Posted by Troy (Jazz) - Metro D.C. on March 3, 2009:

To Jim, in TX:

Should all of those musicians who have shamelessly been using unaltered musical notes in what is almost certainly previously used & copyrighted pairs, triplets, quads and more suffer a fate similar to RC's? I, for one, think so! And, if you will join me, together (along with the firm repping Hasbro) we can rake in grillion$$$ in a class-action-anti-fair-use-non-parody (excluding 2 Live Crew, of course) case.

Posted by John in Detroit on March 3, 2009:

Looks like Hasbro got a new flock of attorneys and they have, as usual, no clue.

Isn't there something in the law that says if you have been doing for for a specified period of time and they have not sought legal intervention, they have to shut up?

(Not a lawyer, don't even play one on TV, but I'm only asking a question here.)

---

Yes there are, including laches and estoppel. That said, I still believe their rights have not been violated, since it's such a clear parody. But even if their rights were violated, they have known about it and done nothing for nearly nine years now. -rc

Posted by Chris - Columbus, OH on March 4, 2009:

Give 'em hell, Randy!

Posted by David, CT on March 4, 2009:

I thought that to be a parody it had to pick on or comment on the thing being parodied. So this would be a parody (from a copyright standpoint) only if it was picking on monopoly or hasbro wouldn't it?

---

I think the comment is reasonably obvious, but for those who don't "get it", the explanation has been on the original GOOHF page since 2000. -rc

Posted by Regina San Diego on March 5, 2009:

There is 1 lawyer for every 268 persons in the US. It must be hard to keep them all busy. I expect that why there are so many class action lawsuits and stupid garbage like this.

Posted by Gary, Oakland on March 7, 2009:

I seem to recall someone creating an obscene cartoon involving Goofy, Minnie, and/or Mickey, and being successfully sued by Disney because coupling obscenity with those pure-for-children characters was held to diminish their market value. It would seem that parody that could interfere with the income generated by the original is not defensible under the "fair use" exception.

This is the reverse, though; the publicity generated by your parody could be to their advantage. If Hasbro was clever, they'd turn the situation around and use your cards as promotional material to sell more games.

OTOH, that may not be fair use of your parody . . .

---

Profiting from a parody doesn't invalidate its fair use defense, but I can see that a court might rule that way in the Disney case: courts don't have a lot of sympathy for pornographers. -rc

Posted by E. J., Amherst, MA on March 9, 2009:

Gary in Oakland is referring to the Air Pirates underground comix case, which is described here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Pirates

Long, ugly, weird, unclear, and still controversial. One lawyer said the case set back parody law 20 years. And, as Randy has pointed out, uses that are arguably obscene are more likely to lose even if otherwise their "fair use" is on firm legal ground.

Posted by Loring, Redlands, CA on March 10, 2009:

Are you ready for a boycott?

---

Heh! Not yet. Let's see what they do with my response. They clearly "forgot" (in a corporate sense) that this had already been dealt with years ago. They could still do the right thing. -rc

Posted by Greg, Lexington, NC on March 14, 2009:

How about the readers flood Hasbro with emails and letters expressing our outrage at their 'intimidation' of the small business man? When Hasbro sees the large audience you reach and their support of you, maybe they will decide it makes good sense to back off.

---

No, I don't think harassment is a valid tactic. -rc

Posted by Rick, Chicago on April 13, 2009:

Posted by Greg, Lexington, NC on March 14, 2009:

How about the readers flood Hasbro with emails and letters expressing our outrage at their 'intimidation' of the small business man? When Hasbro sees the large audience you reach and their support of you, maybe they will decide it makes good sense to back off.

---

No, I don't think harassment is a valid tactic. -rc

Harassment - that's a little harsh, don't you think? I see it more like, "...the teeming masses [exercising their] right of free speech, to express their disapproval." Calling for a boycott and letter-writing campaign would merely encourage Hasbro to make the decision to stop harassing you "on their own". Wouldn't you agree?

---

Nope. Posting someone's name and address *invites* harassment. I have little to no doubt it would happen, so encouraging (or enabling) it would make me a party to it. -rc