My favorite example is the first Leon Russell album, which contains original songs titled “I Put a Spell on You” and “Give Peace a Chance” that are no relation to the much-covered Screamin’ Jay Hawkins classic or the Plastic Ono Band anthem.
Robert Zemeckis had to play nice with the Beatles’ organization in order to get the film *I Wanna Hold Your Hand *made, and apparently part of that was making the subtle change to the title. (The song is “I Want to Hold Your Hand.”)
However though copyright does not apply, trademark may, depending on the nature of the work and of the title and how on it’s used. (see here). You’re right merely Part I, Part II, Part III, etc. would not be enough by itself.
I think an example of the distinction can be that someone can still freely reuse “A New Hope” or “Attack of the Clones” as a title (as long as it’s not for a Space Opera, I suppose the Bureau would opine), but what’s trademarked would be the “Star Wars:…” part (a trademarked branding). “Episode [number]” is unprotectable.
BTW – someone above mentioned munged titles being used in porn parodies/knockoffs: in the last few years a trend has arisen in some porn studios of NOT using a munged title but rather using all or part of the well known title but with a disclaimer, e.g.: * “Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody” ; “OMG It’s the Duck Dynasty XXX Parody”; “This Isn’t Police Academy…It’s A XXX Spoof”; “This Ain’t Two and a Half Men”; “Not The Bradys XXX”*. The idea apparently being that not only would a reasonable person realize he’s watching a parody and not an autorized installment of the series, but that the parodist has explicitly stated so up front so there’s no attempt at damaging the brand.
I’d always heard that Lucas, after giving his movie the working title Revenge of the Jedi, decided that revenge was not a proper Jedi motivation and changed it (he later made Revenge of the Sith, though).
Parody is always protected in copyright. Trademark does not protect titles, as I said earlier. As long as they don’t use specific protected imagery or logos they can even use character names.
Searching IMDb.com I found Man of Steel XXX: An Axel Braun Parody and '70s Show: A XXX Parody.
There have been several Star Trek parodies. This Ain’t Star Trek XXX uses real character names, but the Sex Trek series doesn’t. Why the difference? I have no idea.
Interesting (and SFW) article about the Justice League porn parody. The article is talking about the costumes and said the guy designing the costumes for the porn movie did a better job than most of the mainstream designers did. (For other SFW examples here’s the Batman, Superman, and Catwoman costumes.)
I’ll bet the only reason nobody’s mentioned The Avengers is because the earlier 90s film based on the Brit series was so godawful!
Also, I believe the official registered titled of the recent movie is Marvel’s The Avengers. But I wouldn’t be surprised if some money changed hands between Disney/Marvel and Warner just to make everybody happy.
Wait, that’s the joke, right? That they named it that when there was never a plan for a “Part II”? That’s what I always assumed.
Similarly, the supergroup The Traveling Wilburys (appropriate since a George Harrison song was mentioned upthread) released albumed called “Volume 1” and “Volume 3.” There was no “Volume 2.” It’s funny.
At that, I get why I can’t make a Captain America movie, but it’d sure be a dick move on my part to make a Thor movie.
If you did, you would be competing with Almighty Thor, Thor: Legend of the Magical Hammer, and Thor the Conqueror, of course.
Yeesh. I stand by what I said about that being a dick move.
Just a WAG, but real movies have to cut and design costumes so that actors can run around and do at least some stunts in them. That calls for totally different specs than a costume that just has to look good in a pose and then poof is vanished for a sex scene. Lots of outfits had to go through major revisions when it was found that the actors couldn’t act in them.
We won’t know for sure since that Wonder Woman parody seems never to have appeared and the only image from it is the one in that article. It doesn’t look anything at all like Wonder Woman to me so I don’t get what the fuss was.
Paragraph 1: I know it and you know it. But a porn producer/distributor may not feel confident that the legal fight would not bankrupt him unless he signals loud and clear that “It’s A Joke, Son.”
Paragraph 2: Like I said, in view of the above, a more timid producer wants to make it crystal clear that this is so. Even MAD, who were involved in one of the main parody-protection court cases, for a long time used munged titles and character names just to play it safe. Also, the munged-title versions tend to be quite looser about following the source material.
This has nothing to do with IP law, it’s because SAG maintains a registry of actors’ names and they don’t like to have more than one member with the same name. So if there’s already somebody in the union with your name, you need to pick a different stage name, or go through a bureaucratic process to appeal it in order to join the union.
Marvel’s The Avengers was released in the UK as Marvel Avengers Assemble specifically to avoid confusion with the 1960s TV series and subsequent (shitty) movie.
Yeah, I know. It’s just a great anecdote.
Well, i know i’m doubled over with laughter! :rolleyes::dubious:
(By the way, the smilies were not for you, but for the person who thought there was any humor in those things you referenced)
As for your other statement, that HOTW PI was meant as a joke, i honestly have no idea.
Releasing an album called “Vol. 1” and one called “Vol. 3” and imagining your fans running around to record shops trying to find “Vol. 2” was (most likely) funny to George Harrison…I personally get a chuckle out of it. It’s not hilarious joke funny, but it’s funny. Maybe I’m weird. 
Bill Cosby put out a movie titled Leonard Part 6. Nobody thought it was funny.