Forum - View topicAdult Website Cosplay Deviants Relinquishes Trademark of 'Cosplay is NOT Consent' Phrase
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
v1cious
 Posts: 6238 Location: Houston, TX |
|
|||
|
I can't even believe you can trademark something like this. It's not exactly a unique phrase.
|
||||
|
||||
TsukasaHiiragi
 Posts: 179 |
|
|||
|
Sadly, you can trademark pretty much anything these days. Look what happened with the No Man's "Sky" case, since Sky TV trademarked that word, Hello Games had to pay them off.
|
||||
|
||||
Emerje
 Posts: 7432 Location: Maine |
|
|||
Even Microsoft couldn't do anything about their "sky" copyright. The original name for their OneDrive cloud service was SkyDrive until they were forced to change it despite being spelled out as one word. In this case I think if his reasoning for having the trademark are so noble then he should have kept it since the next person to take it may not be so well intended. Emerje |
||||
|
||||
|
valoon
Posts: 172 |
|
|||
|
that's the biggest bullshit i had to hear this month and the month only started...
|
||||
|
||||
Joe Carpenter
 Posts: 503 |
|
|||
|
Cosplay Deviants had a panel had a local convention I attended in 2014 complete with a panel discussion of "cosplay is not consent"
Most of it seemed like pretty common sense stuff to me, like asking someone before you take their photo and not grabbing or manhandling anybody, but evidently common sense must have been lacking for this to be necessary. It's a shame because cosplay should be a fun and safe thing, especially if a girl decides to dress in a pretty racy costume, she should feel safe no matter how much skin she's showing. |
||||
|
||||
Hiroki not Takuya
 Posts: 2736 |
|
|||
|
it seems to me that Mr Doerner is being a bit of a TM/Patent "troll". He probably found that the phrase was too present in the public domain before his filing and nobody was willing to pay his price or just told him to "get lost". I remember the panels at AX going back several years and if Cosplay Deviants was using it before the filing, legally they lost all rights to redress.
|
||||
|
||||
EricJ2
 Posts: 4016 |
|
|||
So, IOW:
instead of all the discussions of the bringing the issues forward that he hoped for, he discovered the fan conversations kept turning to the subject of what a greedy SOB everyone thought he was. Bummer. And the hypocrisy that it came from a cosplay-porn site (and a pretty darn amateur one, compared to some of the more professional out there) barely even entered the conversation, since the "Greedy SOB" topic kept being so first and foremost. |
||||
|
||||
BodaciousSpacePirate
 Subscriber Posts: 3024 |
|
|||
With what's been going on in the world of cosplay this past month, I wouldn't go around casting aspersions on anyone in the cosplay community unless I personally knew the dude. They're a pretty agitated bunch right now. |
||||
|
||||
Greed1914
 Posts: 4714 |
|
|||
|
I'm a little confused about the quotes in the article. Doerner said that he started the trademark process to keep it from being leveraged for profit. Leveraged by whom? Others besides his business? It seems like conventions were using it in a policy sense, and not to make any money. Or did he want to allow that, but prevent it from being used by other sites, etc?
|
||||
|
||||
|
BodaciousSpacePirate
Subscriber Posts: 3024 |
|
|||
His claim is that he started the website CosplayIsNotConsent.org with the intent to use it as a hub for advocacy (when I hear issue-oriented sites described like that, I assume that they are centered around curated collections of links to things happening on other websites, similar to the way sites like We Hunted the Mammoth operate... that doesn't seem to be the case here, though), but that some convention wanted to buy the website and use it - and the phrase "Cosplay Is Not Consent" - for marketing purposes. |
||||
|
||||
|
Lord Oink
Posts: 876 |
|
|||
Molesting is one thing, but you don't need permission to photograph someone in a public place. You automatically give consent to be filmed or photographed if you enter a place of business or are in a public area.
Please don't cite Polygon as a source, they usually report the opposite of what actually happened. |
||||
|
||||
|
BodaciousSpacePirate
Subscriber Posts: 3024 |
|
|||
Breaking the law =/= being an asshole |
||||
|
||||
|
SilverTalon01
Posts: 2421 |
|
|||
And taking pictures of people at a public event isn't being an asshole. It is just capturing the event. I guess anyone who has ever covered an event is an asshole because they filmed / photographed in a public space? Cosplaying in a public space IS consent to take a picture because simply being in public space is consent. Now could you also be an asshole / creep about it? Sure. However, it certainly doesn't automatically make someone an asshole. This also doesn't cover certain types of pictures like up-skirts which does make them a creep and in a lot of places is also not legal. |
||||
|
||||
|
Joe Carpenter
Posts: 503 |
|
|||
|
It's simply good manners to ask someone before you take their photograph.
|
||||
|
||||
penguintruth
 Posts: 8509 Location: Penguinopolis |
|
|||
Well, it certainly gets you a better picture. Generally, I disagree with people who complain about having their pictures taken at public events (though you can argue that a con you have to pay for isn't as public), but I don't want to make a big thing of it. You're not going to endear yourself to the cosplayers or get a good picture out of them if they don't want their picture taken. So there's no reason to make a fuss. Plenty of people will ALLOW you to take pictures of them if you just ask. It can be difficult for the more socially awkward to ask for a photo, but it gets the best results. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group