Journalista! points out an interesting OC Weekly story on
Dan O'Neill's Air Pirates, the infamous parody of Disney's cartoon characters that was squashed by copyright law.
Disney's case hinged on the fact that O'Neill's drawings closely resembled the real thing; that, of course, is an important aspect of parody. But Disney argued that such accurate representations might confuse America. It's difficult to take seriously Disney's argument that Air Pirates, an unknown, underground, small-circulation publication, could ever be confused with or compete economically with the real deal no matter how exact the rendering. Perhaps this is why Disney's counsel peppered the complaint with references to Air Pirates as "perverted," "offensive," "degrading" and "defamatory" (they forgot "schismatical"), as if parody should somehow strive for wholesomeness.
Recent comments
27 min 37 sec ago
17 hours 28 min ago
17 hours 33 min ago
1 day 43 min ago
2 days 1 hour ago
2 days 15 hours ago
2 days 16 hours ago
3 days 18 hours ago
4 days 6 hours ago
5 days 15 min ago