Wayans brothers rip off Bugs Bunny

[M2]

Not that I expect much from the guys who brought the world "White Chicks," but the new Wayans brothers movie is a direct lift from a 1954 Bugs Bunny cartoon called "Baby Buggy Bunny" in which a tiny criminal called Baby-Faced Finster plants himself on Bugs' doorstep and hilarity ensues. They've even listed the classic scene where the tiny criminal is shaving with a stogie in his mouth and sporting a tattoo on his bicep.

I've got no intentions of watching the full movie, but the advertising trailer makes it clear that the movie is a thefted idea from that cartoon. Here's my question, how has such a clear ripoff made it to the point where it's about to be released?

[NJReds]

Is it being produced by Warner Brothers?

[M2]

Is it being produced by Warner Brothers?

It's a Sony film.

[pedro]

It's a Sony film.

Aren't they all owned by the Illuminati?

Or was it the Morlocks?

[RBA]

Just wait tell you see what they do to "The Munsters". Now in production.

[savafan]

Just wait tell you see what they do to "The Munsters". Now in production.

The Wayans Brothers are doing the Munsters? :thumbdown

[gonelong]

They've even listed the classic scene where the tiny criminal is shaving with a stogie in his mouth and sporting a tattoo on his bicep.

Picked that out last night and mentioned it to the wife. Blatent.

I am sure others have noticed, but isn't Harry Potter just a kiddie version of Star Wars?

... kid grows up in crappy place with relatives
... finds out he has special powers
... fights evil
blah blah blah

[minus5]

[QUOTE=gonelong]Picked that out last night and mentioned it to the wife. Blatent.


That's funny, I did the same thing last night. She wasn't as appalled as I was though.

[Outshined_One]

I am sure others have noticed, but isn't Harry Potter just a kiddie version of Star Wars?

... kid grows up in crappy place with relatives
... finds out he has special powers
... fights evil
blah blah blah

Eh, there are structures to those kinds of stories that pop up in pretty much every culture. People like Albert Lord and Joseph Campbell (who helped Lucas out with the original Star Wars trilogy) have pointed out the various structures that tend to pop up in epic stories, with things like the descent into an underworld, the young naive hero meeting a wise old man who serves as a guide, and so on.

[Redsland]

Then there was the 2005 Johnny Knoxville vehicle, The Ringer, which was surprisingly similar to the 2004 South Park episode in which Cartman participated in the Special Olympics.

[StillFunkyB]

Then there was the 2005 Johnny Knoxville vehicle, The Ringer, which was surprisingly similar to the 2004 South Park episode in which Cartman participated in the Special Olympics.

I like nuts

[ochre]

Disney had few original ideas...

I'm guessing that the copyright must have expired on that episode, or they received permission from the copyright holder. If the copyright expires, I think it becomes public domain.

[Red Leader]

Disney had few original ideas...

I'm guessing that the copyright must have expired on that episode, or they received permission from the copyright holder. If the copyright expires, I think it becomes public domain.

I wonder if the copyright for the Uncle Pecos episode of Tom and Jerry has expired.

O-ooo-ooohhh...froggy wenta courtin' he did right....C-c-c-c-crambo...



I could watch that forever...

[cincinnati chili]

I'm guessing that the copyright must have expired on that episode..... If the copyright expires, I think it becomes public domain.

I guarantee you the copyright didn't expire. Copyright terms are something ridiculous now like 80 years beyond the life of the author. One of Sonny Bono's last big political acts (before doing a face plant into a tree) was getting Congress to extend the copyright act to some interminable length. Media companies had their nose up Congress' rear ends, and this was the product. There was a Supreme Court case (Eldred v. Ashcroft) about this and the "pro public domain" people lost.

Getting back to M2's point. The copyright holder has an automatic copyright to all "derivative" works. The question becomes whether this is a derivative work, and I don't know the case law well enough to know the standard. I would guess that a single reminiscent scene or two wouldn't matter.

One factor a court will consider is whether consumers will choose to go see this movie instead of buying bugs bunny dvds. That's just one factor, but obviously, it's unlikely.

[TC81190]

I don't know if it was derived from the cartoon, but the movie clearly has the potential to be the worst of all time.