The Axanar debacle has had an amusing side effect - there's a battle for the soul of the Klingon language! I particularly like this bit of the amicus brief: That's right people, some parents were so fucking shitty and dumb they thought they'd raise their kid to speak Klingon. I don't know what the Klingon is for 'swirly', 'wedgy' or 'I hate my parents for the years of being relentlessly beaten up', but I bet that kid does! Red Room because you're all a bunch fuckwit p'tahks!
Yes, but what does it mean for a language to be someone's intellectual property? I don't know that there is any precedence. What are the implications for sentences said or printed in that language, or for a native speaker?
It's about contextual use IMO. This brief misses the point somewhat because it's concerned with the language only. But that isn't the only issue in the Axanar litigation. It's not just about whether or not Jim Bob and Mary Jane raise their brats on Klingonese. It's about how the Axanar production use elements to create something reminiscent of and derivative of Star Trek. For instance, pointy ears aren't by themselves limited to Star Trek. Neither is the name Vulcan. But when used together and in conjunction with other things like Starfleet, The Federation and so on, the overall combination is really what gives rise to the imitation of Star Trek. When you feature a language expressly created for Star Trek being spoken by someone dressed as, and referred to as, a Klingon in a production containing many of the other hallmarks of Trek, then to me it becomes clear that it's use is contributing to an overall derivative work based on Star Trek. I think that the Axanar defence and now this this intervener are concentrating on individual elements in the hope that somehow it unravels the tapestry. But in my opinion, even if the court finds that certain individual elements are not part of the IP when taken alone, that doesn't mean that the overall endeavour as a whole isn't still derivative and clearly based on Trek's IP. In my view, to not find that overall Axanar is a derivative work would be perverse. Not only do I think the thing speaks for itself, but it would create a precedent where pretty much no commercial entertainment IP is protected.
That makes a lot of sense. The separate question of what else would follow from someone's ownership of a language alone, while not decisive for this case, seems much more interesting to me, though.
Taken by itself as an singular issue, their argument probably has some merit....and if there were a copyright claim for the language by itself then it might be that Marc Okrand has as much a claim to it's copyright as the studio. But I think there is a counter argument that this particular language is being expressly created for a commercial product, particularly it it's alphabetic form. For instance, if someone started making heaps of cash on products based on Middle Earth languages I would be very surprised if the Tolkien estate didn't go after them, even if it's let casual use slide until now, as I don't see how it can't be said that using it as part of a money making venture couldn't be considered to be trading on the goodwill of the original product it was created for. Same with Klingon. The court will have to give commentary on the issue if the case goes to trial, so it will be interesting to see what it's view of this as a single issue, irrespective of it's overall decision on the litigation.
The owners of Star Trek permitted and endorsed books intended to teach the language. Can you copyright a language, especially after you actively encourage others to learn it? If I make up a clever word for something and other people start using it, can I go back after the fact and claim that the word is my property? Interesting case, and I can kinda see both sides of it.
I would say you can't copyright a language because then you'd essentially hold the copyright to all works written in that language, which would violate the rights of the authors who wrote them. Shakespeare would have been granted the copyright to his plays, not to Elizabethan English. Instead of a copyright being for a story, such a grant would be for a universe of all possible stories that could be written in the language. Perhaps it would be like trying to patent the concept of patents: a government authority or license conferring a right or title for a set period, especially the sole right to exclude others from making, using, or selling an invention. "I got the patent on patents!" But as part of the overall intellectual property, the language would serve as an example of the many story elements unique to the franchise that makes up the intellectual property, all the signs and indicators that you are watching Star Trek, not some other work of fiction. I could see a judge in some hypothetical case saying "It uses all or most of the elements from Star Wars, but with Legos. You should do Romeo and Juliet with Legos because Shakespeare is fair game, Star Wars is not."
How much of the Klingon language was actually createdd by Paramount compared to how much of the language was created by fans of the show? If granted, would Paramount only have a copyright over the pieces created through or by Paramount and not by the fans?
I have to agree with Space Jew, it definitely seems like Paramount is right on this. They hired a guy to come up with the language. The author should also have a right to the copy right.
Almost all of Klingon was indeed invented by Doohan, Okuda, and other people employed in the production of Trek. It isn't a fan creation to any reasonable extent.
True, but they invented it as a plot element, kind of like the brilliant idea of using German as a plot element in WW-II movies. As an element of a particular franchise I can see it as a supporting case, as it marks a work as being part of Star Trek, but I don't think a copyright can actually be applied to a language, or to a significant subset of a language. Futher, the key element of Klington isn't the language itself, it's the guttural sound. The audience doesn't actually speak Klingon, they read the subtitles. It's almost entirely filler, like R2-D2's beeps. Could Lucas get a copyright on computer beeps? If SG-1 could copyright the Go'uld language, they'd be copyrighting "Jaffa kree", but then why couldn't The Big Bang Theory copyright "Bazinga!" and the use of geek references? Finally, How1 would2 you1 even1 write3 when1 properly1 citing1 copyrighted2 text1?
Actually, Mark Lenard created the rough version by improvising gibberish in "The Motion Picture", then a linguist broke down the gibberish, and made it into real words for "Search For Spock" , and it evolved from there.
Yeah, both the original dialogue and The Klingon Dictionary were works-for-hire by Marc Okrand, so they'd belong to whoever paid him (unless he had a contract explicitly giving him the rights, but I doubt that). So any work written in Klingon would essentially be a derivative work. However, you might be able to make a case based on fair use. A fair use case is easier to make when the work is transformative (which, say, an original novel written in Klingon would be) and doesn't impair the original work's value to its creator.
You could extend that with a case by a child raised speaking Klingon. How can a corporation own the rights to every word that flows from the child's mouth without holding that the corporation essentially owns the child? ETA: I would argue that to be an enforceable part of the Star Trek requires more than one element. The rights to a film where the child speaks Klingon would depend on whether the child is talking about Federation ships and Ferengi treachery, or whether he's talking about SpongeBob SquarePants and going to McDonalds.
Perhaps. Axanar as a whole is not fair use though IMO, and this is the point was trying to make above. It's not just about the language itself, but how it's being used. Axanar is a clear derivative work. One which relies on the goodwill of the Star Trek franchise for funding, and one that has been used as a vehicle for the people behind it to earn a salary, build a for profit studio, sell merchandise and ultimately compete with the offices Trek by being a professional production. Fair use may fly if you're just writing love poems to your girlfriend in Klingon, but Axanar is so much more than that, and the language is just one constituent element of much wider derivation.
It seems to me that Paramount has a pretty valid argument. It suck though because Axanar looked pretty good.
Of course, no Trek writer has bothered to even use it for a good chunk of B&B's run, so this comes off as Paramount struggling to get Anaxar on something. I wouldn't have thought they'd really have to try all that hard, though.
As a for profit project the rights would fall to the copywriter holders because they are using it within a star trek universe. I think you could probably use the language without reference to star trek and it intellectual property as long as you varied it enough that people could not directly use the copywriter Klingon language to learn the language in your work. For example I do believe you could create a fantasy work where orcs spoke something very similar, but not a direct copy. I also think if you were just creating pure fan fiction you could do it as long as you credit the creators and do not make profit from it. It seems these guys are creating a production derivative of star trek cannon and you have to get permission by licensing it if you are going to add ideas to the cannon universe especially for profit.
I'm with Chup on the contextual use in the case of Axanar, I'm just uncertain why they're going down the road of copyrighting a language. It's almost certain to fail as it's too wide a scope and would open up a can of worms - just look at how precious the French are over their language, I could easily see the Academie Francaise try to use such a case to gain further control of it in the US. Although seeing Dubya in court, being prosecuted for stating the French have no world for entrepreneur would be entertaining Plus, the French economy may get a boost if the US has to pay them a few billion annually to use French words... Surely there are more subtle laws that could be used here? Copyright is a pretty blunt instrument.
That is why they have courts. It really is a case by case thing when you are rationalizing the ownership of ideas. We see a lot of copywrite law being tossed about and some of it we may not care for, but this is exactly why we have courts to argue it in. Both sides have their arguments, and they should be presented to a unbiased court for a ruling. It is what we wrote the
They have a lot to get Axanar on, but the lawyers for Axanar demanded a detailed account of all the various elements of Star Trek that Axanar is accused of ripping off, so they got it. Now they're picking through that very long list to argue technicalities, because they don't have a real defense against the bulk of it.
I believe there is an official studio sanctioned version of Hamlet and/or Shakespeare's works out there now from Pocket Books or similar.
Yeah, I don't think a major publishing house would touch such a thing without getting clearance from the studio. Even if Paramount couldn't secure copyright on the language, the legal bills associated with the battle over the book would eat up any potential profits by an order of magnitude, at the very least. I've heard interviews with the linguist Paramount hired to create the language, and he's said he made sure that there were no words in Klingon which were 'soundalikes' for words in any human language. He borrowed sounds from various languages, but he never put them into a combination where someone could claim it had come from their language. That alone should be enough for Paramount to get a copyright on Klingon in my non-legalistic opinion.
