What to do about copyright issues

[~hellbaby~]

Can someone help me please? I have a story about Pinoccio taking viagra, every time he leis his dick grows. The problem is you cannot write abot Pinoccio taking viagra because of possible copyright issues. So here are my questions.First off, is the story even worth fixing? Can I rename the issues to something similar? Do all the other characters need to be renamed? Lastly, I'm not sure what catagory- humor/satire or reviews?
If anyone can help me I would be most thankful.
Here is some of the story.
thanks,~hb~,
~maggie



MOVIE REVIEW-Pinocchio Takes Viagra

By Connie Lingus



This is not the story you remember as a child. Producer Ivan Toby Fukinu once again surprises us with a new take on an old story. No one can take an innocent story and turn it into first rate smut as well as Ivan. Eaton Pussé makes his directorial debut in this campy romp. He emerges with a unique style that establishes him as a new and upcoming artist in the adult film genre. Clearly, this newcomer is here to stay.

.The talented Rubin Yordik expertly performs the puppetry. Rubin recently finished the off Broadway production of ‘Woodies with Woodies’. “Woodies with Woodies” is a dark comedy that required technical expertise in maneuvering the puppets penises. His talent won him national recognition as a puppet master. At first, this master debated taking on a film project, but eventually joined in.

The combined efforts of Rubin, Eaton, and Fukinu are simply orgasmic. This mélange of talent is sure to please everyone. Anyone who comes to watch is sure to leave with a smile on his face.

The plot is weak at times but the audience isn’t too interested in the plot. ‘Pinocchio on Viagra’ is clever and witty with enough sex to make you want to be a marionette.

As the movie begins, Pinocchio tells Jiminy Cricket he must run errands for Geppeto and will not be able to go see a play with him as planned. Later in the evening Jiminy Cricket overhears Pinocchio making plans with Tinker Bell on the phone.

“So,” Jiminy Cricket says to himself, “Pinocchio is lying again; he blew me off to go out with Tinker Bell. I’m going to teach him a lesson finally. When I’m through with him he won’t ever want to tell another lie.”.....

 

[oggbashan]

There should be no copyright issues with Pinocchio. The original story, not the Disney version, is long out of copyright.

Viagra is another issue. Viagra is a registered product name belonging to Pfizer's. If you used the generic chemical term instead of the trade name then you might be safe.

However someone has already written a story about Pinocchio's nose being used for sexual purposes so it wouldn't be original. That doesn't necessarily matter as long as your story works.

Og

PS. "Lie, Pinocchio, Lie! Bigger Lies!" Now!"

 

[LadyCibelle]

Mr Ogg is absolutely right in what he says. You should listen to him and take his recommandations at heart. His suggestions always make sense and it's easy to see he knows what he's talking about.

Listen to the man

 

[oggbashan]

I'm blushing.

I'm not infallible.

Pinocchio by C Collodi was first published in Italian as a magazine serial in 1881-3 and as a book in 1883.

The first English version was about 1898. BUT, and this is important, a modern translation of the original Italian can still be in copyright FOR THE TRANSLATION.

The 1883 Italian and the 1898 English are in the public domain.

Either base your story on the 1898 edition in English or on your translation of the original Italian. If your story is based on a book of the film you would be breaching copyright law.

Og

 

[Weird Harold]

There should be no copyright issues with Pinocchio. The original story, not the Disney version, is long out of copyright.

Viagra is another issue. Viagra is a registered product name belonging to Pfizer's. If you used the generic chemical term instead of the trade name then you might be safe.

The copyright problems with the posted sample stem from the names Jimminy Cricket and Tinkerbell -- which are Disney creations. Disney has a reputation for being sticky about it's characters being presented in a "non-family friendly manner" and has been known to go after even non-profit amateur authors for abusing their characters.

Pinnocio and Gepeto are fair game, but the Disney characters can be more trouble than they're worth -- although that doesn't stop a good many authors, including myself, from making use of them.

 

[Captain Midnight]

Pinocchio on Viagra?

"It's not his nose that grows in this one."

That was the tagline for a 1978 film called The Erotic Adventures of Pinocchio, later edited to an R rating and released in mainstream theaters and on homevideo (I saw it at a drive-in theater in the early eighties). In this case, Pinocchio was given the power of increased size in order to make love to "Geppetta", despite a number of ladies who were impressed by his equipment (and a very ticked-off Fairy Godmother who tried to get him back on track). It was played mostly for laughs, weak ones, and the old leering "sexploitation" stuff that was common back when nudity on celluloid, at least for people not in the grind houses, was still titillating.

So this particular story has been done before. You also might want to consider that Roberto Begnini directed and starred in his own version of the book, released to American cinema in 2004, so you might have some problems there.

I think you might just want to try another story rather than dip your toe in this particular shark tank. The idea is funny but not particularly sexy.

 

[~hellbaby~]

There should be no copyright issues with Pinocchio. The original story, not the Disney version, is long out of copyright.

Viagra is another issue. Viagra is a registered product name belonging to Pfizer's. If you used the generic chemical term instead of the trade name then you might be safe.

However someone has already written a story about Pinocchio's nose being used for sexual purposes so it wouldn't be original. That doesn't necessarily matter as long as your story works.

Og

PS. "Lie, Pinocchio, Lie! Bigger Lies!" Now!"

Thanks for the info, I think I'm going to go with my first instinct and throw it back into the pile of "stories I write or start to and never finish"

 

[~hellbaby~]

"It's not his nose that grows in this one."

That was the tagline for a 1978 film called The Erotic Adventures of Pinocchio, later edited to an R rating and released in mainstream theaters and on homevideo (I saw it at a drive-in theater in the early eighties). In this case, Pinocchio was given the power of increased size in order to make love to "Geppetta", despite a number of ladies who were impressed by his equipment (and a very ticked-off Fairy Godmother who tried to get him back on track). It was played mostly for laughs, weak ones, and the old leering "sexploitation" stuff that was common back when nudity on celluloid, at least for people not in the grind houses, was still titillating.

So this particular story has been done before. You also might want to consider that Roberto Begnini directed and starred in his own version of the book, released to American cinema in 2004, so you might have some problems there.

I think you might just want to try another story rather than dip your toe in this particular shark tank. The idea is funny but not particularly sexy.

AH, I and here I thought I had an original idea. Thanks for the info.

 

[bearlee]

The copyright problems with the posted sample stem from the names Jimminy Cricket and Tinkerbell -- which are Disney creations. Disney has a reputation for being sticky about it's characters being presented in a "non-family friendly manner" and has been known to go after even non-profit amateur authors for abusing their characters.

Pinnocio and Gepeto are fair game, but the Disney characters can be more trouble than they're worth -- although that doesn't stop a good many authors, including myself, from making use of them.

Even if it would be submitted under celebrities with the disclaimer and all?

 

[Weird Harold]

Even if it would be submitted under celebrities with the disclaimer and all?

Disney has the reputation of using intimidation and financial weight to "protect" its character's family-friendly image, so the disclaimers might have to be (expensively) tested in the courts.

There is some safety in numbers because Disney can't sue everyone, but a very explicit use of one of Disney's copyrighted characters in a pornographic situation is risky -- to both the author and Literotica.

The distinction is easiest to explain using Snow White as an example -- Snow White can get as kinky as she wants and Disney can't do anything UNLESS you use the names Disney gave the seven dwarves. The Names are a Disney creation and they can object to the use of those names as a copyright violation that damages the family-friendly image of the Disney version of the story.

The story of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves itself isn't Disney's property and many authors have retold it in various degrees of realism and adult content, but not using Disney's characters.

FWIW, J. K. Rowlings has a similar reputation when it comes to Harry Potter Porn.

Shrek II used a lot of parodies of Disney Fairy tale Characters, but they a) weren't explicitly pornographic and B) not copyrightable secondary characters.

PS: I used a Disney secondary character or two in a "fractured fairy tale" Porn story, but in a way that only a Disney Trivia fantatic would recognise the references -- mainly "Ambassador Major, of Charmingdale" who just happens to be hung like horse and works for Queen Cindy. That is IMHO a "fair use" of a "pop culture reference" because it is not a direct perversion of the Disney Character (the Horse turned Coachman in Disney's "Cinderella") but an oblique reference to the Disney Movie.

 

[snooper]

The copyright problems with the posted sample stem from the names Jimminy Cricket and Tinkerbell -- which are Disney creations. ...

Well I never thought I would see the day when WH posted something inaccurate.

Tinkerbell was NOT a Disney creation - J.M.Barrie created Tinkerbell long before Disney existed.

 

[oggbashan]

Well I never thought I would see the day when WH posted something inaccurate.

Tinkerbell was NOT a Disney creation - J.M.Barrie created Tinkerbell long before Disney existed.

But Disney linked Tinkerbell to Pinocchio so using Tinkerbell in a Pinocchio story could be argued to be a Disney trait. Copyright is a minefield once lawyers get involved.

Og

 

[bearlee]

But Disney linked Tinkerbell to Pinocchio so using Tinkerbell in a Pinocchio story could be argued to be a Disney trait. Copyright is a minefield once lawyers get involved.

Og

Fuckin' lawyers Oh wait, I'm one of those

 

[Mac_Flecknoe]

But Disney linked Tinkerbell to Pinocchio so using Tinkerbell in a Pinocchio story could be argued to be a Disney trait. Copyright is a minefield once lawyers get involved.

Og

I don't believe Disney linked Tinkerbell to Pinocchio in any copyrightable way. But the copyright on the Barrie characters is complicated, so one should be careful. (Barrie wrote both a novel and a play.) The copyright of a literary character is a complicated matter -- not all characters are subject to copyright protection even though invented as part of a copyrighted work. (Often greater protection comes under trademark law -- and the theprotection is greater for cartoon characters and no doubt enforced more strictly where sex is involved.)

BUt in practical terms, even where you might eventually win the right to use a character use by Disney, the fight would be more expensive than it would likely be worth.

 

[Weird Harold]

But Disney linked Tinkerbell to Pinocchio so using Tinkerbell in a Pinocchio story could be argued to be a Disney trait. Copyright is a minefield once lawyers get involved.

Actually, Snooper is right -- sort of -- that Tinkerbell is NOT a part of the Pinnochio story and Disney borrowed the character from J.M. Barrie. However, Tinkerbell outside of a connection with Peter Pan[/n] is a Disney invention -- and major part of the image of things like Wonderful World of Disney TV programs and advertising for the theme parks.

It might be Trademark infringement that they're so zealous in protecting, but the end result is an expensive battle in the courts over an unpaid amateur story.

 

[snooper]

Disney's habit of taking well-kown stories and copyrighting them is put into perspective by the attached image. It is a 700 year old fresco in a church in the vilage of Malta in Carpathia (a province of Austria). So the Disney copyright in Mickey Mouse may be invalid!