The first rule of Calvinball is don’t talk about Calvinball
Given the discussion and speculation on this, I asked her some questions. Turns out, the reason she imagined Sam as a black dude is simpler than our speculations: it’s because she knows a few kids named Sam at school, and they’re all black.
I knew what the site was before I clicked on it, but TBH, the comments are about plotlines – such as they are – about as much as weird drawings.
Hah! that makes a lot of sense.
(All the Sams I’ve known, at least that I can think of right now, have been white. There are several in my family.)
– Another point to think of about Hobbes:
Supposing that he’s only real through Calvin’s imagination: then Hobbes is part of Calvin. (Which is not to say that he isn’t real; he’d be as real as Calvin is.) In which case he’s utterly incapable of doing anything to Calvin that Calvin’s not OK with. Calvin doesn’t want those play attacks to cause actual injury; so they don’t.
Of course he gives bad advice, they’re six!
And a lot of what’s happening, from that perspective, is Calvin working out for himself discrepancies and obvious errors in the information that the world is handing him. That whole shtick about tigers doing things better than humans? It’s Calvin figuring out that humans screw up a lot, and often in ways not available to other species. Which we do.
-
You’re sick. I like that. It’s obviously a reference to Calvinball.
-
IANAL but if all he’s doing is posting these strips for free on the internet I would think suing would be much more difficult than if he were selling them, as well as being completely pointless.
Also, as others have said, although I wouldn’t call this a “parody” so much as a “tribute”, I bet the same exceptions to copyright law would apply.
A trademark holder must pursue all violations, no matter how small, in order to retain the rights to the trademark, but I don’t think the same is true for copyrights. Even if Hobbes and Bacon actually is a copyright violation, it’s so small that it’s probably not worth pursuing. There’s no money to recover, and something as small as a cease and desist letter could create bad publicity for Watterson if it became public.
Also, remember that Watterson has never tried to cash in by merchandising his characters. He’s not the type who chases after every dollar he can get.
And Watterson may actually like Hobbes and Bacon. The artwork is good, the writing is good, and it’s in the spirit of the original strips. He may even find it flattering.
I think he would be undoubtedly flattered to know that his artwork is still inspiring creations like this, decades later. That was the whole reason he stopped at the top of his game: he wanted every strip to be meaningful and free from the declining quality so often associated with long-running comics.
Hobbes and Bacon isn’t just a flattering tribute; it vindicates what was certainly a difficult decision.
I mean… Hobbes IS Calvin. He’s terrible because Calvin is an immature small boy with all the lack of self control and introspection that entails.
I must point you to the brilliant Sam Richardson, one of the funniest humans alive. Now you know a Sam who isn’t white!
It’s not even true for trademarks:
Quite simply, the view that a trademark holder must trawl the internet and respond to every unauthorized use (or even every infringing use) is a myth. It’s great for lawyers, but irritating and expensive for everyone else. And when done clumsily or maliciously, it chills free expression.
Trademark Law Does Not Require Companies To Tirelessly Censor the Internet | Electronic Frontier Foundation
They have to keep it in use and can’t just let everything slide, but there’s no compulsion in the law to pursue every infringement (or possible infringement).
Oh, I know of Sams who aren’t white; I just meant that I can’t think of any who I know personally, and that it’s also very commonly a white name. I’ve lived most of my life in mostly-white areas, which undoubtedly has something to do with it.
Do you have a link to a short piece or two by Sam Richardson? I haven’t time to watch a series, or really even full length episodes.
“There’s no money to recover” is the salient feature, I think. A copyright violation either has to be profiting someone else, or hurting you. Since this strip cannot possibly be hurting a strip no longer in publication, and might even help, since it is very flattering, and there is a good argument it exposes the strip to a new audience, and creates a market for the books, the argument against damages, I think, is very sound.
An author whining “Don’t copy me!” doesn’t work. They give up the right to do that when they go public.