IP, Copyright Question

[TheGeekess]

Your talking in generalities which you would have to because it is all I have given you and that is intentional. However, the specific methodology for creating the humanoid is not in practice and has not been done. Also I am not claiming to have invented the android, that would be stupid, they are not androids, the mx android example is based on my creation in that they explode purple, like my characters do and they all look exactly the same visually based on race just like my characters do and they are the police. Which specific sci fi has that? None. Blade Runner all looked different, Body Snatchers all looked different, Terminators in exo form all looked the same but they looked like machines, there is no mention in terminator lore that suggests the Terminators all looked the same except one, Arnold's terminator is the only one that looked the same movie to movie. Which specific story has the lead character shooting the automaton in the face when it won't shut up and it exploding purple? Specifically. The process I described for creating the new humanoid has never been done and probably wouldn't work and therefor he has just copied my idea "errors" and all. When you take the specifics and the generalities together it looks like IP infringement to me.

But on whose side? Do you realize how long it takes to produce a TV show? From writing and submitting the script to getting funding, hiring the actors/actresses/camera/sound/special effects/electrical/props/set designers/etc?

 

[surrealcoma]

I actually know exactly when

But on whose side? Do you realize how long it takes to produce a TV show? From writing and submitting the script to getting funding, hiring the actors/actresses/camera/sound/special effects/electrical/props/set designers/etc?

I actually know exactly when the show was put on the FOX slate, I know they didn't have an acceptable pilot episode until 1 month after my book published, I know that the guy "writing" it with Wyman left months prior to that over "creative differences" I know that filming for the pilot started in July 2013 and the pilot aired in November.

I know that JJ Abrams, JH Wyman and Bad Robot could probably put all that together between March 8, 2013 and July 2013.

Is that ok?

 

[quincy]

When I'm finished filming the animated version of my book than I will advertise it thusly:

"Before Wyman, Abrams and Bad Robot made 'Almost Human,' there was THE PRINTED MAN."

Then I'll send him a copy and he can take me to court.

Why are you here again, then? Not only are you on a U.S. law forum and you need to check Canadian law because you reside in Canada, it sounds as if you intend to go ahead regardless of what anyone tells you.

Based on what you have written so far, it sounds more like you are discussing copied ideas rather than the copied expression of those ideas. If that is the case, then no one has any legal action to pursue against anyone else. But a comparison of works would still be smart, before you risk ticking off someone with a whole heck of a lot of money available to challenge your book's content, and so you can better determine if you have a legal leg to stand on in challenging the show's content.

 

[Proserpina]

I actually know exactly when the show was put on the FOX slate, I know they didn't have an acceptable pilot episode until 1 month after my book published, I know that the guy "writing" it with Wyman left months prior to that over "creative differences" I know that filming for the pilot started in July 2013 and the pilot aired in November.

I know that JJ Abrams, JH Wyman and Bad Robot could probably put all that together between March 8, 2013 and July 2013.

Is that ok?

Seriously. Get an attorney. You're arguing for nothing.

 

[FlyingRon]

A patent won't help him, even if it was a real process/invention. You're free to write about other's patented inventions all you want. That's the whole point of patents, you get exclusive rights to use the invention in exchange to disclosing it.

 

[bishopsgait]

Hope in one hand and sh*t in the other, one will fill up faster.

You will rightfully be disgusted/infuriated when you realize just how many similarities, even in a beginning to end proper sequence, can go unnoticed by "a trained professional" when it comes to comparing one work which predates another. These attorneys say it quite simply when they end their posts with the words "good luck", because registered copyrights and breached contracts originally signed in good faith expedite and as far as I see it stand for absolutely nothing if you can't afford your equal access to the legal system. Don't be a damned believer, it is by no means all about facts.

I'm thinking it wouldn't be any different than if I wrote about a cyborg that had liquid metal skin and could turn into any shape or copy any form than the people that wrote Terminator 2 could sue me. That is a very specific character, it isn't a generic robot. If I wrote about a character with 3 steel claws that came out of his knuckles than Marvel could sue me for wolverine. I wrote about a very specific process of creating a life form.

 

[quincy]

You will rightfully be disgusted/infuriated when you realize just how many similarities, even in a beginning to end proper sequence, can go unnoticed by "a trained professional" when it comes to comparing one work which predates another. These attorneys say it quite simply when they end their posts with the words "good luck", because registered copyrights and breached contracts originally signed in good faith expedite and as far as I see it stand for absolutely nothing if you can't afford your equal access to the legal system. Don't be a damned believer, it is by no means all about facts.

bishopsgait, I get it. You had a bad experience. But you are wrong about it not being all about facts, because it is.

Now, if you want to start your own thread, instead of ranting and raving in other people's threads about your experience, then do that. We could address some of your concerns there.

As an encouraging note for you, however, there has been and continues to be serious discussion among the "powers that be" to make copyright infringement suits a more financially feasible option for the average artist/author whose work has been infringed. A copyright holder may eventually have the option of suing an infringer in a small claims court set up for IP issues. This could help those who currently find the costs of a lawsuit outweigh any benefits that can be realized (for example, a holder of a registered copyright work that has been infringed might, as it stands now, be awarded in statutory damages as little as $750 for the infringement, with a suit often costing in the thousands).