Jerry farwell tried to sue for something like this.
It didn’t turn out well to say the least.
Why did they even bother to ask permission in the first place?
I’ve never seen more than two or three minutes of the show myself. I wasn’t really criticizing the show. I was confused at what I thought was the OP’s support of the parody.
I’m guessing in order to avoid a lawsuit like this. Even if they win (which I’m hoping, and almost certain, they will), it’s gonna be expensive for htem.
Carol Burnett’s likeness is not her personal property. Parodies, even crappy parodies, are protected, as well they should be. There is very little to be gained in the public sphere by destroying the right of parody, and a great deal to be lost, inasmuch as parody is a time-honored form of political speech.
Daniel
They have to ask permission to use the theme song because it’s copyrighted. Since permission was denied, they used a parody instead. If they had used the original without asking permission, they would not have won the ensuing lawsuit.
Sure it is. Google “right of publicity.”
Now that I think about it, Burnett is being kind of hypocritical with this lawsuit- not only did she do a number of parodies of famous movies and TV shows on her show, she’s also used other people’s intellectual property without permission- she would often mimic the trademarked Tarzan yell.
Vanna White sued Samsung over a ROBOT that RESEMBLED her in front of a board that LOOKED LIKE the Wheel of Fortune board… and won.
I wouldn’t be too quick to judge the outcome yet…
I have mixed feelings. I like Family Guy and I like Carol Burnett (except for that godawful Eunice/Mama’s Family crap*) but I fail to see how she lost publicity money over that. Were lots of people clamoring to use her charwoman character and couldn’t because Family Guy did?
*Okay, she loses lots of points on the sympathy meter for that mess.
So, Carol Burnett asked for permission from Margaret Mitchell or her estate before she did that famous ‘Gone With The Wind’ parody?
I was just going to say this. Carol Burnett used to parody old movies all the time on her own show.
Parody is protected free speech. Her case has no merit and she should know better. I can’t believe her lawyers wouldn’t have told she had no shot, so I wonder if she’s just hoping to give Family Guy some bad publicity out of petty spite.
Make up your mind–“those who have an ounce of creativity” and Family Guy are mutually exclusive.
IANAL, but it seems to me that in that advertisement Samsung could not claim that parody was the objective when the likeness was used, because the objective there clearly was to not pay loyalties for using something very similar to a different program in an attempt to confuse people into thinking Wheel of Fortune or Vanna White approved the message or had a connection to Samsung.
In the Family Guy case there is no attempt to create a similar confusion, Carol Burnett is clearly the target of a parody.
Was the Tarzan yell actually trademarked?
(BTW, even if it was, I don’t think that her usage amounts to a trademark violation. For a violation to occur, there has to be the potential for customer confusion, which could not have happened with her usage.)
The Tarzan yell is a registered trademark of Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. (USPTO serial number 75326989, filed December 15, 1988).
If the Tarzan yell trademark was registered in 1988, then Carol Burnett was not necessarily in violation of that trademark. Remember, her show ended in the 1970s.
Admittedly, a trademark does not necessarily have to be registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office. My point, however, is I don’t think we can argue strongly that Ms. Burnett violated that trademark – partly due to the date of registry, and partly because there’s no reasonable grounds for customer confusion.
The best ever example of taking the piss out of your critics was that done by Johnny Speight the writer of Till Death Us Do Part which was ripped off to become All In The Family. On finding out that Brit morals campaigner Mary Whitehouse didn’t approve of the show Speight wrote a script in which Alf Garnett (Archie Bunker) was a staunch advocate of Whitehouse’s opinions.
I don’t think you read very carefully there.
What I’m curious to know is if any human on earth really thinks a quick reference in a “Family Guy” episode actually cost Carol Burnett two million dollars. Somehow, I doubt it.
I’m pretty sure you misread my post.
Did you google it before suggesting that I did?
Of course people have some limited control over the use of their image, but their image is not their personal property, and nothing about the right of publicity chages that.
Daniel