Thursday, 12 January 2017

I am no superhero, no demigod, if I have no discipline, no self control, no will power.

Fasting day.

Finally took a true constitutional, theoretically timed to view the sunrise.

34th Ave. (8499–8501): vlog, dog, blurry jog.

74th St. (8502–04): “possible electrical condition.”

35th Ave. (8505): young man.

I avoided 35th Ave. because of bus brakes, but found the school‐bus brakes on 34th Ave. at that time of day almost as bad.

Basement storage, hand truck investigation (8506–09). Divided Nov.–Jan. receipts by month for logging and eventual discarding.

Unseasonable temperature in the 60s. Various items at 99¢ Up, Roosevelt Ave. (21:54). (See sticky note.) Poorly photographed attractive South Asian lad with friends (6197–6200).

“Closeups” of S’eed and Esti as I walked home from the discount store: I stopped to see the FD window advertisements and one started to be peeled down from behind as I looked at it, revealing S’eed’s lovely face, which would have made an amazing photo had I had any forewarning thereof; Esti and I looked right at one another through the DR window as he rushed towards me before turning to open a new cash register.

First off, the basic concept of “Santa’s ninth reindeer” may theoretically be in the public domain, but so is “Santa’s first reindeer,” “Santa’s second reindeer” etc. There is no attribute unique to the ninth reindeer without using one of Rudolph’s (copyrighted) attributes. In fact, L. Frank Baum gave Santa Claus ten reindeer, so Ready is really the ninth.

“Rudolph the Red‐Nosed Reindeer was created in 1939 … and his first appearance was renewed in its 28th year, meaning the name ‘Rudolph the Red‐Nosed Reindeer’ cannot be used without permission. However, an unnamed reindeer with a red nose (or a reindeer with a red nose and a different name) can appear in other works.”

This is incorrect. You’re essentially saying that the copyright protects the name (which it doesn’t), but that the character can otherwise be used however one wishes: So long as one attribute is left out (the red nose, the name etc.), then “technically … one couldn’t be sued.” This is groundless, even reckless, legal advice. Of course someone could be sued for using a copyrighted character!

“The earliest mention of the term ‘Santa's 9th Reindeer’ is in the 1964 special Rudolph the Red‐Nosed Reindeer ….”

Might you provide some proof of this? I found evidence of a 1950s radio program called “The Ninth Reindeer,” perhaps about Santa’s reindeer.

I believe Superman and Wonder Woman have appeared in works published by the US government that are technically in the public domain, but that does not mean the characters are in the public domain. It would be incorrect to create a page called “Amazon Princess” and tell people that the character of Wonder Woman can be used however one wants so long as the magic lasso is left out of the story and the name Wonder Woman is not used. “Technically, no one can own the name [Diana] so, without it being [preceded] by [‘Princess’] … technically … one couldn’t be sued.” Then I could list her real name in the info‐box as being “Diana (sort of).”

I recommend this page for speedy deletion. (02:45)

Perhaps he is “popularly (and … generically) referred to as ‘Santa’s 9th Reindeer’,” not that I recall ever hearing it. He’s even more popularly referred to as Rudolph. What does this have to do with the public domain? Superman is very popularly referred to as the Man of Steel, but he’s still copyrighted. That something is popular or generic does not automatically place it in the public domain. You can also name all the different aspects of a copyrighted character that supposedly cannot be copyrighted, but when you start putting them all (or nearly all) together, you enter the territory of copyright infringement. (But apparently you also feel “rip‐off characters” are appropriate for this site while I do not.)

Moreover, my writing on this talk page has nothing to do with languages in info‐boxes; I make edits of different sizes when I have time for them and writing here required more time for composition. (I was also not entirely certain what you even meant by “mere logging purposes.”) I have explained why I feel this Rudolph article is a bad idea, and if you don’t agree, you don’t agree. I explain things once and move on because they’re not terribly important to me in the long run. Take (or don’t take) whatever actions you want. (19:09)

If you want to have a rule that the names whereby characters are first known must not appear in any info‐box if they’re not in English, that’s your prerogative, even if it seems unnecessarily restrictive to me. We’re also not discussing every name a character might have in every language. Saint Nicholas was an ethnic Greek who lived in Hellenized Anatolia and, if I’m not mistaken, the earliest legends and hagiographies about him were in Greek. But whatevs. (19:27)

I will try to contain my excitement. 😉 (19:32)