Can I ask some legal advice?

[Lord Ash]

Hi all,

Okay, this place is full of smart folks, so I thought I would start here.

I've started up a little business making miniature soldiers.

We wanted to do a soldier that is sort of a not-Jedi, but we were unsure how to avoid copyright issues.

It seems that a typical Jedi outfit isn't too copyrightable... sort of samurai looking clothing. We were going to add a few somewhat non-Jedi things (armored gauntlets and shin guards.)

We were going to do a sort of "laser sword" which we were afraid might look too much like a lightsaber, but how do we know the difference between what is allowed by copyright and what is NOT allowed?

Anyone with some legal experience able to offer some advice on how to know what will and what will NOT anger the Mouse?

[PackMan97]

IANAL and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Express last night, this is not legal advice.

If I were making such a figurine I would stay away from the term "lightsaber" and "light saber". That could definitely get you in trouble.

[Lord Ash]

Oh yeah, in terms of vocabulary we were going to get FAR away from that... considering a "Solar Warrior" with a "Sun Sword".

[BD80]

The issue is quite literally copying.

The problem is that the Jedi "outfit" is rather ubiquitous and thus arguably of influence in your design choices. The combination of a laser sword with samurai clothing suggests Jedi.

Actually, Samurai wore rather different clothing than Jedi robes, so staying closer to authentic Samurai clothing would be advantageous.

For the laser sword, get creative, that is the whole purpose of the Copyright Laws, to foster creativity: come up with a new design for a sword using a laser powered cutting edge. For example, make it a samurai sword where the very cutting edge is a brightly glowing cutting laser.

[Lord Ash]

Yeah, I can do the uniform and get it done fine... its generic enough, especially if I mess with it a bit. Its the sword that is tough. Like... how can a company copyright "laser sword", you know? And where is the limit of what they can restrict? If it has a narrow edge, it isn't copyrighted, but if it is a "column" of light it is?

[wilson]

Yeah, I can do the uniform and get it done fine... its generic enough, especially if I mess with it a bit. Its the sword that is tough. Like... how can a company copyright "laser sword", you know? And where is the limit of what they can restrict? If it has a narrow edge, it isn't copyrighted, but if it is a "column" of light it is?

Maybe the blade isn’t made of light, but it glows in the dark or something?
Just spitballing.

[Jim3k]

Curve it like a scimitar.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

The Mouse is notoriously litigious, as is Lucas. Be very careful.

[El_Diablo]

It's potentially a trademark issue (specifically, trade dress infringement and/or blurring). The main test for infringement varies by jurisdiction, but in the US, the primary test boils down to whether the product's appearance/design creates a likelihood of confusion as to its source/origin (i.e., whether a consumer could confuse it with a Jedi or otherwise be led to believe that it is a Star Wars product). Blurring refers to the use of another's distinctive mark in a way that is not necessarily confusing but is similar enough that it would dilute the distinctiveness of the mark. Here is a brief synopsis on trade dress infringement I found via google: https://www.upcounsel.com/trade-dress-infringement, but I would formally consult a trademark lawyer for a more thorough analysis, as there may be other trademark or unfair competition issues, depending on a whole host of details.

Also note that, whether you are technically within the bounds of what is permissible, Disney could still go after you and make it a costly endeavor to demonstrate that you are on the right side of the law.

[Acymetric]

I have no legal background whatsoever, but in addition to checking with a real in person lawyer, you might just look around at other non Star Wars "laser sword" products to see what may or may not have been acceptable in the past.

[PackMan97]

It's potentially a trademark issue (specifically, trade dress infringement and/or blurring). The main test for infringement varies by jurisdiction, but in the US, the primary test boils down to whether the product's appearance/design creates a likelihood of confusion as to its source/origin

None of which stopped my mom from buying some goshdarned Go-Bots for my 10th birthday when she knew I wanted Transformers. I mean how hard is it to tell the difference between a Porsche 935 Turbo that turns into a giant robot and a Porsche 928S Turbo that turns into a giant robot! Parents. /smh I'm still bitter!

[JasonEvans]

The Mouse is notoriously litigious, as is Lucas. Be very careful.

Yeah, but they are only going to sue you if you are like really successful at selling these suckers. And I suspect they define "successful" different than how we would.

For example, if I made figurines as a hobby and I managed to sell 200 of them at $15 each, that would net me $3000 and I would be elated at my success. Disney can't even have a lawyer draft a cease and desist letter for $3000, I bet so I doubt they would bother to pester me about my "solar swords" or whatever.

Also, a sword that glows and emanates light is not exactly a creation unique to George Lucas' Star Wars world.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yeah, but they are only going to sue you if you are like really successful at selling these suckers. And I suspect they define "successful" different than how we would.

For example, if I made figurines as a hobby and I managed to sell 200 of them at $15 each, that would net me $3000 and I would be elated at my success. Disney can't even have a lawyer draft a cease and desist letter for $3000, I bet so I doubt they would bother to pester me about my "solar swords" or whatever.

Also, a sword that glows and emanates light is not exactly a creation unique to George Lucas' Star Wars world.

Well, I have a good friend who had a YouTube video of him playing the Star Wars theme on the banjo. It was in no way monetized, but got several million hits. He received a cease and desist from Lucas, with no money changing hands.

[Indoor66]

Well, I have a good friend who had a YouTube video of him playing the Star Wars theme on the banjo. It was in no way monetized, but got several million hits. He received a cease and desist from Lucas, with no money changing hands.

To maintain exclusive rights you must always defend the right

[Reisen]

To maintain exclusive rights you must always defend the right

This. I work for a big company. I'm surprised how often we defend IP rights even when the financial impact is negligible.

[cato]

Also, I doubt the incremental cost to the Mouse of ripping off a cease and desist letter is material. I don’t know if it would be handled in house or by outside counsel, but it would a fill-in-the-blank letter.

[Acymetric]

To maintain exclusive rights you must always defend the right

This. I work for a big company. I'm surprised how often we defend IP rights even when the financial impact is negligible.

Absolutely this. Some companies are not as aggressive as others, but Disney is one of the worst.

[Kdogg]

Absolutely this. Some companies are not as aggressive as others, but Disney is one of the worst.

No kidding. I remember 25-30 years ago, they sued a couple of day care centers for having Disney character on a mural. There was not financial impact to the Mouse House, just protecting the copyright. I think Hanna-Barbera stepped in and let then use their characters for free.

[OldPhiKap]

To maintain exclusive rights you must always defend the right

Yup, yup, and yup.

Copyright/trademark law is really fact-specific. If you are serious about this, I think you need more than free internet advice. Research close-by lawyers (look for an AV Martindale-Hubbell ratings, not crap like Avvo ratings) and get real advice. Be aware that this is a specialized field, so (1) there may not be anyone really close; and (2) it may not be cheap.

Probably not what you wanted as an answer, but FWIW that is what I would do.

[Rich]

Hmmm, trademarks, copyrights, trade dress...if only there were an attorney who frequented these boards who had expertise in the area. Hey, that's me! I've been handling non-patent IP work for over 25 years as in-house counsel, some of that time with the National Basketball Association, but most at a large pharma company.

Lord Ash, feel free to ping me privately and we can find some time to chat and/or I can see if I know someone in your vicinity who can work with you more formally.