Boing-Boing is one of my favorite web-sites out there on the ole' intraweb...however, I think that they can, and do, get themselves worked up into a frenzy over the wrong things from time to time.
This, I think, is one of them.
Did DC and Marvel Comics create the term super-hero? No, probably not. However, did they not invest a lot of time, money and effort into the development of the concept of the super-hero? Certainly. Very much so, I think, and without any sort of argument. Yes, there are other comic book companies out there and, yes, they do super-hero books. However, if it hadn't been for the effort of those two companies over the last three-quarters of a century or so there really wouldn't be the concept of "super-heroes" as we know it for other sources to "exploit." I think that this deserves them more than a little consideration on the topic of trademarking the term super-hero.
Personally, I have no trouble with it and no issues at all with those companies owning a trade-mark on the word. Will this stop others from making super-hero comics? Let's ask Charlton, Fawcett, Image, Dark Horse, Valiant, and all of the multitude of greater and lesser known Independent Comic Publishers out there....hm, I guess that they can still make super-hero comics. With or without being able to directly use the term super-hero.
Frankly, the argument put forward by Cory Doctrow in this post is less than engaging. And I find it a bit asinine to be completely honest. In this case ownership of a word does not equal ownership of that concept. Whoever owns the word, it will not mean that super-hero comic books, movies, novels or role-playing games will fade away (or even be oppressed).
Don't they have something valid and worthwhile to argue about, like Sony and their draconian DRM measures?
Boing Boing: Marvel Comics: stealing our language
"Marvel Comics is continuing in its bid to steal the word 'super-hero' from the public domain and put it in a lock-box to which it will control the key. Marvel and DC comics jointly filed a trademark on the word 'super-hero.' They use this mark to legally harass indie comic companies that make competing comic books."
I am sure that this will end up being an unpopular post (if it is noticed at all in the great noise-to-signal ratio of the Internet). However, this last sentence that I quoted above is complete and utter horse-crap. Do I care if my saying that pisses folks off? Not in the least...the nice thing about the world today is that we still have the voice with which to speak up on dissenting viewpoints. I'm not usually this ranty but this post just struck me as dumb-headed and naive.
[By the way, if you decide to comment on this post...please, please, please do so. This blog is Moderated, but that is only because I receive so damn many spam comments that it is the easiest way to combat them. I never delete a comment because I don't agree with it.]
This, I think, is one of them.
Did DC and Marvel Comics create the term super-hero? No, probably not. However, did they not invest a lot of time, money and effort into the development of the concept of the super-hero? Certainly. Very much so, I think, and without any sort of argument. Yes, there are other comic book companies out there and, yes, they do super-hero books. However, if it hadn't been for the effort of those two companies over the last three-quarters of a century or so there really wouldn't be the concept of "super-heroes" as we know it for other sources to "exploit." I think that this deserves them more than a little consideration on the topic of trademarking the term super-hero.
Personally, I have no trouble with it and no issues at all with those companies owning a trade-mark on the word. Will this stop others from making super-hero comics? Let's ask Charlton, Fawcett, Image, Dark Horse, Valiant, and all of the multitude of greater and lesser known Independent Comic Publishers out there....hm, I guess that they can still make super-hero comics. With or without being able to directly use the term super-hero.
Frankly, the argument put forward by Cory Doctrow in this post is less than engaging. And I find it a bit asinine to be completely honest. In this case ownership of a word does not equal ownership of that concept. Whoever owns the word, it will not mean that super-hero comic books, movies, novels or role-playing games will fade away (or even be oppressed).
Don't they have something valid and worthwhile to argue about, like Sony and their draconian DRM measures?
Boing Boing: Marvel Comics: stealing our language
"Marvel Comics is continuing in its bid to steal the word 'super-hero' from the public domain and put it in a lock-box to which it will control the key. Marvel and DC comics jointly filed a trademark on the word 'super-hero.' They use this mark to legally harass indie comic companies that make competing comic books."
I am sure that this will end up being an unpopular post (if it is noticed at all in the great noise-to-signal ratio of the Internet). However, this last sentence that I quoted above is complete and utter horse-crap. Do I care if my saying that pisses folks off? Not in the least...the nice thing about the world today is that we still have the voice with which to speak up on dissenting viewpoints. I'm not usually this ranty but this post just struck me as dumb-headed and naive.
[By the way, if you decide to comment on this post...please, please, please do so. This blog is Moderated, but that is only because I receive so damn many spam comments that it is the easiest way to combat them. I never delete a comment because I don't agree with it.]