Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill..

For it is said by Biljo White <biljowhiteSTOPSPAM DeleteThis @yahoo.com>:

"Sure, it's legal. it's just a name."

There are artists who consider an initial boost to a career to be the
utility of a more familiar name. There was the case of the folk singer
named after the Dylan tune "John Wesley Harding" and there was also a Roy
Rogers and a Jane Seymour. And of course all those historical novels which
entrap you, or hope to, by plowing over famous ground.

But remember when Carolyn Cassady went Hollywood and so disgusted the main
Beat characters with "Heart Beat" that Ginsberg would not allow his name to
be used. He threatened them, and they complied, naming an obvious Carlo
Marx something else.
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill.. 

Singer John Wesley Harding may have named himself after the Dylan song but
Dylan in turn named his song after
John Wesley Hardin, a real old West outlaw/gunfighter. He killed over 40 men
but said he never killed a man who didn't need killin!'

It is illegal to use a character that someone else created, since characters
are covered by copyright law. If you wanted to write a book detailing the
further adventures of, for example, Kerouac's character, "Sal Paradise",
that would illegal (as is most "fan fiction" - though most of it is not
prosecuted).

Naming a character "Duluoz" with reference to Kerouac, even if you are not
actually using one of Kerouac's characters, seems to be in sort of a grey
area. It is probably OK, but it would be best to check with an attorney
experienced in copyright issues.

--

"Tremonius" <ulTIMum.DeleteThis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:_7cSc.17379$cK.15848@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
 > For it is said by Biljo White <biljowhiteSTOPSPAM.DeleteThis@yahoo.com>:
 >
 > "Sure, it's legal. it's just a name."
 >
 > There are artists who consider an initial boost to a career to be the
 > utility of a more familiar name. There was the case of the folk singer
 > named after the Dylan tune "John Wesley Harding" and there was also a Roy
 > Rogers and a Jane Seymour. And of course all those historical novels
which
 > entrap you, or hope to, by plowing over famous ground.
 >
 > But remember when Carolyn Cassady went Hollywood and so disgusted the main
 > Beat characters with "Heart Beat" that Ginsberg would not allow his name
to
 > be used. He threatened them, and they complied, naming an obvious Carlo
 > Marx something else.
 >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill.. 

Say velvet:

"Singer John Wesley Harding may have named himself after the Dylan song but
Dylan in turn named his song after John Wesley Hardin, a real old West
outlaw/gunfighter. He killed over 40 men but said he never killed a man who
didn't need killin!'"

He lied, which was the least of his crimes. He was actually a merciless
sociopath intent on counting coup with corpses. His own autobiog convicts
him. A racist who shot blacks and Yankees just for body count in
Reconstruction Texas, it's a wonder someone didn't plug him before Selman
did him in out in El Paso. A real bad hombre, no matter what Dylan sang.
(Dylan has a string of psychotic killers he tried to convert to victims:
Crazy Joe Gallo, Hurricane Carter, and Hardin.)

Nothing new about Wes Hardin lore for this boy. He was born in the same
small town in northeast Texas I was.

"It is illegal to use a character that someone else created, since
characters are covered by copyright law."

Is this so? I'm no lawyer, but I heard it differently. I read somewhere
long ago that neither characters nor titles could be copyrighted.

Anybody else?
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill.. 

"Tremonius" <ulTIMum RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:21gSc.17028$9Y6.9347@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
 > Say velvet:
 >
 > "It is illegal to use a character that someone else created, since
 > characters are covered by copyright law."
 >
 > Is this so? I'm no lawyer, but I heard it differently. I read somewhere
 > long ago that neither characters nor titles could be copyrighted.
 >
 > Anybody else?
 >
 >

Yes, it is true that titles cannot be copyrighted. I didn't say they could.

However, using someone else's characters in your own work is not generally
(there are exceptions) permitted under copyright law - this is most often
considered a "derivative work." An exception would be parody, which is
permitted.

You might find these links of interest:
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html" target="_blank">http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html" target="_blank">http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html</a>
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.clickandcopyright.com/articles/copyright_infringement.htm" target="_blank">http://www.clickandcopyright.com/articles/copyright_infringement.htm</a>

a search for something like "derivative works copyright" (without quotes)
would no doubt turn up much more information.

But getting back to what the OP asked - using Duluoz is probably OK, as long
as he is not using one of Kerouac's characters.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill.. 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill.. 

It does appear I was indeed wrong about copyright of character.

A story also is copyrighted, which can be difficult to judge, since most are
derivative at best. There are only so many plots, and plenty less than so
many in scifi. (Can you imagine holding the copyright to the story of the
computer that takes over or time travel?)

I have been curious about how real life, which means Kerouac's fiction, can
be protected. I know those who are part of newsworthy events are offered
huge sums for their stories. But I'm wondering of the excellent Nicole
Kidman role in "To Die For."

She plays a wife who forms a coterie of high school dropouts and one of them
at least becomes her lover and she uses that one to kill the husband she's
grown weary of. This is identical to the story of a real-life monster who
is serving life without parole for just that crime. And yet nowhere do I
see any acknowledgment of the story behind the movie.

This creepy seductress, named Smart as I recall, possibly would have to
admit she is guilty in a successful suit, which she is illogically denying
at this time. But it's a case of using a story from recent history without
attribution.

I can think of other movies which used the plots of books and stories
without attribution. I suspect they can do this because the print is old
and anybody going to these movies would be unlikely to have read them.


--

--
ulTIMus.DeleteThis@nerdnosh.com
"A collective of journalers since 1991"
www.nerdnosh.com
 >> Stay informed about: Is using "Duluoz" as a different character's last name ill..