Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cwruecmp!neoucom!wtm
From: wtm@neoucom.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: There's No Fun At Pixar
Message-ID: <649@neoucom.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Aug-87 00:24:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: neoucom.649
Posted: Mon Aug 10 00:24:28 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Aug-87 01:37:10 EDT
References: <1681@cadovax.UUCP> <921@hp-sdd.HP.COM> <24931@sun.uucp>
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Lines: 49
Summary: Leo's animation was original art


I really doubt that Pixar can really do much to Leo for his unicyle
animation that is similar to a scene from Pixar's "Red's Dreams".
Visual copyright laws are, unfortunately, pretty flabby and
difficult to enforce unless two artistic products are virtually
identical.  That is to say that a photo transparency of Leo's scene
when place over a photo transparency of Red's Dreams placed one
over the other and held up to the light wouldn't show any
differences.  Text book illustrators often get away by adding a few
embelishments to a figure from a different text and get away with
publishing without attributions.

Its amusing that Pixar would acknowledge that something created on
a lowly Amiga could challenge the output from their $$$ machines
and bevy of employees.  It seems that in effect, Pixar is
admitting inferior design and performance.  If I had $$$ pixar
equipment, I'd be annoyed that Pixar is suggesting a $2K Amiga can
do as much.  Seems like a poorly thought out piece of Publicity on
Pixar's part.  If a suit were filed and Pixar won, it seems that
Pixar would be open for [possibly legal] complaints from its
customers for not providing appropriate bang for the $$$ buck.

Its a pretty nice compliment for Amiga that the big guys can be
upset by such a modest machine!

Number one, I think that it would be pretty difficult for Pixar to
claim damages becuase Red's Dreams is not for sale, and I doublt
that they could substantively prove that sales of Pixar computers
declined as potential users switched to Amigas 8 :-).  The argument
of Leo's demo being an inferior copy being mistaken for the "real
thing" (R's D) and thus discrediting Pixar's reputation probably
wouldn't wash.

Number two, Leo could claim that his work is a parody.  Grant
Woods' "American Gothic" is copyrighted.  That is the "Green Acres"
painting of a man with a pitchfork and woman in front of a house.
Note that Green Acres' opening shot is a parody of that.  There are
a lot of lampoonish paintings of Woods' painting around whose
authours aren't worried.

Pixar reads this net.  I hope they have already applied the
appropriate 40 lashes with the mandatory wet noodle to the spoil-
sports in their carde.

By the way, I'm not a lawyer.  The usual disclaimers about opinion
versus fact apply to the above ranting.  Way to go.

  --Bill
(wtm@noeuocm.UUCP)