36,360 --> 00:06:39,080 Speaker 2: was something else, you know. And once you get into 94 00:06:39,160 --> 00:06:42,800 Speaker 2: like parody, uh, and the idea of like fair use 95 00:06:42,880 --> 00:06:45,040 Speaker 2: and all of that stuff, which we'll get into, it 96 00:06:45,080 --> 00:06:47,240 Speaker 2: really starts to get confusing. And we're taking a lot 97 00:06:47,240 --> 00:06:49,480 Speaker 2: of this stuff in this section here from a really 98 00:06:49,480 --> 00:06:52,920 Speaker 2: great essay by a professor of philosophy at Brooklyn College 99 00:06:52,960 --> 00:06:56,320 Speaker 2: of the City University of New York named Samir Chopra, 100 00:06:56,640 --> 00:07:01,400 Speaker 2: who has a fabulous essay literally titled in Intellectual Property 101 00:07:01,839 --> 00:07:05,040 Speaker 2: with the subtitle Copyrights, patents, and trademarks are all important, 102 00:07:05,200 --> 00:07:10,320 Speaker 2: but the term intellectual property is nonsensical and pernicious. And 103 00:07:10,360 --> 00:07:13,760 Speaker 2: it's a dear friend of mine and the show Peyton 104 00:07:13,840 --> 00:07:18,239 Speaker 2: Fisher buddy, who we all have hung out with together. 105 00:07:19,080 --> 00:07:22,120 Speaker 2: He's a lawyer in New York, in Brooklyn himself, and 106 00:07:22,160 --> 00:07:25,920 Speaker 2: he believes this wholeheartedly. We have had conversations multiple times 107 00:07:25,960 --> 00:07:30,280 Speaker 2: about the just convoluted nature of intellectual property law and 108 00:07:30,320 --> 00:07:33,120 Speaker 2: a lot of these kind of patent troll situations where 109 00:07:33,160 --> 00:07:36,960 Speaker 2: someone is just basically bilking the system, you know, by 110 00:07:38,320 --> 00:07:41,960 Speaker 2: exploiting this idea of intellectual property, or even some of 111 00:07:42,000 --> 00:07:45,680 Speaker 2: these lawsuits around like a tune that are once you 112 00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:47,960 Speaker 2: kind of look at everything, look at all the evidence, 113 00:07:48,240 --> 00:07:49,760 Speaker 2: seemingly a bit opportunistic. 114 00:07:50,080 --> 00:07:54,680 Speaker 1: I think a lot about software law when this comes 115 00:07:54,720 --> 00:07:58,560 Speaker 1: into play, like patenting things such as the click of 116 00:07:58,640 --> 00:08:02,960 Speaker 1: a mouse right, or the idea of a window in general, 117 00:08:03,000 --> 00:08:05,400 Speaker 1: which would be familiar to any fan of the software 118 00:08:05,400 --> 00:08:10,120 Speaker 1: giant Microsoft. So also want to shout out again the 119 00:08:10,160 --> 00:08:13,080 Speaker 1: excellent work by Bruce Bugby in nineteen sixty seven The 120 00:08:13,160 --> 00:08:17,240 Speaker 1: Genesis of American Patent and Copyright Law, for an example 121 00:08:17,480 --> 00:08:21,760 Speaker 1: of what I'm talking about with impersonation of well known brands. 122 00:08:22,280 --> 00:08:25,520 Speaker 1: You can travel to Iran if you can get the visa, 123 00:08:25,880 --> 00:08:28,760 Speaker 1: and you can see that due to a lot of sanctions, 124 00:08:29,480 --> 00:08:36,199 Speaker 1: Iranian businesses have been copying or creating fake fast food 125 00:08:36,240 --> 00:08:40,400 Speaker 1: franchises for many, many years. You probably aren't going to 126 00:08:40,480 --> 00:08:43,719 Speaker 1: find a McDonald's or a Pizza Hut in Tehran, but 127 00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:51,400 Speaker 1: you might find a Pizza Hat or a mash Donald's. 128 00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:58,560 Speaker 1: There's a great NPR article about this called mash Donald's 129 00:08:58,640 --> 00:09:01,400 Speaker 1: Iranian's copy American fast food brands. 130 00:09:01,160 --> 00:09:04,080 Speaker 2: It's a great read. And that's interesting too, Ben, based 131 00:09:04,120 --> 00:09:05,840 Speaker 2: on we were just talking about earlier, where it's like 132 00:09:05,880 --> 00:09:10,720 Speaker 2: in America, where there's a McDonald's, you know, every thousand feet, 133 00:09:10,880 --> 00:09:13,599 Speaker 2: it would seem you're gonna be much less likely to 134 00:09:13,640 --> 00:09:15,760 Speaker 2: be able to make the argument that someone would be 135 00:09:15,840 --> 00:09:20,080 Speaker 2: fooled by mash donald's thinking that they were actually in 136 00:09:20,160 --> 00:09:23,840 Speaker 2: a McDonald's. But in a country where McDonald's is not 137 00:09:23,920 --> 00:09:27,560 Speaker 2: nearly as ubiquitous, you could make the opposite argument that, yeah, 138 00:09:27,720 --> 00:09:31,040 Speaker 2: definitely you could, I if the branding was close enough 139 00:09:31,960 --> 00:09:35,000 Speaker 2: that there was an attempt to trick people. But then 140 00:09:35,320 --> 00:09:40,040 Speaker 2: because of the other countries and the way the laws vary, 141 00:09:40,400 --> 00:09:42,520 Speaker 2: it might be a little harder to enforce. What do 142 00:09:42,559 --> 00:09:45,760 Speaker 2: you think, Ben, Has McDonald's gone after mash Donald's or 143 00:09:45,920 --> 00:09:48,040 Speaker 2: Pizza Hut gone after Pizza Hat. 144 00:09:48,480 --> 00:09:52,280 Speaker 1: No, you know, it's interesting they really haven't because it's 145 00:09:52,440 --> 00:09:57,559 Speaker 1: tough to given all the other geopolitical issues, it's tough 146 00:09:57,840 --> 00:10:01,600 Speaker 1: for Iran and Western governments to get on the same 147 00:10:01,600 --> 00:10:04,880 Speaker 1: page as for about anything, you know what I mean, 148 00:10:05,040 --> 00:10:10,880 Speaker 1: So how would you realistically even start that conversation, you 149 00:10:10,920 --> 00:10:13,320 Speaker 1: know what I mean? It is lower on the list 150 00:10:13,360 --> 00:10:17,679 Speaker 1: of priorities. And then this goes into again the generality 151 00:10:17,760 --> 00:10:23,200 Speaker 1: the vagueness of the term. Good legislation, good jurisprudence is 152 00:10:23,320 --> 00:10:27,920 Speaker 1: all about concrete definitions, and intellectual property has a hard 153 00:10:27,960 --> 00:10:31,400 Speaker 1: time with that because you know, if you're debating copyright law, 154 00:10:31,679 --> 00:10:34,920 Speaker 1: you have to wonder how does copying of academic papers work. 155 00:10:35,280 --> 00:10:38,360 Speaker 1: Patent law doesn't really apply to that. If you're talking 156 00:10:38,400 --> 00:10:42,240 Speaker 1: about patent law, you have to wonder whether pharmaceutical companies 157 00:10:42,679 --> 00:10:47,960 Speaker 1: should have to issue licenses to poor countries for life 158 00:10:48,040 --> 00:10:51,360 Speaker 1: saving drugs. Copyright law doesn't really matter there. And I 159 00:10:51,400 --> 00:10:56,520 Speaker 1: would also say that I have some personal feelings about 160 00:10:58,080 --> 00:11:02,600 Speaker 1: the way pharmaceutical companies behave internationally. I don't think people 161 00:11:02,640 --> 00:11:06,240 Speaker 1: should die because they don't have money. But that's, you know, 162 00:11:06,320 --> 00:11:07,760 Speaker 1: that's a philosophical thing. 163 00:11:08,200 --> 00:11:10,720 Speaker 2: And isn't there a similar thing to like the idea 164 00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:14,200 Speaker 2: of a of a trademark expiring or something entering the 165 00:11:14,200 --> 00:11:18,560 Speaker 2: public domain as it pertains to generic drugs, like after 166 00:11:18,600 --> 00:11:21,679 Speaker 2: a certain point, isn't something able to become generic and 167 00:11:21,720 --> 00:11:23,800 Speaker 2: then you know, it's it's it's kind of up for 168 00:11:23,840 --> 00:11:26,400 Speaker 2: grabs and different companies can manufacture it. Uh. 169 00:11:26,760 --> 00:11:29,640 Speaker 3: The big thing about drugs is it's a pattern, so 170 00:11:29,720 --> 00:11:32,360 Speaker 3: it has very strict protections, but only for a set 171 00:11:32,400 --> 00:11:35,679 Speaker 3: amount of time. Once that time has passed, it's become 172 00:11:35,760 --> 00:11:39,000 Speaker 3: like you know, in theory, just like well known enough 173 00:11:39,040 --> 00:11:42,680 Speaker 3: that everyone can now have the actual like basically the 174 00:11:42,720 --> 00:11:43,400 Speaker 3: script to. 175 00:11:43,440 --> 00:11:46,400 Speaker 2: How this thing was made, because right, yeah, and that's 176 00:11:46,440 --> 00:11:47,000 Speaker 2: the generic. 177 00:11:47,080 --> 00:11:49,400 Speaker 3: Right, that's that's when generics come out. That's like you know, 178 00:11:49,840 --> 00:11:52,160 Speaker 3: like you know, you get the generic like you know, 179 00:11:52,480 --> 00:11:55,280 Speaker 3: allegras and stuff like that, because it's literally the same 180 00:11:55,440 --> 00:11:59,080 Speaker 3: ingredients as the original version of the drug because we 181 00:11:59,160 --> 00:11:59,920 Speaker 3: have that script. 182 00:12:00,320 --> 00:12:03,360 Speaker 2: So that means that at that point, the original manufacturer 183 00:12:03,400 --> 00:12:06,200 Speaker 2: has to release that information. They have to like make 184 00:12:06,240 --> 00:12:07,520 Speaker 2: the recipe available. 185 00:12:07,840 --> 00:12:10,160 Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm like nine percent certain because you have to 186 00:12:10,160 --> 00:12:11,920 Speaker 3: give the recipe in the patent. 187 00:12:12,000 --> 00:12:13,000 Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, there you go. 188 00:12:13,240 --> 00:12:15,840 Speaker 1: So okay, got it, and it gets it becomes even 189 00:12:15,920 --> 00:12:20,079 Speaker 1: more complicated when you look at countries like India. So 190 00:12:20,200 --> 00:12:23,640 Speaker 1: right now, India is the largest democracy on the planet 191 00:12:24,200 --> 00:12:27,720 Speaker 1: and very much in need of some life saving medications, 192 00:12:27,960 --> 00:12:32,040 Speaker 1: and they did something that really ticked off a lot 193 00:12:32,120 --> 00:12:34,839 Speaker 1: of Western countries where they said, look, we know how 194 00:12:34,880 --> 00:12:37,840 Speaker 1: to make this. We're not going to have people die 195 00:12:38,040 --> 00:12:40,480 Speaker 1: just because they're poor, so we're going to make our 196 00:12:40,520 --> 00:12:44,880 Speaker 1: generic versions. You guys deal with it. And for some 197 00:12:44,960 --> 00:12:47,400 Speaker 1: folks that makes the Government of India villainous, and for 198 00:12:47,480 --> 00:12:50,480 Speaker 1: other folks that makes them heroes, especially the people had 199 00:12:50,520 --> 00:12:53,640 Speaker 1: their lives saved as a result of that decision. So 200 00:12:53,679 --> 00:12:57,240 Speaker 1: there's a lot involved here, and the rubber does hit 201 00:12:57,280 --> 00:12:59,520 Speaker 1: the road. What we're saying is this is, although it 202 00:12:59,600 --> 00:13:03,120 Speaker 1: might sound dry at times, this is very much important, 203 00:13:03,160 --> 00:13:06,920 Speaker 1: mission critical stuff for human society at large. We also 204 00:13:06,960 --> 00:13:10,760 Speaker 1: have the idea of fair use, which we deal with 205 00:13:11,240 --> 00:13:15,640 Speaker 1: so often here in podcast land. It's the reason that 206 00:13:15,720 --> 00:13:21,960 Speaker 1: we decided, with reluctance to put in our own law 207 00:13:22,000 --> 00:13:24,520 Speaker 1: and order spin on the casey on the case sound 208 00:13:24,559 --> 00:13:29,320 Speaker 1: cu because we didn't want Dick Wolf mad at us. 209 00:13:29,360 --> 00:13:32,080 Speaker 1: And you have to be very very careful with what 210 00:13:32,200 --> 00:13:34,280 Speaker 1: qualifies as fair use well. 211 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:37,000 Speaker 2: And of course, as we've often run against and as 212 00:13:37,040 --> 00:13:39,800 Speaker 2: our policy kind of as a company has become, fair 213 00:13:39,920 --> 00:13:44,160 Speaker 2: use isn't an ironclad protection you can't just say, ah, 214 00:13:44,240 --> 00:13:47,240 Speaker 2: fair use boom, leave me alone. Now, it's just a 215 00:13:47,280 --> 00:13:50,439 Speaker 2: defense that you have to then use in court, and 216 00:13:50,480 --> 00:13:53,240 Speaker 2: you still have to go to court and defend your position, 217 00:13:53,320 --> 00:13:56,960 Speaker 2: and that's very, very expensive, especially for a big company. 218 00:13:57,120 --> 00:13:59,800 Speaker 2: And if you're a big company, that makes you a 219 00:13:59,840 --> 00:14:02,839 Speaker 2: target for these types of lawsuits. And so sometimes it's 220 00:14:02,840 --> 00:14:06,079 Speaker 2: just better to err on the side of safety than 221 00:14:06,120 --> 00:14:08,800 Speaker 2: it is to depend on some sort of fair use argument, 222 00:14:09,000 --> 00:14:13,880 Speaker 2: whereas like a DJ or under the radar kind of 223 00:14:14,160 --> 00:14:17,680 Speaker 2: indie artist might be more likely to give it a role. 224 00:14:18,000 --> 00:14:21,160 Speaker 3: Yeah, fair use fairy much has like the self defense 225 00:14:21,200 --> 00:14:24,360 Speaker 3: the argument where if you believe you go you just 226 00:14:24,360 --> 00:14:26,200 Speaker 3: go on to court and say it was self defense 227 00:14:26,240 --> 00:14:29,000 Speaker 3: and they oh, that's okay, that's fine. You're in a 228 00:14:29,040 --> 00:14:32,240 Speaker 3: lot of trouble. You really have to make a good 229 00:14:32,360 --> 00:14:35,880 Speaker 3: case for it. It's not to say, you know, get 230 00:14:35,960 --> 00:14:37,760 Speaker 3: a jail free card exactly. 231 00:14:37,840 --> 00:14:41,200 Speaker 1: It's not like tagging base. You have to explain why 232 00:14:41,240 --> 00:14:44,560 Speaker 1: you should be able to tag base. And like you said, Noel, 233 00:14:45,720 --> 00:14:49,880 Speaker 1: you can enter into a war of attrition legally, right, 234 00:14:50,000 --> 00:14:54,520 Speaker 1: especially if the other side wants to make it super inconvenient. 235 00:14:55,000 --> 00:14:58,720 Speaker 1: Then you go into appeals that can last for years 236 00:14:58,720 --> 00:15:00,840 Speaker 1: and years and years, and you can just hemorrhage money 237 00:15:00,880 --> 00:15:07,400 Speaker 1: and time. The other thing is the idea of non obviousness. 238 00:15:07,520 --> 00:15:10,920 Speaker 1: This can come up in patent law, but it can't cut. 239 00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:14,360 Speaker 1: It doesn't really come up in copyright law. So what 240 00:15:14,400 --> 00:15:16,760 Speaker 1: we're saying, essentially, and you don't have to be a 241 00:15:16,800 --> 00:15:20,400 Speaker 1: lawyer for this one. We're saying is that intellectual property 242 00:15:20,680 --> 00:15:23,760 Speaker 1: is a broad term that applies to all sorts of 243 00:15:23,800 --> 00:15:28,480 Speaker 1: things that are, in truth their own distinct areas of 244 00:15:28,880 --> 00:15:31,760 Speaker 1: legal concern. So copyright law is not the same as 245 00:15:31,760 --> 00:15:37,400 Speaker 1: patent law. Trademarks are not the same as other IP violations. 246 00:15:37,560 --> 00:15:37,760 Speaker 2: Right. 247 00:15:37,840 --> 00:15:41,560 Speaker 1: So because of this, like like we're citing in this 248 00:15:41,680 --> 00:15:47,560 Speaker 1: wonderful essay, just using intellectual property as a concept all 249 00:15:47,640 --> 00:15:53,920 Speaker 1: the time indiscriminately, it leads to absolutely absurd situations. Anything 250 00:15:53,960 --> 00:15:58,560 Speaker 1: associated with a creator is grouped under this huge umbrella, 251 00:15:58,760 --> 00:15:59,800 Speaker 1: and that doesn't make sense. 252 00:16:00,240 --> 00:16:02,800 Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, what does make sense, though, is that it 253 00:16:02,840 --> 00:16:06,120 Speaker 2: gets so murky because we know what property is for 254 00:16:06,160 --> 00:16:09,480 Speaker 2: the most part. You know, it's tangible. It's an asset. 255 00:16:09,560 --> 00:16:12,360 Speaker 2: It's like a thing that you can catalog and you know, 256 00:16:12,480 --> 00:16:15,000 Speaker 2: tag and put in a ledger of some kind. Like 257 00:16:15,040 --> 00:16:17,680 Speaker 2: a car or a house, you know, or a piece 258 00:16:17,720 --> 00:16:20,440 Speaker 2: of equipment or something like that. That's that's property, and 259 00:16:20,560 --> 00:16:24,160 Speaker 2: we are guaranteed to our property. But an idea is 260 00:16:24,200 --> 00:16:27,120 Speaker 2: a little more slippery than that, because what led to 261 00:16:27,200 --> 00:16:31,520 Speaker 2: the idea, where what's the what are the guts, you know, 262 00:16:31,560 --> 00:16:34,040 Speaker 2: the sort of foundations of the idea, and where do 263 00:16:34,120 --> 00:16:36,760 Speaker 2: those aspects come from and who owns those So it's 264 00:16:36,760 --> 00:16:40,040 Speaker 2: a lot harder to pin down an idea than it is, like, 265 00:16:40,200 --> 00:16:41,720 Speaker 2: you know, evol though. 266 00:16:42,040 --> 00:16:44,480 Speaker 1: Right exactly, Yeah, that's a good way to say it. 267 00:16:44,800 --> 00:16:48,440 Speaker 1: And when we see this, we also see enormous opportunity 268 00:16:48,520 --> 00:16:52,000 Speaker 1: for something we alluded to import one the idea of 269 00:16:52,440 --> 00:16:56,480 Speaker 1: so called patent trolls, the concept that there are people 270 00:16:56,920 --> 00:17:02,320 Speaker 1: who know how to weaponize this incredibly byzantine, imperfect system. 271 00:17:02,800 --> 00:17:05,680 Speaker 1: And they're not there because they want their patent to 272 00:17:05,800 --> 00:17:09,800 Speaker 1: help the world. They're not there to really protect their 273 00:17:09,840 --> 00:17:14,679 Speaker 1: rights and good faith. They are there to get money 274 00:17:15,119 --> 00:17:19,040 Speaker 1: from other people. And there are thousands of ways to 275 00:17:19,160 --> 00:17:23,760 Speaker 1: do this. And in doing that, what we see is 276 00:17:25,119 --> 00:17:28,520 Speaker 1: a lot of the really important stuff about IP gets 277 00:17:28,640 --> 00:17:32,840 Speaker 1: lost in this semantic mire, this war of words. The 278 00:17:32,880 --> 00:17:37,440 Speaker 1: notion of borrowing, reusing, reworking, remixing stuff all. You need 279 00:17:37,520 --> 00:17:40,520 Speaker 1: all of this for culture and art and science to grow. 280 00:17:40,880 --> 00:17:44,119 Speaker 1: Perhaps Pablo Picasa was right when he said, what is 281 00:17:44,160 --> 00:17:44,720 Speaker 1: a good artist? 282 00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:45,080 Speaker 2: Copy? 283 00:17:45,160 --> 00:17:45,760 Speaker 1: Great artists? 284 00:17:45,760 --> 00:17:51,160 Speaker 2: Steel? You know what, dude, Even that phrase has been 285 00:17:51,320 --> 00:17:55,919 Speaker 2: repurposed and associated with so many different people who maybe 286 00:17:55,920 --> 00:17:59,040 Speaker 2: said that. So it's just it's like parallel thinking is 287 00:17:59,040 --> 00:18:02,320 Speaker 2: also an issue. Right, two different parties thousands of miles 288 00:18:02,320 --> 00:18:05,040 Speaker 2: away might legitimately come up with the same idea at 289 00:18:05,040 --> 00:18:07,520 Speaker 2: the same time, and then you have all kinds of 290 00:18:07,880 --> 00:18:09,760 Speaker 2: problems that can arise from that. I do want to 291 00:18:09,800 --> 00:18:12,840 Speaker 2: just there's a really great definition of patent trolls from 292 00:18:12,840 --> 00:18:15,480 Speaker 2: the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I'm just going to read it 293 00:18:15,520 --> 00:18:19,119 Speaker 2: right off of their article on patent trolls. They describe 294 00:18:19,160 --> 00:18:23,800 Speaker 2: patent trolls as someone who uses patents as legal weapons 295 00:18:24,000 --> 00:18:26,600 Speaker 2: instead of actually creating any new products or coming up 296 00:18:26,640 --> 00:18:29,240 Speaker 2: with new ideas. Instead, trolls are in the business of 297 00:18:29,280 --> 00:18:32,800 Speaker 2: litigation or even just threatening litigation. They often buy up 298 00:18:32,880 --> 00:18:35,840 Speaker 2: patents cheaply from companies down on their luck who are 299 00:18:35,880 --> 00:18:39,679 Speaker 2: looking to monetize what resources they have left, such as patents. Unfortunately, 300 00:18:39,720 --> 00:18:41,919 Speaker 2: the patent office is a habit of issuing patents for 301 00:18:42,000 --> 00:18:45,880 Speaker 2: ideas that are neither new nor revolutionary, and these patents 302 00:18:45,880 --> 00:18:48,960 Speaker 2: can be very broad, covering every day or common sense 303 00:18:49,040 --> 00:18:52,560 Speaker 2: types of computing. This is specifically referring to, to your 304 00:18:52,600 --> 00:18:56,240 Speaker 2: point bend, software things that should have never been patented 305 00:18:56,440 --> 00:18:59,000 Speaker 2: in the first place. And this does not just have 306 00:18:59,080 --> 00:19:03,120 Speaker 2: to attached to software. This is the case for any 307 00:19:03,240 --> 00:19:05,879 Speaker 2: type of patent. And you know, because the patent offices 308 00:19:06,080 --> 00:19:10,320 Speaker 2: it is probably overwhelmed and so they maybe something's slide 309 00:19:10,320 --> 00:19:13,000 Speaker 2: through the cracks, and so these patent trolls are taking 310 00:19:13,040 --> 00:19:16,600 Speaker 2: advantage of this system rather than using it as a 311 00:19:16,640 --> 00:19:19,000 Speaker 2: means of innovation, and if anything, to your point bend, 312 00:19:19,040 --> 00:19:23,120 Speaker 2: they're slowing it down and possibly doing serious damage. There 313 00:19:23,160 --> 00:19:25,600 Speaker 2: was a patent troll that we ran up against very 314 00:19:25,640 --> 00:19:28,879 Speaker 2: early on in our podcast careers because How Stuff Works 315 00:19:29,280 --> 00:19:34,080 Speaker 2: was listed as a defendant in a patentrol case involving 316 00:19:34,080 --> 00:19:37,600 Speaker 2: the concept of podcasts. Oh yeah, yeah, Because the idea 317 00:19:37,680 --> 00:19:41,480 Speaker 2: of a podcast was that it was serialized content placed 318 00:19:41,520 --> 00:19:44,840 Speaker 2: on a feed, you know, an RSS feed, which stands 319 00:19:44,920 --> 00:19:48,280 Speaker 2: for really simple syndication. So a feed RSS feed was 320 00:19:48,320 --> 00:19:51,520 Speaker 2: originally used for things like I believe newsgroups, or maybe 321 00:19:51,560 --> 00:19:54,120 Speaker 2: it was just like reading lists and things like that. 322 00:19:54,200 --> 00:19:56,600 Speaker 2: And then somebody figured out how to repurpose it and 323 00:19:56,720 --> 00:20:00,439 Speaker 2: use it for you know, compressed audios in a serialized form, 324 00:20:00,680 --> 00:20:04,359 Speaker 2: and therein live the advent of podcasting as we know it. 325 00:20:04,400 --> 00:20:08,240 Speaker 2: But this patent troll targeted folks like Jimmy Kimmel and 326 00:20:08,600 --> 00:20:11,160 Speaker 2: How Stuff Works and some other kind of early big 327 00:20:11,240 --> 00:20:14,400 Speaker 2: names I think Mark Maron, but ultimately did not win 328 00:20:14,560 --> 00:20:15,879 Speaker 2: because that would have been really bad. 329 00:20:16,320 --> 00:20:19,399 Speaker 1: Yeah, podcasts would not have been a thing, or they 330 00:20:19,440 --> 00:20:23,199 Speaker 1: would have changed. They would have had to change by necessity. 331 00:20:23,600 --> 00:20:27,399 Speaker 1: So because of this, because of this indiscriminate use of 332 00:20:27,440 --> 00:20:32,880 Speaker 1: the concept of intellectual property, there have been numerous legal disasters. 333 00:20:33,320 --> 00:20:38,280 Speaker 1: Copyrights have grown without limit almost you know. Again, they 334 00:20:38,280 --> 00:20:41,840 Speaker 1: were supposed to be temporarily limited, but that hasn't been 335 00:20:41,880 --> 00:20:46,680 Speaker 1: the case. Congress drastically increased copyright terms in nineteen seventy 336 00:20:46,720 --> 00:20:50,600 Speaker 1: six and then again in nineteen ninety eight. I mentioned 337 00:20:50,640 --> 00:20:55,080 Speaker 1: this in Part one, but a big, big piece of 338 00:20:55,119 --> 00:20:59,280 Speaker 1: this was the Disney Corporation. They were lobbying for decades 339 00:20:59,400 --> 00:21:04,040 Speaker 1: to exclusivity over Mickey Mouse and not to let the 340 00:21:04,080 --> 00:21:06,719 Speaker 1: poor guy get into the public domain, not to let 341 00:21:06,760 --> 00:21:11,040 Speaker 1: old Steamboat become a man of the people or a 342 00:21:11,080 --> 00:21:14,879 Speaker 1: mouse of the people as a word, and so in 343 00:21:14,920 --> 00:21:18,200 Speaker 1: other cases you see that people who are using intellectual 344 00:21:18,240 --> 00:21:22,080 Speaker 1: property also suggests that protections be passed on to an 345 00:21:22,119 --> 00:21:25,959 Speaker 1: air of some sort. Like the notion of inheritance that 346 00:21:26,040 --> 00:21:31,159 Speaker 1: comes from real estate would also apply to copyright laws. 347 00:21:31,200 --> 00:21:36,080 Speaker 1: So like let's say your great grandfather is ts Eliott 348 00:21:36,200 --> 00:21:38,800 Speaker 1: or something like that. Then does that mean that you 349 00:21:39,080 --> 00:21:44,600 Speaker 1: have the copyright over the wasteland you know or wastelands? 350 00:21:44,600 --> 00:21:47,040 Speaker 1: Does that mean you own little Gettings even though he 351 00:21:47,040 --> 00:21:50,840 Speaker 1: didn't write it and played no role in the creation. 352 00:21:51,520 --> 00:21:54,800 Speaker 2: It's a weird question, it is. And it's interesting too 353 00:21:55,000 --> 00:21:59,680 Speaker 2: because when you deal with say music, I believe it's 354 00:21:59,680 --> 00:22:03,400 Speaker 2: a different from ballgame because you have publishing rights versus 355 00:22:03,480 --> 00:22:06,720 Speaker 2: the rights of the recording itself. So like to every 356 00:22:07,000 --> 00:22:09,040 Speaker 2: album or a piece of music that's released, there are 357 00:22:09,040 --> 00:22:12,200 Speaker 2: two sides of the copyright. There's the publishing side, which 358 00:22:12,200 --> 00:22:15,600 Speaker 2: literally refer has to be registered as notes on a 359 00:22:15,640 --> 00:22:19,320 Speaker 2: page and lyrics on a page, and that's one copyright. 360 00:22:19,359 --> 00:22:23,479 Speaker 2: The other is the actual recording, the masters exactly, and 361 00:22:23,680 --> 00:22:28,800 Speaker 2: those are passed down to generations you know, they'll they'll 362 00:22:28,840 --> 00:22:32,040 Speaker 2: exist in the estate of a family, and usually you'll 363 00:22:32,040 --> 00:22:35,960 Speaker 2: see it's members of the estate that are suing kind 364 00:22:36,000 --> 00:22:38,760 Speaker 2: of down the line. But you know, I mean it's 365 00:22:38,800 --> 00:22:40,960 Speaker 2: it's a long time though for something to enter the 366 00:22:40,960 --> 00:22:43,320 Speaker 2: public domain. So for the fact the fact that we 367 00:22:43,400 --> 00:22:46,880 Speaker 2: see Mickey Mouse, you know, finally running up against that's 368 00:22:46,880 --> 00:22:49,280 Speaker 2: because it's almost these over one hundred years old at 369 00:22:49,280 --> 00:22:52,639 Speaker 2: this point, right, I mean, right, I believe it was. 370 00:22:53,600 --> 00:22:55,400 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a hundred years old. 371 00:22:55,440 --> 00:23:00,640 Speaker 2: But like we certainly there are classical music pieces where 372 00:23:00,680 --> 00:23:04,199 Speaker 2: the publishing rights are in the public domain, but not 373 00:23:04,320 --> 00:23:08,320 Speaker 2: the recording by the London Philharmonic, Right, So that's different, 374 00:23:08,480 --> 00:23:10,480 Speaker 2: you know, those are there's two different sides of that, 375 00:23:11,000 --> 00:23:12,520 Speaker 2: and we're gonna have a good time in a minute 376 00:23:12,520 --> 00:23:15,840 Speaker 2: getting into some specific and pretty silly examples of some 377 00:23:16,640 --> 00:23:21,160 Speaker 2: you know, actual court cases surrounding intellectual property. But it's 378 00:23:21,200 --> 00:23:24,560 Speaker 2: a it's a murky topic because there are so many 379 00:23:24,600 --> 00:23:27,240 Speaker 2: different flavors of it. So we just you know, hopefully 380 00:23:27,240 --> 00:23:29,400 Speaker 2: we're not getting too bogged down. But I think we've 381 00:23:29,400 --> 00:23:31,560 Speaker 2: done a decent job of kind of trying to you know, 382 00:23:31,640 --> 00:23:32,920 Speaker 2: demonstrate the different ones. 383 00:23:33,680 --> 00:23:37,280 Speaker 1: Yeah, what we're saying is that this is leading to 384 00:23:37,440 --> 00:23:40,800 Speaker 1: a huge, messy bowl of spaghetti. Things are gonna get 385 00:23:40,800 --> 00:23:44,359 Speaker 1: even weirder in the US and abroad next year, because 386 00:23:44,440 --> 00:23:48,639 Speaker 1: twenty twenty four is when Mickey Mouse enters public domain. 387 00:23:48,840 --> 00:23:52,919 Speaker 1: At present, you're already seeing stuff like that with the 388 00:23:52,920 --> 00:23:56,200 Speaker 1: Winnie the Pooh horror movie. I think Winnie oyah Iyah 389 00:23:56,440 --> 00:23:59,080 Speaker 1: just got released, and I think you can't there's certain 390 00:23:59,119 --> 00:24:01,800 Speaker 1: things you can't do though, Like it's not like you 391 00:24:01,880 --> 00:24:04,160 Speaker 1: just can use the character in whatever way you see 392 00:24:04,160 --> 00:24:04,920 Speaker 1: fit exactly. 393 00:24:05,240 --> 00:24:08,199 Speaker 3: It's the red shirt. You can't a red shirt on 394 00:24:08,240 --> 00:24:09,080 Speaker 3: Winnie the Pool. 395 00:24:09,400 --> 00:24:13,360 Speaker 2: Because that's a more recent iteration, right or well. 396 00:24:13,320 --> 00:24:17,480 Speaker 3: I think that is what made it Disney's property, because 397 00:24:17,480 --> 00:24:20,359 Speaker 3: Winning the Pooh obviously predated Disney. 398 00:24:20,520 --> 00:24:23,399 Speaker 2: That's right. So we're talking about the book Winnie the 399 00:24:23,440 --> 00:24:27,000 Speaker 2: Pooh entering the public domain, not necessarily the Disney version, 400 00:24:27,200 --> 00:24:31,439 Speaker 2: but with Mickey Mouse, we are talking about a character 401 00:24:31,520 --> 00:24:35,320 Speaker 2: that was originally created by Disney. So what happens if 402 00:24:35,359 --> 00:24:40,680 Speaker 2: you if over time a character's design changes, then does 403 00:24:40,720 --> 00:24:41,840 Speaker 2: that restart the clock? 404 00:24:43,119 --> 00:24:43,639 Speaker 1: Maybe? 405 00:24:43,880 --> 00:24:47,960 Speaker 3: Probably that is probably in the minutia of the argument, 406 00:24:48,560 --> 00:24:52,359 Speaker 3: and probably the corporations would love discussing that minutia as 407 00:24:52,359 --> 00:24:56,560 Speaker 3: long as you continue this clock further and further. 408 00:24:55,880 --> 00:24:59,960 Speaker 1: Out running the clock. And it depends on how good 409 00:25:00,080 --> 00:25:03,160 Speaker 1: your lawyer is and frankly, what their relationship with the judges. 410 00:25:03,320 --> 00:25:05,639 Speaker 1: I'm just gonna say the quiet part out loud. I mean, 411 00:25:05,720 --> 00:25:08,320 Speaker 1: let's you know what, let's get into We've done our 412 00:25:08,400 --> 00:25:12,280 Speaker 1: due diligence on the background and some of the legal 413 00:25:12,359 --> 00:25:15,440 Speaker 1: and philosophical concerns. Let's get into the fun stuff. Let's 414 00:25:15,480 --> 00:25:20,040 Speaker 1: talk about Louis Vaton and Hote Diggity Dog exactly. 415 00:25:26,800 --> 00:25:31,959 Speaker 2: Louis Vuitton, of course, famous storied fashion house, you know, 416 00:25:32,080 --> 00:25:38,000 Speaker 2: fashion brand known for its hote couture. Hote Diggity Dog 417 00:25:39,200 --> 00:25:43,280 Speaker 2: probably not as much of a household name, but there was. 418 00:25:43,320 --> 00:25:46,080 Speaker 2: In fact, they lost sue Louis Vitton versus Hot Diggity 419 00:25:46,119 --> 00:25:50,280 Speaker 2: Dog when in two thousand and six Louis Vuitton sued 420 00:25:50,440 --> 00:25:54,200 Speaker 2: this little little little doggy toy company, Hote Diggity Dog, 421 00:25:54,240 --> 00:25:59,840 Speaker 2: for trademark, trade dress and copyright infringement when Hote Diggity 422 00:25:59,880 --> 00:26:03,720 Speaker 2: Do created these little plush dog toys under the name 423 00:26:03,840 --> 00:26:07,520 Speaker 2: chew Evaton and you've probably seen the iconic Louis Viton 424 00:26:07,880 --> 00:26:10,359 Speaker 2: handbags that are like kind of brown leather with the 425 00:26:10,840 --> 00:26:15,080 Speaker 2: LV sort of like stamped in like a pattern on them. Uh. 426 00:26:15,119 --> 00:26:18,440 Speaker 2: And that is what Chewyvaton used, you know, for their 427 00:26:18,480 --> 00:26:23,240 Speaker 2: dog toys. So it really you know, they're obviously not handbags, 428 00:26:23,280 --> 00:26:25,199 Speaker 2: and I don't think anyone would ever confuse them for that. 429 00:26:25,240 --> 00:26:28,000 Speaker 2: They're little squishy toys that kind of look like handbags. 430 00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:29,120 Speaker 2: And say Chewyvaton and. 431 00:26:29,080 --> 00:26:30,840 Speaker 1: Have the little with one T. 432 00:26:31,280 --> 00:26:34,080 Speaker 2: Not too it is with one te Sorry you're right, Ben, 433 00:26:34,200 --> 00:26:36,639 Speaker 2: good point. Now it's with two. 434 00:26:37,240 --> 00:26:39,440 Speaker 1: Chewyvaton is with one mm hmm. 435 00:26:39,600 --> 00:26:40,440 Speaker 2: Look at it right now. 436 00:26:40,560 --> 00:26:42,480 Speaker 1: I'm looking at it too. I've got it pulled up here. 437 00:26:42,800 --> 00:26:44,680 Speaker 2: V U I T T O N. 438 00:26:45,000 --> 00:26:46,720 Speaker 1: I'm seeing, I'm seeing multi. 439 00:26:46,800 --> 00:26:48,560 Speaker 2: I'm looking at their actual website. 440 00:26:48,720 --> 00:26:50,760 Speaker 1: Okay, I'm looking at the images. Let me go to 441 00:26:50,760 --> 00:26:51,680 Speaker 1: their website and check. 442 00:26:52,000 --> 00:26:56,680 Speaker 2: You're right on the on the actual things, it's one T, 443 00:26:57,000 --> 00:26:59,320 Speaker 2: but the but the U R L is two t's 444 00:27:00,240 --> 00:27:02,600 Speaker 2: and the actual logo of the top is suit cheese. 445 00:27:03,400 --> 00:27:04,520 Speaker 2: I wonder why they did that. 446 00:27:05,240 --> 00:27:06,200 Speaker 1: I think we can tell. 447 00:27:06,480 --> 00:27:08,920 Speaker 2: Okay, well, I think we keep all this in because 448 00:27:08,920 --> 00:27:10,840 Speaker 2: this is exactly the kind of stuff we're talking about. 449 00:27:11,160 --> 00:27:16,320 Speaker 2: So chewey Vaton argued that they were essentially doing a parody. 450 00:27:16,520 --> 00:27:19,240 Speaker 2: You know, it's like, oh, it's silly, this is like 451 00:27:19,680 --> 00:27:22,840 Speaker 2: high fashion stuff. Let's make it for doggies, and the 452 00:27:22,880 --> 00:27:25,760 Speaker 2: courts agreed. Louis Vuitton argued that the toys were going 453 00:27:25,840 --> 00:27:31,600 Speaker 2: to cause brand confusion, but then Louisittan doesn't make dog toys, right, 454 00:27:31,800 --> 00:27:34,320 Speaker 2: so where's the brand confusion. No one is going to 455 00:27:34,800 --> 00:27:39,919 Speaker 2: mistake a little, you know, cuddly squeaky dog bag for 456 00:27:40,200 --> 00:27:41,680 Speaker 2: you know, an overpriced handbag. 457 00:27:42,640 --> 00:27:47,240 Speaker 1: And then the court makes the decision that chewey Vatan 458 00:27:47,960 --> 00:27:51,480 Speaker 1: is a quote joking and amusing parody and nothing more. 459 00:27:51,560 --> 00:27:57,119 Speaker 1: So parody again qualifies for its own set of considerations, 460 00:27:57,160 --> 00:28:00,560 Speaker 1: which we we mentioned briefly, but just you know, this 461 00:28:00,640 --> 00:28:04,760 Speaker 1: is part of the reason why weird Al does a 462 00:28:04,800 --> 00:28:07,960 Speaker 1: lot of uh does so much great work, you know, 463 00:28:08,119 --> 00:28:12,760 Speaker 1: And and the weird Al situation I love because interestingly enough, 464 00:28:13,320 --> 00:28:17,600 Speaker 1: a lot of other musicians consider it a great honor 465 00:28:17,720 --> 00:28:20,720 Speaker 1: at a right of passage for weird Al to parody them. 466 00:28:20,800 --> 00:28:23,360 Speaker 3: Who's I believe that he didn't like it. There's one 467 00:28:23,359 --> 00:28:24,719 Speaker 3: guy who really didn't like it. 468 00:28:25,280 --> 00:28:27,520 Speaker 2: There was Chris I think he ever did it. He 469 00:28:27,520 --> 00:28:28,640 Speaker 2: didn't he never do did a prince. 470 00:28:28,920 --> 00:28:31,120 Speaker 1: He never got the permission to do a prince. When 471 00:28:31,160 --> 00:28:34,679 Speaker 1: can you ask people in advance? He usually does. I 472 00:28:34,680 --> 00:28:37,600 Speaker 1: think he almost always does, whether as a courtesy or what. 473 00:28:37,840 --> 00:28:42,320 Speaker 1: Coolio didn't like it, You're right, Coolio. Coolio later apologized 474 00:28:42,360 --> 00:28:43,160 Speaker 1: to weird Al. 475 00:28:43,200 --> 00:28:46,440 Speaker 3: Because he would always beforehand reach out and I think 476 00:28:46,440 --> 00:28:48,440 Speaker 3: he got it from the record label, and he thought 477 00:28:48,480 --> 00:28:51,240 Speaker 3: he had got it directly from Coolio, and Coolio was 478 00:28:51,360 --> 00:28:53,960 Speaker 3: very mad, saying, hey, you're using my work man, and 479 00:28:54,040 --> 00:28:55,720 Speaker 3: so like it was one of these situations where he 480 00:28:55,800 --> 00:28:59,280 Speaker 3: was like legally right, but I believe he was like 481 00:28:59,360 --> 00:29:01,200 Speaker 3: really like he bad about it. He's like, hey, man, 482 00:29:01,240 --> 00:29:03,520 Speaker 3: I didn't I don't want to ever do that to people. 483 00:29:03,760 --> 00:29:06,680 Speaker 2: Well, also, like you could argue that Ku Coulio was 484 00:29:06,960 --> 00:29:10,240 Speaker 2: thinking it was disrespecting what he considered to be kind 485 00:29:10,280 --> 00:29:14,080 Speaker 2: of like a serious song about a real problem in 486 00:29:14,160 --> 00:29:16,520 Speaker 2: terms of like young people getting tied up in gang 487 00:29:16,560 --> 00:29:18,840 Speaker 2: violence and all of that, and to make it sort 488 00:29:18,880 --> 00:29:22,880 Speaker 2: of like a silly goof he might have felt was 489 00:29:23,120 --> 00:29:25,240 Speaker 2: in poor tastes. And you know, you could argue that 490 00:29:25,320 --> 00:29:28,720 Speaker 2: it is in poor taste, but it does come with 491 00:29:28,760 --> 00:29:30,880 Speaker 2: some protections that it's so funny. I just have to 492 00:29:30,880 --> 00:29:35,040 Speaker 2: add Chewy Vaton is a brand in and of itself. 493 00:29:35,360 --> 00:29:40,400 Speaker 2: So Hote Diggity Dog had their line of Chewy Vaton toys. 494 00:29:40,640 --> 00:29:43,640 Speaker 2: But if you look online, there actually is a website 495 00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:46,960 Speaker 2: that's just Chewy Vuton and that's spelled with two tea's, 496 00:29:47,320 --> 00:29:50,000 Speaker 2: whereas the one in the Hote Diggity Dog line is 497 00:29:50,000 --> 00:29:52,320 Speaker 2: spelled with one tea. So now we're really getting into 498 00:29:52,360 --> 00:29:55,520 Speaker 2: parodies of parodies, you know, I mean, it gets deep 499 00:29:55,560 --> 00:29:56,120 Speaker 2: and weird. 500 00:29:56,760 --> 00:29:59,680 Speaker 1: And this is far from the only example. Let's look 501 00:29:59,720 --> 00:30:03,160 Speaker 1: at Slater versus Peta on behalf of none other than 502 00:30:03,240 --> 00:30:07,280 Speaker 1: the Ruto the Monkey. So David Slater is a British 503 00:30:07,360 --> 00:30:11,840 Speaker 1: nature photographer and he was hanging out with a group 504 00:30:11,960 --> 00:30:16,600 Speaker 1: of monkeys in Indonesia celebs crested maccox and he had 505 00:30:17,160 --> 00:30:23,640 Speaker 1: no idea that his photography would make a huge legal quagmire. 506 00:30:23,960 --> 00:30:27,080 Speaker 1: So while he's hanging out with these monkeys, some of 507 00:30:27,120 --> 00:30:30,880 Speaker 1: them picked up his camera. And monkeys are very intelligent. 508 00:30:31,480 --> 00:30:35,080 Speaker 1: They took a lot of cool selfies. You could see these. 509 00:30:35,080 --> 00:30:38,760 Speaker 1: They were viral for a while and surprise, surprise, when 510 00:30:38,760 --> 00:30:41,880 Speaker 1: our pal Dave Slater gets home he sees these photos 511 00:30:41,880 --> 00:30:44,800 Speaker 1: have been published in all sorts of newspapers, not just 512 00:30:44,920 --> 00:30:47,640 Speaker 1: like kind of tabloidy stuff like the Daily Mail, but 513 00:30:47,720 --> 00:30:52,720 Speaker 1: the Guardian and the Telegraph as well. And someone took 514 00:30:52,800 --> 00:30:57,000 Speaker 1: these photographs, an editor at Wikimedia Commons and uploaded them 515 00:30:57,040 --> 00:31:01,240 Speaker 1: to the wikimedia website. Slater found this and he said, hey, 516 00:31:01,960 --> 00:31:04,600 Speaker 1: can you take these off your website because this is 517 00:31:04,640 --> 00:31:10,520 Speaker 1: my work, and Wikimedia said, hey, sorry, David, that might 518 00:31:10,520 --> 00:31:13,120 Speaker 1: have been your camera, but you didn't take those photos. 519 00:31:13,440 --> 00:31:16,360 Speaker 1: The monkeys did, and we'll go to court over it 520 00:31:16,400 --> 00:31:16,920 Speaker 1: if you want. 521 00:31:17,560 --> 00:31:20,600 Speaker 2: And in fact, there's still a note attached to that license, 522 00:31:21,080 --> 00:31:24,640 Speaker 2: this Wikimedia Commons thing, which is a very useful tool 523 00:31:24,840 --> 00:31:28,560 Speaker 2: for let's say, documentary filmmakers or podcasters you know where. 524 00:31:28,600 --> 00:31:31,400 Speaker 2: If it's got a Wikimedia Commons license attached to that 525 00:31:31,840 --> 00:31:34,120 Speaker 2: is a damn good sign that they've done their homework 526 00:31:34,120 --> 00:31:36,600 Speaker 2: and that it is, in fact something that is public domain. 527 00:31:36,640 --> 00:31:38,920 Speaker 2: But the note reads, this file is in the public 528 00:31:38,920 --> 00:31:42,160 Speaker 2: domain because as the work of a non human animal, 529 00:31:42,400 --> 00:31:46,320 Speaker 2: it has no human author in whom copyright is vested. 530 00:31:47,600 --> 00:31:50,680 Speaker 1: So unless the monkeys go to court, what are you 531 00:31:50,760 --> 00:31:53,640 Speaker 1: going to say? And like I said at the beginning 532 00:31:53,760 --> 00:31:57,400 Speaker 1: this one, you heard the name PETA ridiculous historians. How 533 00:31:57,440 --> 00:32:00,400 Speaker 1: did PETA get in there? Well, PETA takes Slater Court 534 00:32:00,920 --> 00:32:04,520 Speaker 1: because of something called the next friend principle of law. 535 00:32:04,600 --> 00:32:08,080 Speaker 1: The next friend principle of law allows you to sue 536 00:32:08,160 --> 00:32:13,520 Speaker 1: in the name of another person. In this case, the 537 00:32:14,040 --> 00:32:17,760 Speaker 1: organization PETA is suing on behalf of one of those 538 00:32:17,840 --> 00:32:21,640 Speaker 1: monkeys whose name is Naruto. And so in twenty eighteen, 539 00:32:22,240 --> 00:32:25,400 Speaker 1: a judge at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has 540 00:32:25,440 --> 00:32:28,000 Speaker 1: probably one of the weirdest cases in their entire career, 541 00:32:28,240 --> 00:32:31,600 Speaker 1: and they rule against the selfie taking monkey. They throw 542 00:32:31,600 --> 00:32:34,920 Speaker 1: out the copyright lawsuit, and along the way they heavily 543 00:32:34,920 --> 00:32:39,240 Speaker 1: criticize PETA and they say, don't make Naruto an unwitting 544 00:32:39,640 --> 00:32:42,440 Speaker 1: pawn in your quote ideological goals. 545 00:32:42,680 --> 00:32:45,680 Speaker 2: We talked about this case in our Animals in Court 546 00:32:45,800 --> 00:32:50,120 Speaker 2: episode around the concept of animal personhood and PETA. Whatever 547 00:32:50,160 --> 00:32:53,320 Speaker 2: you think of them as an organization, you can't really 548 00:32:53,360 --> 00:32:56,200 Speaker 2: deny the fact that they do often do kind of 549 00:32:57,120 --> 00:33:02,040 Speaker 2: I guess let's call them symbolic lawsuits that maybe are 550 00:33:02,120 --> 00:33:05,120 Speaker 2: wasting a lot of folks time, but ultimately are an 551 00:33:05,120 --> 00:33:07,760 Speaker 2: excuse for them to create a press release. But nothing 552 00:33:07,800 --> 00:33:08,440 Speaker 2: really comes of that. 553 00:33:08,920 --> 00:33:11,720 Speaker 1: Or a legal precedent that's so like two for a 554 00:33:11,800 --> 00:33:15,400 Speaker 1: dollar so that you can get something some jurisprudence on 555 00:33:15,440 --> 00:33:18,239 Speaker 1: the books. We're going to end on two from the 556 00:33:18,280 --> 00:33:22,720 Speaker 1: world of pop culture. Let's go to Mattel Incorporated versus 557 00:33:23,000 --> 00:33:28,400 Speaker 1: MnGa Entertainment Incorporated. So these are two companies suing each other, 558 00:33:28,920 --> 00:33:33,560 Speaker 1: and they're suing because of beef between Barbie and the 559 00:33:33,680 --> 00:33:34,840 Speaker 1: Brats with a Z. 560 00:33:35,600 --> 00:33:37,480 Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. And this really goes into that whole 561 00:33:37,520 --> 00:33:41,720 Speaker 2: concept of like something being so derivative that it could 562 00:33:41,800 --> 00:33:45,960 Speaker 2: be considered an infringement, you know, But that's for the 563 00:33:46,000 --> 00:33:48,520 Speaker 2: courts to decide, isn't it. And no one's going to 564 00:33:48,560 --> 00:33:51,840 Speaker 2: make that decision unless the lawsuit is file. So Barbie 565 00:33:52,600 --> 00:33:55,640 Speaker 2: at this point, obviously Barbie's having a real moment right now, 566 00:33:55,680 --> 00:33:58,400 Speaker 2: real glow up. But at this point in two thousand 567 00:33:58,400 --> 00:34:00,800 Speaker 2: and one, Barbie as a brand is our forty two 568 00:34:01,040 --> 00:34:04,920 Speaker 2: years young when the Brats Dolls with a Z because 569 00:34:04,960 --> 00:34:08,040 Speaker 2: they're edgy, you know, hit the scene. I believe the 570 00:34:08,080 --> 00:34:13,239 Speaker 2: first run of Brats Dolls included Chloe, Jade, Sasha, and Yasmin. 571 00:34:14,280 --> 00:34:16,360 Speaker 2: And these are like they're kind of a cob like 572 00:34:16,480 --> 00:34:21,000 Speaker 2: giant headed, you know, puffy lipped, cartoony sort of you know, 573 00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,560 Speaker 2: seem girls. 574 00:34:22,840 --> 00:34:24,640 Speaker 1: They're like bad powder puff girls. 575 00:34:24,880 --> 00:34:27,600 Speaker 2: Really yeah, exactly in terms of the proportions of head 576 00:34:27,600 --> 00:34:31,640 Speaker 2: to body. But they did really well, very quickly. I 577 00:34:31,680 --> 00:34:33,879 Speaker 2: think in the span of just five years, they took 578 00:34:33,920 --> 00:34:38,040 Speaker 2: about forty percent of the market share away from Barbie 579 00:34:38,200 --> 00:34:43,240 Speaker 2: in terms of I guess dolls portraying fashioning young women 580 00:34:43,640 --> 00:34:44,520 Speaker 2: right right. 581 00:34:44,360 --> 00:34:47,080 Speaker 1: Because it's a specific demographic that these toys are for. 582 00:34:47,760 --> 00:34:54,000 Speaker 1: And so Mattel does what any company would reasonably do there, 583 00:34:54,360 --> 00:34:57,880 Speaker 1: They try to make a new iteration of Barbie dolls 584 00:34:58,280 --> 00:35:01,680 Speaker 1: that will bring back some of that market share. And 585 00:35:01,960 --> 00:35:05,319 Speaker 1: this line of barbiees is called my Scene Barbies. They 586 00:35:06,040 --> 00:35:09,520 Speaker 1: they echo the big headed, slim bodied build of the 587 00:35:09,520 --> 00:35:14,160 Speaker 1: Bratz dolls. And MGA Entertainment doesn't cot into this. So 588 00:35:14,200 --> 00:35:16,960 Speaker 1: in April two thousand and five, they sue Mattel and 589 00:35:17,000 --> 00:35:21,239 Speaker 1: they say, you are infringing upon our Brats thing. And 590 00:35:21,239 --> 00:35:23,759 Speaker 1: then Mattel comes back in court because both of these 591 00:35:23,760 --> 00:35:26,400 Speaker 1: are companies so they can afford to bleed a little money, 592 00:35:27,000 --> 00:35:31,480 Speaker 1: they say, well, Bratz has a designer named Carter Bryant, 593 00:35:31,880 --> 00:35:36,160 Speaker 1: and Carter Bryant made the Bratz doll design while we 594 00:35:36,200 --> 00:35:39,760 Speaker 1: at Mattel were paying Carter. And this is true. Carter 595 00:35:40,320 --> 00:35:44,080 Speaker 1: worked for Mattel from nineteen ninety five and September to 596 00:35:44,120 --> 00:35:46,880 Speaker 1: April nineteen ninety eight, and then worked for him again 597 00:35:47,440 --> 00:35:52,160 Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety nine to October two thousand and the 598 00:35:52,239 --> 00:35:57,760 Speaker 1: contract that Carter Bryant signed stipulated that his designs during 599 00:35:57,760 --> 00:36:00,239 Speaker 1: this time would all be property in Mattel. And you 600 00:36:00,280 --> 00:36:02,920 Speaker 1: can see this in a lot of other industries, like, 601 00:36:03,480 --> 00:36:07,360 Speaker 1: please read your employment contracts carefully, because you might sign 602 00:36:07,440 --> 00:36:12,040 Speaker 1: something that says any software you create while you're employed, 603 00:36:12,760 --> 00:36:16,960 Speaker 1: or any thing you make on a work computer becomes 604 00:36:17,000 --> 00:36:20,320 Speaker 1: the ip of your employer, so be very careful with that. 605 00:36:20,320 --> 00:36:23,160 Speaker 2: That becomes a big plot point in the HBO series 606 00:36:23,200 --> 00:36:27,160 Speaker 2: Silicon Valley, where like there's an algorithm that one of 607 00:36:27,160 --> 00:36:31,239 Speaker 2: the main characters is working on, like a compression algorithm, 608 00:36:31,520 --> 00:36:33,960 Speaker 2: and at some point it becomes a subject in core 609 00:36:34,040 --> 00:36:38,120 Speaker 2: proceedings as to whether he did that on a computer 610 00:36:38,520 --> 00:36:41,000 Speaker 2: owned by the sort of Google you know stand in 611 00:36:41,200 --> 00:36:43,799 Speaker 2: that's in the show. Huli is what it's called, And 612 00:36:43,800 --> 00:36:45,920 Speaker 2: that's a big deal. Like if you do anything like 613 00:36:45,960 --> 00:36:48,560 Speaker 2: that in a work computer technically it is the product 614 00:36:48,640 --> 00:36:52,399 Speaker 2: of the company. Like, even maybe if it's not within 615 00:36:52,440 --> 00:36:55,040 Speaker 2: the scope of your work, you got to wonder that, Like, 616 00:36:55,080 --> 00:36:57,560 Speaker 2: what if you're like, you know, I have my own 617 00:36:57,600 --> 00:36:59,960 Speaker 2: computer that I that I use in my home setup 618 00:37:00,080 --> 00:37:03,359 Speaker 2: my home studio that I record music on. But if 619 00:37:03,400 --> 00:37:06,960 Speaker 2: I was using a work computer all of the stuff 620 00:37:06,960 --> 00:37:10,239 Speaker 2: that I did with that computer, if I one day 621 00:37:10,280 --> 00:37:13,600 Speaker 2: sold a song for a million dollars or whatever, technically 622 00:37:14,200 --> 00:37:16,360 Speaker 2: the company could claim that I did it on a 623 00:37:16,400 --> 00:37:19,160 Speaker 2: work computer, and therefore they would be party to that 624 00:37:19,880 --> 00:37:23,919 Speaker 2: those earnings. Right, I think, even if it's not under 625 00:37:23,960 --> 00:37:26,120 Speaker 2: the scope of my employment. 626 00:37:25,760 --> 00:37:29,960 Speaker 1: It can happen that way. Again, this we cannot emphasize 627 00:37:30,000 --> 00:37:33,640 Speaker 1: this enough. You've got to read those contracts carefully because 628 00:37:34,360 --> 00:37:38,640 Speaker 1: another example would be whether or not it matters that 629 00:37:38,680 --> 00:37:41,640 Speaker 1: you were working on company time, which takes precedent using 630 00:37:41,719 --> 00:37:46,080 Speaker 1: company equipment or using company time. For example, I have 631 00:37:47,480 --> 00:37:51,520 Speaker 1: I've had to negotiate some pretty specific things with non 632 00:37:51,640 --> 00:37:57,120 Speaker 1: competes in regards to being a writer independent of the 633 00:37:57,120 --> 00:38:01,759 Speaker 1: podcast and stuff, and that that is Like, we're very 634 00:38:01,800 --> 00:38:05,799 Speaker 1: fortunate in that the our colleagues and the folks we 635 00:38:05,840 --> 00:38:10,040 Speaker 1: work with are all for some reason, big fans of us. 636 00:38:10,160 --> 00:38:14,759 Speaker 1: So when we have outside projects or work, ninety nine 637 00:38:14,800 --> 00:38:17,280 Speaker 1: times out of one hundred, they're like, you guys are awesome, 638 00:38:17,640 --> 00:38:18,560 Speaker 1: Go do the thing. 639 00:38:18,719 --> 00:38:19,440 Speaker 2: That's great. 640 00:38:19,680 --> 00:38:22,279 Speaker 1: Yeah and yeah, But that doesn't apply to everyone. We're 641 00:38:22,360 --> 00:38:24,080 Speaker 1: quite fortunate in that regard. 642 00:38:24,080 --> 00:38:26,680 Speaker 2: For sure. We also do know that typically noncompete clauses 643 00:38:26,680 --> 00:38:28,839 Speaker 2: are a little difficult to enforce. You know, they're not 644 00:38:28,880 --> 00:38:32,000 Speaker 2: always ironclad. But in this case, it did not go 645 00:38:32,120 --> 00:38:35,799 Speaker 2: in favor of Carter Bryant and the Brats brand. In 646 00:38:35,880 --> 00:38:38,640 Speaker 2: July two thousand and eight, the Jewelry took the side 647 00:38:38,640 --> 00:38:43,000 Speaker 2: of Mattel and MGA, the Brat's I guess parent company 648 00:38:43,040 --> 00:38:45,640 Speaker 2: had to pay Mattel a whopping one hundred million dollars 649 00:38:46,080 --> 00:38:50,880 Speaker 2: and also oh insults and injury remove Bratz dolls from shells. 650 00:38:50,880 --> 00:38:56,800 Speaker 2: But something's changed because there's been Brats movies and stuff, 651 00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:59,080 Speaker 2: and I think Brats are back in a big way. 652 00:38:59,320 --> 00:39:01,080 Speaker 3: One year, they had to take him off a shell 653 00:39:01,160 --> 00:39:01,799 Speaker 3: for one year. 654 00:39:02,160 --> 00:39:03,600 Speaker 2: Okay, okay, got it. 655 00:39:03,840 --> 00:39:08,240 Speaker 1: And then MGA ultimately prevailed and they said, we're proving 656 00:39:08,280 --> 00:39:13,480 Speaker 1: that Mattel has stolen our trade secrets. So these cases 657 00:39:13,560 --> 00:39:18,399 Speaker 1: are almost never fully done thanks to appeals processes. These 658 00:39:18,480 --> 00:39:23,799 Speaker 1: can go on for so long. Li'sten on one more. 659 00:39:23,920 --> 00:39:27,120 Speaker 1: This is one for the eighties babies in the crowd today. 660 00:39:27,640 --> 00:39:31,360 Speaker 1: You may recall the mid nineteen eighties, the Reagan administration 661 00:39:32,000 --> 00:39:36,600 Speaker 1: started something called the Strategic Defense Initiative or SDI, and 662 00:39:36,840 --> 00:39:40,920 Speaker 1: immediately everyone in the United States called it the Star 663 00:39:41,000 --> 00:39:44,839 Speaker 1: Wars program. Most people loved this. One guy who didn't 664 00:39:44,880 --> 00:39:48,719 Speaker 1: love this was George Lucas, who you may be familiar with. 665 00:39:49,360 --> 00:39:54,680 Speaker 2: Yeah, George Lucas said, it's like history at rhymes. Yeah, 666 00:39:54,680 --> 00:40:00,000 Speaker 2: that guy. He and his production company, Lucasfilm, were an 667 00:40:00,560 --> 00:40:05,000 Speaker 2: at Uncle Sam or Uncle Ronnie, and it didn't want 668 00:40:05,080 --> 00:40:09,279 Speaker 2: this association with its brand, with his brand. And by 669 00:40:09,320 --> 00:40:12,879 Speaker 2: this association, I'm referring to one tied up in war 670 00:40:12,960 --> 00:40:18,000 Speaker 2: efforts and missile launching, missiles into space and all of that. 671 00:40:18,120 --> 00:40:21,120 Speaker 2: You know, you wanted kind of a clean slate. In 672 00:40:21,160 --> 00:40:25,719 Speaker 2: Star Wars, there's very little threat of global annihilation. You know, 673 00:40:25,880 --> 00:40:28,160 Speaker 2: there's kind of dog fights in space. I mean, there 674 00:40:28,200 --> 00:40:29,920 Speaker 2: is the Death Star and all of that stuff, but 675 00:40:30,080 --> 00:40:32,319 Speaker 2: you know, there really isn't much of like an apocalypse 676 00:40:32,440 --> 00:40:35,839 Speaker 2: vibe in Star Wars. There's sort of a nice, kind 677 00:40:35,880 --> 00:40:38,799 Speaker 2: of diplomatic wave of things working themselves out. 678 00:40:39,040 --> 00:40:43,800 Speaker 3: Oh, by the way, the blockade that was Phantom Menace, 679 00:40:44,000 --> 00:40:44,719 Speaker 3: not Clone War. 680 00:40:45,040 --> 00:40:45,320 Speaker 1: Oh. 681 00:40:46,760 --> 00:40:50,200 Speaker 2: It starts with the weird aliens and they're talking about 682 00:40:50,360 --> 00:40:53,399 Speaker 2: the blockade, but it comes into play in the second one. 683 00:40:53,440 --> 00:40:55,640 Speaker 2: And that one really slip of debating. 684 00:40:55,440 --> 00:40:59,680 Speaker 3: To really date this recording. I was editing the Lucian 685 00:40:59,680 --> 00:41:03,359 Speaker 3: Islands episode and I watched a clip and it's it's 686 00:41:03,520 --> 00:41:06,160 Speaker 3: very weird, and it's like, wow, I didn't realize the 687 00:41:06,160 --> 00:41:08,439 Speaker 3: Phantom Menace was this weird. It all just feels weird. 688 00:41:08,520 --> 00:41:10,080 Speaker 3: It has a whole of jury's getting blown up on 689 00:41:10,200 --> 00:41:12,400 Speaker 3: R two D two survives it, so they introduced our 690 00:41:12,440 --> 00:41:15,759 Speaker 3: two D two. It's really ham fisted in there. All 691 00:41:15,800 --> 00:41:18,640 Speaker 3: that whole movie was it's just a joyless cash grab. 692 00:41:18,880 --> 00:41:21,640 Speaker 1: Now this is interesting. I'm glad we're ending on this 693 00:41:21,680 --> 00:41:25,080 Speaker 1: one because it's a larger question for us and all 694 00:41:25,160 --> 00:41:29,680 Speaker 1: the ridiculous historians in the crowd in nineteen eighty five, 695 00:41:30,080 --> 00:41:34,520 Speaker 1: when this lawsuit comes to bear, Lucas doesn't sue the 696 00:41:34,640 --> 00:41:39,799 Speaker 1: US government, right because officially the US government just has 697 00:41:39,800 --> 00:41:43,520 Speaker 1: a few politicians who start using the phrase Star Wars program. 698 00:41:44,160 --> 00:41:47,759 Speaker 1: But he can sue two public interest groups, one called 699 00:41:47,840 --> 00:41:52,040 Speaker 1: High Frontier and one called the Committee for Strong Peaceful America. 700 00:41:52,440 --> 00:41:55,719 Speaker 1: They run these TV messages, these like PSA's, and they 701 00:41:55,760 --> 00:41:59,719 Speaker 1: refer to this program as star Wars, and Lucasfilm has 702 00:41:59,719 --> 00:42:03,240 Speaker 1: a t for Star Wars, the movies, the brilliant film 703 00:42:03,280 --> 00:42:06,560 Speaker 1: franchise that goes into all sorts of things, toys, books, merch, 704 00:42:06,640 --> 00:42:12,680 Speaker 1: you name it. The Federal District Court said, sorry, George, 705 00:42:12,880 --> 00:42:16,480 Speaker 1: we're ruling in favor of the interest group. They are 706 00:42:16,920 --> 00:42:21,239 Speaker 1: totally fine to call their program whatever they want, even 707 00:42:21,400 --> 00:42:24,200 Speaker 1: Star Wars, so long as they don't attach it to 708 00:42:24,280 --> 00:42:28,600 Speaker 1: a product or service for sale. And the court decision 709 00:42:28,680 --> 00:42:33,399 Speaker 1: even said, look, forever, creators of fictional worlds have seen 710 00:42:33,400 --> 00:42:39,600 Speaker 1: their vocabulary for fantasy appropriated to describe reality. So that's 711 00:42:39,760 --> 00:42:43,200 Speaker 1: stuff like you know, like George, orwell, people reference nineteen 712 00:42:43,200 --> 00:42:47,239 Speaker 1: eighty four and double think all the time. I don't know, 713 00:42:47,280 --> 00:42:49,080 Speaker 1: what do you guys think about that decision. 714 00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:51,719 Speaker 2: I think it's right on the money, because first of all, 715 00:42:51,719 --> 00:42:54,399 Speaker 2: it wasn't even officially the name of the program. Sure 716 00:42:54,440 --> 00:42:57,360 Speaker 2: it was sort of shorthand that was just being thrown around, 717 00:42:58,160 --> 00:43:00,480 Speaker 2: And that's what happens when you have such a brand 718 00:43:00,480 --> 00:43:03,880 Speaker 2: that's so ubiquitous as as Star Wars, people are going 719 00:43:03,920 --> 00:43:07,680 Speaker 2: to start using terms from it, you know, in normal 720 00:43:07,760 --> 00:43:10,560 Speaker 2: kind of parlance, whether it be in conversation or in 721 00:43:11,239 --> 00:43:13,920 Speaker 2: to describe, you know, things that are bigger than just 722 00:43:14,040 --> 00:43:17,600 Speaker 2: like civilian kind of activities. Right, It's just it's it 723 00:43:17,960 --> 00:43:21,600 Speaker 2: makes sense. But you can't put that genie back in 724 00:43:21,680 --> 00:43:24,440 Speaker 2: the bottle. That's part of having something that sort of 725 00:43:25,640 --> 00:43:29,000 Speaker 2: really invades the public consciousness. It's gonna get appropriated. 726 00:43:29,560 --> 00:43:34,520 Speaker 1: M h yeah, well said, and these conversations continue in 727 00:43:34,600 --> 00:43:38,719 Speaker 1: the modern day. There are so many other strange examples 728 00:43:38,800 --> 00:43:43,759 Speaker 1: we can give you of intellectual property beefs, but for 729 00:43:43,880 --> 00:43:48,200 Speaker 1: now I think we can say safely that this stuff 730 00:43:48,320 --> 00:43:50,920 Speaker 1: often gets very, very ridiculous. 731 00:43:51,239 --> 00:43:54,879 Speaker 2: So no question about it, man, Yeah, this is cool. 732 00:43:55,040 --> 00:43:57,440 Speaker 2: It's something that we often find ourselves kind of in 733 00:43:57,480 --> 00:44:00,799 Speaker 2: the midst of is in podcasting and have kind of 734 00:44:01,239 --> 00:44:04,040 Speaker 2: seen some of these things sort of evolve, you know, 735 00:44:04,400 --> 00:44:06,719 Speaker 2: in our lifetimes, and they're going to continue to do 736 00:44:06,840 --> 00:44:09,640 Speaker 2: so because it is still based on the history of 737 00:44:09,680 --> 00:44:14,480 Speaker 2: it not so clear. You know, ideas are like you know, 738 00:44:15,400 --> 00:44:18,839 Speaker 2: made of spider's webs and magic. As Noel Fielding might 739 00:44:18,920 --> 00:44:21,800 Speaker 2: say on the mighty boosh. It's really hard to pin down. 740 00:44:22,600 --> 00:44:25,120 Speaker 1: And one thing we can say is that we are 741 00:44:25,520 --> 00:44:29,240 Speaker 1: continually grateful for all of all of you folks playing 742 00:44:29,280 --> 00:44:32,880 Speaker 1: along at home, Ridiculous Historians. Thanks to you. We're also 743 00:44:32,960 --> 00:44:36,879 Speaker 1: grateful for the help of everybody in the Ridiculous crew. 744 00:44:37,000 --> 00:44:40,240 Speaker 1: Let's start with a big thanks for super producer mister 745 00:44:40,480 --> 00:44:41,400 Speaker 1: Max Williams. 746 00:44:41,760 --> 00:44:46,239 Speaker 2: Jonathan Strickland. Ever may he you know, live under our 747 00:44:47,160 --> 00:44:51,040 Speaker 2: symbolic podcast bridge and we'll always pay that sol because 748 00:44:51,040 --> 00:44:52,799 Speaker 2: at the end of the day, you know, he's our troule. 749 00:44:54,120 --> 00:44:55,440 Speaker 2: Chris rosciotis here in spirit. 750 00:44:55,800 --> 00:44:58,600 Speaker 1: Yeah, Eve's Jeff Coat. Let's also give a shout out 751 00:44:58,600 --> 00:45:01,800 Speaker 1: to Gabeluesier. Let shout out to our researchers Associe It 752 00:45:01,840 --> 00:45:04,480 Speaker 1: for this episode, Doctor Z and Noel. 753 00:45:04,680 --> 00:45:08,000 Speaker 2: Shout out to you Surgy with you as well, my friend. 754 00:45:08,400 --> 00:45:18,040 Speaker 2: We'll see you next time. Folks. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, 755 00:45:18,160 --> 00:45:21,400 Speaker 2: visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen 756 00:45:21,440 --> 00:45:22,480 Speaker 2: to your favorite shows.