- Japanese
-
Simplified Chinese (China)
-
English (US)
-
French (France)
"I thought that the creation belonged to its creator." Yes, Mr. Tagawa, you are right. However, the creator of this comic strip, Richard Outcault, unlike you, was an artist for hire, not a freelancer. In such a case, there was inevitably a difference in legal opinion about his creation.
"Well, wasn't there a provision in American law that dealt with such cases?" No, sir. Please take a look at this. This is "Katzenjammer's Kids." The artist of this went through the same conflict as the creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reason in 1913. As it turned out, the lawsuit wasn't a complete victory for him.
"Was it because the court ruled that he shall be prohibited from continuing this comic strip for another newspaper?" No, sir, that's not what the court ruled. In fact, the artist continued to work on the comic strip for the newspaper he switched to. The court ruled that he shall not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work. After the trial, he, Rudolph Dirks, continued the series under the title "The Captain and the Kids." On the other hand, after Dirks left the paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at the paper.
"Were the main characters in these two comics the same?" That's right, Mr. Tagawa. They also had the same names. It was just like in the Buster Brown case.
"That doesn't add up to me." Does it, sir? The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant ultimately involved ownership of the title of the work. It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rose years earlier. In short, this was a dispute over the ownership of the trademark, not about the main characters! Does this sound natural?
"Well, wasn't there a provision in American law that dealt with such cases?" No, sir. Please take a look at this. This is "Katzenjammer's Kids." The artist of this went through the same conflict as the creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reason in 1913. As it turned out, the lawsuit wasn't a complete victory for him.
"Was it because the court ruled that he shall be prohibited from continuing this comic strip for another newspaper?" No, sir, that's not what the court ruled. In fact, the artist continued to work on the comic strip for the newspaper he switched to. The court ruled that he shall not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work. After the trial, he, Rudolph Dirks, continued the series under the title "The Captain and the Kids." On the other hand, after Dirks left the paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at the paper.
"Were the main characters in these two comics the same?" That's right, Mr. Tagawa. They also had the same names. It was just like in the Buster Brown case.
"That doesn't add up to me." Does it, sir? The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant ultimately involved ownership of the title of the work. It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rose years earlier. In short, this was a dispute over the ownership of the trademark, not about the main characters! Does this sound natural?
- English (US)
- Italian Near fluent
A little unnatural
"I thought that the creation belonged to its creator."
Yes, Mr. Tagawa, you are right.
However, unlike you, Richard Outcault--the creator of this comic strip, Richard Outcault--, unlike you, was an artist for hire, not a freelancer.
However, unlike you, Richard Outcault--the creator of this comic strip, Richard Outcault--, unlike you, was an artist for hire, not a freelancer.
In such a case, there waswould inevitably be a difference in legal opinion about his creation.
In such a case, there waswould inevitably be a difference in legal opinion about his creation.
"Well, wasn't there a provision in American law that dealt with such cases?"
No, sir. (Perhaps add "not yet" or "not at the time" here?)
No, sir. (Perhaps add "not yet" or "not at the time" here?)
Please take a look at this.
This is "Katzenjammer's Kids."
The artist ofwho made this strip went through the same conflict as theOutcault creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reasonreasons in 1913.
The artist ofwho made this strip went through the same conflict as theOutcault creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reasonreasons in 1913.
As it turned out, the lawsuit wasn't a complete victory for him.
"Was it because the court ruled that he shall be prohibited from continuing this comic strip for another newspaper?"
No, sir, that's not what the court ruled.
In fact, the artist continued to work on the comic strip for the newspaper he switched to.
The court ruled that he shallcould not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work.
The court ruled that he shallcould not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work.
After the trial, he, Rudolph Dirks, continued the series under the title "The Captain and the Kids."
OnAfter the other hand, after Dirks left the original paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at thethat paper.
OnAfter the other hand, after Dirks left the original paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at thethat paper.
"Were the main characters in these two comics the same?"
That's right, Mr. Tagawa.
They also had the same names.
It was just like in the Buster Brown case.
"That doesn't add up to me."
DoesDoesn't it, sir? (I'm actually not entirely sure what the goal of this particular response is, so I'm not positive "doesn't it?" is the right answer. "Does it?" definitely doesn't work, though.)
DoesDoesn't it, sir? (I'm actually not entirely sure what the goal of this particular response is, so I'm not positive "doesn't it?" is the right answer. "Does it?" definitely doesn't work, though.)
The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant ultimately involved ownership of the title of the work.
It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rosearose years earlier.
It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rosearose years earlier.
In short, this was a dispute over the ownership of the trademark, not about the main characters!
I don't understand
@dorami_9000 Holy fuck! it's too long to read. The pics remind me of "Max und Moritz" btw.
- Japanese
- Japanese
- Japanese
- English (US)
- Italian Near fluent
A little unnatural
"I thought that the creation belonged to its creator."
Yes, Mr. Tagawa, you are right.
However, unlike you, Richard Outcault--the creator of this comic strip, Richard Outcault--, unlike you, was an artist for hire, not a freelancer.
However, unlike you, Richard Outcault--the creator of this comic strip, Richard Outcault--, unlike you, was an artist for hire, not a freelancer.
In such a case, there waswould inevitably be a difference in legal opinion about his creation.
In such a case, there waswould inevitably be a difference in legal opinion about his creation.
"Well, wasn't there a provision in American law that dealt with such cases?"
No, sir. (Perhaps add "not yet" or "not at the time" here?)
No, sir. (Perhaps add "not yet" or "not at the time" here?)
Please take a look at this.
This is "Katzenjammer's Kids."
The artist ofwho made this strip went through the same conflict as theOutcault creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reasonreasons in 1913.
The artist ofwho made this strip went through the same conflict as theOutcault creator of "Buster Brown" would experience, when he decided to move to another newspaper for his personal reasonreasons in 1913.
As it turned out, the lawsuit wasn't a complete victory for him.
"Was it because the court ruled that he shall be prohibited from continuing this comic strip for another newspaper?"
No, sir, that's not what the court ruled.
In fact, the artist continued to work on the comic strip for the newspaper he switched to.
The court ruled that he shallcould not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work.
The court ruled that he shallcould not use the title "Katzenjammer's Kids" in his continued work.
After the trial, he, Rudolph Dirks, continued the series under the title "The Captain and the Kids."
OnAfter the other hand, after Dirks left the original paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at thethat paper.
OnAfter the other hand, after Dirks left the original paper, another artist for hire worked on "Katzenjammer's Kids" at thethat paper.
"Were the main characters in these two comics the same?"
That's right, Mr. Tagawa.
They also had the same names.
It was just like in the Buster Brown case.
"That doesn't add up to me."
DoesDoesn't it, sir? (I'm actually not entirely sure what the goal of this particular response is, so I'm not positive "doesn't it?" is the right answer. "Does it?" definitely doesn't work, though.)
DoesDoesn't it, sir? (I'm actually not entirely sure what the goal of this particular response is, so I'm not positive "doesn't it?" is the right answer. "Does it?" definitely doesn't work, though.)
The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant ultimately involved ownership of the title of the work.
It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rosearose years earlier.
It was just the same as in the Buster Brown lawsuit that rosearose years earlier.
In short, this was a dispute over the ownership of the trademark, not about the main characters!
- Japanese
- Japanese
With HiNative, you can have your writing corrected by native speakers for free ✍️✨.
- What does "all over creation" in line 74 mean?
- What does “literal creation” in “particularly those who do not attribute the literal creation of ...
- I would like to know which is better or which is correct. I will send it to you after creating...
What’s this symbol?
The Language Level symbol shows a user's proficiency in the languages they're interested in. Setting your Language Level helps other users provide you with answers that aren't too complex or too simple.
-
Beginner
Has difficulty understanding even short answers in this language.
-
Beginner-Intermediate
Can ask simple questions and can understand simple answers.
-
Intermediate
Can ask all types of general questions and can understand longer answers.
-
Advanced
Can understand long, complex answers.
