On Tue, Aug 24, 1999, Nick Zales <zales[_at_]execpc.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Bob Cumbow <rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com> mentioned:
> >
> > ... the Seinfeld 'transformative use' case ...
> >
> > I grant that the Seinfeld case was wrongly decided.
>
> Never heard of it. Hasn't everybody heard of Wisconsin's
> "Seinfeld" case? An abomination were a miscreant worker used Seinfeld's
> low-brow humour and sophomoric innuendo to harass women, was fired by
> Miller Brewing and then won a $27 million judgment in a dog-and-pony
> show trial?
>
> What are the facts of your "Seinfeld" case Bob? What's the rule of
> law it spawned?
Somebody put out a Seinfeld quiz book ... trivia questions on the show and all of the episodes ... and it was held to infringe the copyright in the show.
Bob
Robert C. Cumbow
> Graham & Dunn, P.C.
> 1420 Fifth Avenue, 33rd Floor
> Seattle, Washington 98101-2390
> Phone: 206-340-9619
> Fax: 206-340-9599
> E-mail: rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com
> Website: http://www.grahamdunn.com/
Received on Wed Aug 25 1999 - 15:24:12 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:36 GMT