First, we're talking cross duristicion, since I was using the EU ruling above.
Second, I'm wondering if what that US page means is that a non-original work doesn't get copyright protections, or that non-original work is itself in breach of copyright? Maybe I should go digging to find out.
I agree deliberately designed digital worlds are artistic creations. Just that randomly generated ones are not.
You're probably right that legal examples on both sure probably already exist.
Yes, and you have copyright on the photo - not the layout of the plants and trees in it, nor even the angle of the subject. Someone else can go with a camera and take their own photo without touching your copyright.
Much like with digital files, the copyright is as it is a non-random transformation of a mostly replicable media product. People don't have a copyright on numbers, even if their 5000 trillion billion digit number happened to turn into a 1960s Disney short if you run it through the right compiler.
A Minecraft World isn't, not even if you draw on it with exploration as the world was generated from a random seed.
It is random, and unpredictable. You could maybe make an argument from reusing the random seed... But since the ability to turn the seed into the map isn't something a human can replicate without Minecraft I think it also fails the test for copyright.
Talky Toaster really didn't cope well with everyone being dead.
Though wasn't it the antagonist in one of the book versions?
Must be geographically limited as I don't.
I dunno, I credit Scream with getting me into horror, and it's hardly a genre known for being not-silly. Guess it's a little more thinky though.
Braindead is brilliant, as is Army of Darkness and What we Do in the Shadows, which is not horror, but is silly.
filled in depth discussion:
I think my main issues with TdD Vs. E is that I didn't feel any chemistry between Dale and the girl, which seems like it is meant to be a core part of the film. And then, after a good set up the second half of the film feels very paint by numbers, what happens and where they go dictated by genre tropes rather than what their trope inversion story needs.
It's probably just a comment on the way that slasher film protagonists don't get PTSD and keeping the film light, but the girl really doesn't seem to care much about her friends dying. And never has her relationship with Dale challenged by anything.
Then the antagonist being revealled to be the son of a hill billy and that that's probably why he's really a slasher villain undermines what was more him being a prejudice burk leading to his maybe friends dying.
There was a lot of potential with it, but I feel the film decided to inverse a tropey premise and then rather than fully investing in that scenario - hillbillies surrounded by fatal accident prone horny teens - and taking letting its results grow organically, the rest of the script just reached for as many slasher tropes as possible to cram in to make sure the "satirical take" part wasn't subtle, so even a bat with a blindfold and earmuffs on would be sure to "get the joke".
Tudyk and the other guy had great chemistry and their relationship worked, I just found it the only thing to make finish watching the rest of the film, and in the last 1/3 they get previous little screen time together.
Once the core conceit of the film is obvious, it doesn't do anything new, exciting, or interesting with it - just gore for its own sake. (Edit: this is probably exactly what you meant in your post by "too spoofy", so yes. You're right, it is and I am. Sorry it took me too long to clock your meaning. As Soccy himself told us "written words are hard".)
Now maybe I'm missing that the flat romance subplot or nature of the killer, along with gore without substance are high brow meta critiques on the state of horror at the height of the slasher era... And sure, I can dig that. But if you make a film that's deliberately weak in areas as a joke or comment on other films' weaknesses, you've still made a film that's not going to hold folks attention.
That said, clearly it's a very popular film amongst a lot of folks so it's probably me in the minority here. Thanks for giving me an excuse to organise my thoughts and present them. It feels better to get them out of my head in an organised way, and I'm glad you enjoy it as Alan Tudyk getting work that is a success is only a good thing.
So enjoy it, and don't care what I say. But for those of you who felt it was missing a little something... Well know you're not alone.
I'm glad you like it, as I think Mr Tudyk is grand I like to see him in things.
It's just not for me, and seeing a film I felt to not live up anything close to the hype always praised I felt compelled in this case to show a dissenting opinion.
You do you and enjoy it annually.
In no particular order (and yes some are more well known in film circles, maybe I should've ommited them, but you never know what the reader hasn't seen):
Jojo Rabbit, 2019 - a comedic coming of age in Nazi Germany. Jojo and his imaginary friend, Hitler, face a complicated and rapidly changing world.
The Mitchells versus the Machines, 2021 - animated family adventure for fun with the whole family.
Rise of Leslie Vernon, 2006 - mocumentary following slasher killer Leslie Vernon.
Bunny and the Bull, 2009 - an, in my opinion, gorgeously set film about two friends on a road trip in Spain.
Parallel Mothers (Madras Paralelas), 2021 - not a hidden gem if you know anything about Spanish cinema, but maybe you don't. Penolpe Cruz is a new mother whose life becomes intertwined with another women's when they give birth in the same hospital.
Hero (英雄), 2002 - again, if you know Wuxia film then this isn't a hidden gem. A pinnacle of the genre, a Chinese Rashomon with wire fights.
Blow Up, 1966 - British New Wave classic. A photographer used to a free and casual 60s life becomes certain he has accidentally photographed evidence of a murder.
Berberian Sound Studio, 2012 - exploration of sound and feeling. A mild mannered amateurish British sound technician gets a big job working on the sound effects for a giallo film in Italy.
Martyrs, 2008 - the pinnacle of French New Extreme movement. It made a big name for itself at the time for being the sort of torture porn film that really gave it a point beyond vouyerism. Not for the faint of heart.
Rye Lane, 2023 - a romcom love letter to London.
The Day Shall Come, 2019 - an eccentric black preacher gets caught up in a web of madness that runs deep.
Not enough (any) in client tracking of match results and what the match up was.
No way to really combo off. Let me demonstrate a loop and do it X times please.
An acidic heat
3.3ft (and that's a decimal .3, not an imperial .3).
You're welcome, and thank you too.
I agree with all that. The edge cases are tricky and there's no easy answer.
A painter flicking or splashing paint on a canvas presumably makes something with copyright protection.
Does an accidentally statically impossible basically impossible to tell apart version accidentally made by someone flicking and splashing their own paint infringe it? I'd hope not but can't really argue for a rule on it that doesn't involve believing stated goals/mind reading.
Guess not a thing us mortals/non-legal professionals can ever answer.