Recently in idea Category

October 28, 2009

How Much of a Plot Can I Take?

battlestargalactica.jpgDear Rich: Even after intensive legal research (i.e., an afternoon with Google), I'm still confused about the applicability of copyright protection to plots. If I stay away from specific language, from specific characters and locations, how closely can I hew to the plot of a copyrighted work? For example, say I wrote a novel about a little orphan girl who discovered she was actually a sorcerer? That much is okay, I'm sure. Then what if she attended a special sorcerer school? What if she traveled to the school via a magic airplane at a hidden gate at the airport? What if she learned that her parents were killed by an Evil Wizard who was threatening to return? What if she played a magical sport for school, and was assigned into a dorm via the Picking Stocking, and befriended a gruff janitor? At what point, despite the fact that none of the words were identical, would immoral plagiarism of plot become illegal copyright infringement? The Dear Rich Staff must preface this answer by disclaiming any knowledge of books about sorcerers and wizards so if you just provided the plot of a famous book as an example, we wouldn't have any idea. (And what's a "Picking Stocking?" Is that similar to Pippi Longstocking? Please don't rip off Pippi!)
The Standard of Review. As for your question, the standard of review is best described by Judge Learned Hand in Nichols v. Universal Pictures in which the author of the popular play, Abie's Irish Rose, sued the producers of a movie, The Cohens and the Kellys. Both plots involved children of Irish and Jewish families who marry secretly because their parents are prejudiced. At the end of each work there is a reconciliation of the families, based upon the presence of a grandchild. Beyond that, the works had little in common except for ethnic clichés. 
The Abstractions Test. Judge Hand established a standard to separate the idea from the expression. He used the term "abstraction," which is a process of removing or separating something. He stated: "Upon any work, and especially upon a play, a great number of patterns of increasing generality will fit equally well, as more and more of the incident is left out." In other words, every narrative work is built around an underlying idea, in this case the basic plot summary. The idea may be similar to other plots (BTW, many people believe there are only between seven and 30 basic plots), but the author's embellishments -- the series of details and incidents that separate the idea from similar plots -- trigger copyright protection. Copyright only extends to each author's unique expression, not the underlying idea. 
Still in Use. Judge Hand's abstractions test is still applied for plots (and was even modified for application in software infringements). In Litchfield v. Spielberg a writer sued the makers of the movie E.T. -- The Extra Terrestrial. The writer claimed that the film infringed her musical play, Lokey From Maldemar, a social satire designed to "illustrate the disunity of man, divided by egotism." The district court applied the abstractions test and determined that the only similarity in both works was the basic plot line -- aliens with powers of levitation are stranded on earth, pursued by authoritarian characters and finally bid their earthly friends farewell. Again, these similarities (sometimes known as nonliteral similarities) are ideas and are generally not protectable. 
Our Takeaway Points ... Nobody but a judge or arbitrator can safely tell you whether you've taken the "expression" of a plot  or the "idea" of a plot, but you will likely run into problem if you have a high profile work and you're slavishly copying the plot (and/or  characters) of a well known work. For example, that's what happened in the copyright battle between Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica (Chaim Green R.I.P.).

Want more information about copyright law? Check out Stephen Fishman's The Copyright Handbook: What Every Writer Needs to Know.
August 21, 2009

Where Do I Find a Prototype Maker?

iStock_000008455365XSmall.jpgDear Rich: I recently developed a product out of need for someone that is severely handicapped. My prototype is working well for his needs, however, not attractive enough to market. Do I have to have the prototype professionally made to try to market it? If so, where do I begin? We're not sure what you mean by 'market.' If you are referring to direct sales to consumers, yes, you will need a professional prototype to serve as your manufacturing model since we live in a society where consumers take new product ideas seriously only if they are packaged and presented professionally. If you mean to market your idea to a company that will manufacture and sell it on your behalf (a licensing arrangement) then it all depends ... in some cases, the device's functionality may be more important than the form, and potential licensees may be willing to overlook the appearance (since they will deal with design themselves). 
Why Not Hire an Artist?
If you are seeking a license the Dear Rich Staff suggests that you consider hiring an artist instead of a prototype maker. Professional CAD drawings will provide a professional appearance for your product without the expense of preparing a prototype. As for finding a prototype maker (sometimes referred to as "model maker") use search terms such as "prototype maker"  and "model maker" at Google. You can learn more about prototype preparation here.
The Legal Notes
If you intend to seek proprietary rights to your product be aware (1) you have one year from the first public display to file a patent application or provisional patent application; and (2) you should enter into an agreement with your prototype maker assuring your ownership of the final prototype. You can find examples of these agreements in our book, Profit From Your Idea.
June 19, 2009

Idea to 'Monetize' Large Asset

iStock_000009054748XSmall.jpgDear Rich: There is a company that owns a large asset they have been trying to monetize for some time now. I recently came up with, what I believe is, a process that they can use to to do just that. After speaking with a few trusted friends who are consultants and non-IP lawyers they told me I should figure out how to protect the idea then try to strike a deal with the company. Is there some standard way to proceed in these situations? I have heard everything from contact an IP lawyer, send him two written outlines certified mail etc... to don't talk to the company about the idea over the phone. Thanks for any advice. As David Mamet explained in The Spanish Prisoner, there's no protecting a business idea if somebody is intent on conning you out of it. Start with the most important questions: What do you know about the company and what do you know about the people associated with the company? If they have a dubious reputation -- usually documented by lawsuits (and occasionally by movie scripts) -- save your time and money by moving on to your next big idea. If you do decide to pitch your idea, you can: (1) treat the idea as a trade secret and submit it only after a nondisclosure agreement is signed, (2) seek patent protection or 'patent pending' status (or at least have the idea reviewed by a patent attorney) or (3) submit the idea under the terms of an evaluation agreement in which case if the company later decides to pursue it, they'll grant a license in return for royalties. None of these will stop theft; they all provide remedies if your idea is stolen. 
What If They Won't Answer Your Emails?
Be prepared for the fact that most companies are wary of signing an agreement with someone they don't know -- or they may make you sign an agreement waiving any claims. This doesn't mean you can't trust them; just that they're suspicious of strangers. The best chance for success is to find a person at the company who will speak with you, or find a person who knows someone at the company, or find an agent who represents people in your position. It's only through these people-to-people contacts that any business will get done. There are some suggestions on how to pitch, an evaluation agreement, and an agent agreement in the book, Profit From Your Idea. As for the homemade protective measures like mailing copies to yourself, don't bother unless you enjoy the thrill of getting mail. Finally, the Dear Rich staff understands your desire to speak in current biznez lingo but 'monetizing' is inappropriate slang for making a profit. (Its actual meaning is more specific.) When making a pitch, we recommend plain English.
June 12, 2009

Sports Licensing: Is the System Rigged?

112108coffins2.jpg
Dear Rich: I have a great idea for a sports team related product and have started looking into a patent.  I looked into licensing and can't even believe that it's legal to put the restrictions on that these teams do. I don't want to cheat these universities and professional teams out of their money on these things but they make it impossible to make a new product, not similar to anything they are offering without going through one of their existing suppliers or having an exemplary record of mass producing products similar. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE LITTLE GUY? WHY CAN I ONLY SELL MY IDEA? WHY CAN'T I OBTAIN LICENSING THEN GET INVESTORS ONBOARD? THE SYSTEM IN LICENSED PRODUCTS STINKS AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. Ouch ... our ears are ringing.  We understand you're angry, but in the future, you may want to consider the intonation of your query before hitting the "send" button.  Okay, assuming your question is 'Why is it so hard to license products to a university or professional sports franchise?," the short answer is that as a general rule, the bigger the enterprise, the less that the enterprise wants to hear from outsiders, a principle sometimes referred to as "NIH." (As you probably know, sports licensing is a big enterprise .... so big that even reading about it can be expensive.)
Games.jpg
There is, however, a logic behind the closed-door approach of the sports licensing industry. Like the toy licensing business, sports licensing execs don't want to deal with strangers or companies that can't meet manufacturing numbers, accept legal requirements, or provide quality assurance. This is especially true in a depressed business climate when risk-aversion is the name of the game. (Although that doesn't stop sports-licensing of some crazy concepts -- check out the MLB-licensed "fan" coffins, above.) As you may be aware, the road you are seeking -- attempting to patent your invention, get investors and manufacture the product yourself (can you deal with foreign manufacturers?) -- is littered with unhappiness and bankruptcies. The Dear Rich staff advises that you reconsider the idea of pitching your invention (hopefully, patented) to an existing manufacturer or agent -- that is, a middle entity who already has cachet with the teams. That's the way many "little guys" get started in the sports licensing world -- by slowly building trust with existing companies. 
June 9, 2009

Board Games, the Bible, and Canada

Thumbnail image for boardgame.jpg
Hi Rich: I am a Canadian and in 1999 I approached a company (not a board game or toy company) to find out if they wanted to produce a board game. The prototype I sent them was based on a Biblical story and required that the player answer a series of questions to win. I have some emails from this company that I saved that clearly show that I was working with them on the game. After a year of having no contract and no clear answers, I got agitated and contacted the office manager (supposedly the employee's boss) and I was then told that since this company was not a board game producer, they would not be interested in pursuing this with me, but if I did have it produced, they would consider it. Long story short, this company along with their book publisher did in fact produce a board game for kids remarkably similar to mine, although there are some differences. The board itself looks very similar, and the strategy and method of winning are the same. Their board is in a different case and they use a "pop up" device but there are still many similarities. Is this a copyright infringement? Am I protected in Canada just having the idea or did I legally need to do something else to protect my idea?
  
Games.jpgThe short answer to your question -- to paraphrase Bob Dylan -- is that something is happening here but we don't know what it is. Your dilemma falls into a growing area of litigation known as idea-submission disputes. Whether your situation violates Canadian law (we're assuming you submitted to a Canadian company) probably depends on the following: (1) The circumstances under which you submitted your idea. (Was it clear you were making the submission for financial consideration? Probably.) (2) Whether your idea was sufficiently unique. (Have others come up with the same concept or are they likely to? That's a tough call since it's based on the Bible.) (3) Whether there is documentation indicating that the company intended to enter into an agreement or venture with you (or otherwise share revenue). (4) Whether what you provided was sufficiently copyrightable. (Did the company infringe that copyright with their game? Hard to tell without further investigation.) (5) The amount of time that has passed since the company first produced the game. (Did you wait too long to pursue this claim?) (6) Whether Canadian idea submission law differs substantially from U.S. law (according to this article, they appear to be based on similar Anglo-American legal principles). As usual, there are other factors, such as whether you can afford to hire a lawyer, whether you can afford to duke it out, and whether the game is popular enough to make the lawsuit worthwhile. (And of course, the Dear Rich staff suggest that you could always turn your experience into another board game.)