Getting away with references without fearing lawsuits

[pap64]

Recently, it was announced that the Nintendo SNES game "Earthbound" wouldn't be hitting the Wii's Virtual Console store because the game has a lot of references that would be violating copyright issues. I read further what sort of things the game has that could spell lawsuit, and many of these were references to pop culture (like Sky Walker, a nod to Coca-Cola and using the Beatles' names as alternate character names), but were still considered dangerous enough to warrant a lawsuit.

Now this has got me thinking; how far can you get away with references in fictional media?

In other words, if I write a story, and I write that the main character's favorite movie is "Star Wars" could that be enough to get me to court, even if its just ONE mention that isn't elaborated upon?

What about real places being mentioned in fictional media? There was the fear that one would have to pay the city some sort of fee in order to mention real world places in stories (like if I wanted to mention the Empire State Building I would have to get permission from the city in order to use it).

Finally, how could Pixar get away with using actual "Hello Dolly" footage and songs in Wall-E? I assume they had to pay Fox and the creators of the film a fee in order for it to be referenced, but I still want to know how they did it.

[slave2moonlight]

I'm sure others will have some good answers to this stuff. I'll offer up some guesses, assumptions, things I've heard.

With using Hello Dolly, I'd think there'd be no question that PIXAR/Disney got the legal permission(in other words, paid) to use it in the film. I could be wrong, but I don't think you'd get in trouble or have to pay for just mentioning something. I honestly think anyone can do that.

I hope that last part is true, because I do pop culture references all the time in my comic strip. And there's no way Family Guy is paying for all the references they make on that show! And they go pretty far. Then you have SNL doing the Target Lady sketch or some ridiculously close to the real thing characters on Drawn Together (they did this episode of Popeye on steroids that I have no idea how they got away with). It's possible that that old line about being able to use anything for satire is what is protecting people with this stuff. I don't know. I hope it protects me too, ha, but at least I am protected with it too. My references usually aren't insulting or anything anyway, and I think with references that are just verbal or written, that's when you need to be afraid of being sued.

With visual stuff, I find it very confusing, because in some cases you pay to show them (in a film, for example), in others they pay you, but either way it isn't done unless someone is getting or giving permission/payment. Anyway, if someone can clear all this stuff up, I, too, would be very interested in the real details of the matters.

[pap64]

I'm sure others will have some good answers to this stuff. I'll offer up some guesses, assumptions, things I've heard.

With using Hello Dolly, I'd think there'd be no question that PIXAR/Disney got the legal permission(in other words, paid) to use it in the film. I could be wrong, but I don't think you'd get in trouble or have to pay for just mentioning something. I honestly think anyone can do that.

I hope that last part is true, because I do pop culture references all the time in my comic strip. And there's no way Family Guy is paying for all the references they make on that show! And they go pretty far. Then you have SNL doing the Target Lady sketch or some ridiculously close to the real thing characters on Drawn Together (they did this episode of Popeye on steroids that I have no idea how they got away with). It's possible that that old line about being able to use anything for satire is what is protecting people with this stuff. I don't know. I hope it protects me too, ha, but at least I am protected with it too. My references usually aren't insulting or anything anyway, and I think with references that are just verbal or written, that's when you need to be afraid of being sued.

With visual stuff, I find it very confusing, because in some cases you pay to show them (in a film, for example), in others they pay you, but either way it isn't done unless someone is getting or giving permission/payment. Anyway, if someone can clear all this stuff up, I, too, would be very interested in the real details of the matters.

That's why I want to know too. I plan on using very little references in my stories, but if I have to mention that a character went to New York and saw "Cats" on Broadway I don't want to worry about any legal issues it might arise just because I simply SAID it, not went into further detail.

And I think "Family Guy" and "Drawn Together" can get away with those references as long as they state its all parody and satire. But even then they do get pretty damn close to offending laws and I do wonder how they escape that.

[slave2moonlight]

Yeah, it freaks me out when they do something like Fred and Barney on Family Guy or that Popeye situation on Drawn Together and get away with it, especially when showing a character in a bad light.

Well, I wouldn't worry at all about including something like you stated in a written work. I think it is done all the time and you probably could even go into a little detail and not have a problem. Of course, I don't know for sure, but I don't worry about it myself. And I think Marvel comics uses real locals and other companies too, and I don't think they have to pay the city or anything. I think you just have to use common sense about what you saw or show. For example, I wouldn't be comfortable drawing visual references to pop culture subjects in my strip as I feel that is more protected (though I might sneak one in occasionally), but I don't worry about writing about it as that feels like Freedom of Speech to me.

[pap64]

Yeah, it freaks me out when they do something like Fred and Barney on Family Guy or that Popeye situation on Drawn Together and get away with it, especially when showing a character in a bad light.

Oh, people have done MUCH worse, especially in the name of art.

There was an English art show which had very gory and violent representation of Looney Tunes characters, showing real world violence would affect a cartoon universe. And he showed the ACTUAL characters.

Again, when does the satire end and the violations begin?

[slave2moonlight]

Yeah, with art it seems you really can get away with anything, and perhaps that's why it seems like you can with writing and cartoons too. I mean, couldn't that stuff be called art? Ha.