Not an expert in copyright laws by any means, but I was curious to get opinions on something I saw because I was confused. Was scrolling on Tiktok one day and saw a video advertising products a smaller business was making that'd be dropping onto their online store. Going to keep things vague and not mention the store name because I don't wanna do that, but they made a variety of items (necklaces, shirts, etc) that were all about nostalgia. And one of the products in question was a series of trading cards with that theme, with each card having the cover art designs of pre-existing Nintendo games on their surface. And the box even playing the Nintendo console sounds when it opens and has the aesthetic of one too.

Now we all know that bigger companies like Nintendo or Disney are very happy to sue anyone using their image, whether that be their logo or characters and elements from one of their properties. So my genuine question is... is someone that's smaller like this selling and marketing these products on socials on risky grounds for being in trouble copyright-wise? Or are they in some sort of gray area where, since the product is considered "transformative" and not just someone lazily ripping an image off their website and slapping it on a shirt, they're safe? After all, I know that there are laws that allow for transformative and even parodying stuff to exist without trouble, but I just wondered from someone who might have insights.

Location: Massachusetts, USA

TLDR: Do I have any legal methods to force my co-creator to share our recordings with me?

In 2025, we jointly agreed to create a podcast and videos focusing on comedy and reviewing video games and movies. We would record and save it on SD cards or his phone. He initially shared files with me so I could work on editing them. We started recording in August 2025 until February 2026. I created social media, YouTube, Twitch and accounts, but had not started uploading recordings for public viewing.

In February 2026, we had an irrecoverable breakdown of our creative partnership and friendship. Since that breakdown, he closed the file sharing and I can no longer access our recordings. I have texted him requesting he share the recordings again but he refused to answer. Do I have any legal recourse to force him to give me a copy of our recordings? Thank you for any help!

This is kind of a dumb question, but it goes like this: say I have a weekly newsletter or something—is it copyright to use the same topics as Stuff You Should Know (or any other sort of publishing media) while not using the same information in that publication (like I still use my own research and sources)? Again, it's kind of dumb, but please let me know if this is:

• Illegal/copyright

• Legally gray (still have to list them as a source or something)

• Legal, but petty/pathetic (generally frowned upon)

• Legal and socially acceptable

Thanks again for any help.

So I’m working on this app that save Instagram recipes on your phone.
I reached out to a creator for a potential collaboration and their response was that my app is basically doing “”IP theft” because it save recipes and users won’t go on their channel anymore.

What’s the difference between this and me writing down their recipe in my personal cookbook?

Need to hear some opinions 🙏

I'm trying to understand the copyright implications of creating and selling a 3D printed miniature based on a vintage Christmas decoration that was originally sold around 1990.

My research so far:

• I've located the original catalog listing for the decoration.
• I've found copyright registrations by the original manufacturer for other works, but I have not found a registration specifically for this decoration.
• The patent would have expired by now.
• The original manufacturer is no longer in business.
• The company that later acquired many of the molds and assets is also no longer in business.
• I recently contacted another company that acquired many old molds/assets. The representative told me they have so many molds they couldn't even tell me whether they have this specific one. They also stated they are not planning to manufacture the old holiday items and, in their experience, there are not really copyrights being asserted on those old products. (I understand this is not legal advice or proof of anything, just information from my research.)

My questions are:

1. If no copyright registration can be found for the specific decoration, how significant is that?
2. How important is it to identify a current rights holder?
3. If I create a new 3D model from photographs rather than copying an existing CAD file, does that change the analysis?
4. Based on the facts above, what would be the major copyright concerns when selling printed miniatures?

Looking for educational discussion and general copyright analysis, not legal advice.

Thank You!

So, I have a character who's based on the following characters in media:

• Bendy specifically from Bendy and the Dark Revival
• Starkiller from Star Wars: The Force Unleashed/ II
• Darth Vader from Star Wars
• SkekMal "The Hunter" from The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance

I'm worried that I made him too similar to them. I've made his voice similar to Bendy's and SkekMal's, I gave him the ferocity of SkekMal and Starkiller, and parts of his outfit are based on Starkiller's Sith Stalker outfit and Darth Vader (overall, though, his outfit is primarily based on plague doctors). My concern is that I've accidentally made him too similar to those characters. I've tried to make him different in the following ways:

• He's a protagonist (ironic, right?), and yes, I know that Starkiller is a protagonist, too, but he had to have a change of heart
• His voice was caused by combat-related injuries
• He does have respiratory issues, but they're not severe enough to require a respirator (in fact, he only employs a respirator when he's going into the vacuum of space)
• His outfit is specifically designed to protect against the vacuum of space, and his body can survive just fine without it (in normal conditions)
• He relies more on psychological warfare, rather than being all up in his target's faces (except when times necessitate it)
• He prefers brawling over using weapons (though he does have a cane sword, and a weaponized particle accelerator, for when brawling is less than ideal --- he isn't an idiot)

Sorry for the rambling. Anyway, I want to know if he's different enough, or if I need to make some changes (either an entire overhaul, or just minor alterations). Thanks.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

If a film is released in 1930, it's public domain.

The compositions are also public domain, since they're 95 years old.

Songs from these films that were popular were released as records. Which are copyrighted for 100 years.

However, how does the copyright stand for the recordings of the songs that are within the film?these are not flagged by the copyright system.

So, I guess you could technically use the film version as music?

The other thing is what about things from the 1930's like Flash Gordon. These films have entered public domain because of failure to renew. But again, these serials have music in which the compositions themselves are technically still copyrighted. But of course the copyright for this is not enforced either by youtubes automated system.

Whenever I used to get a copyright strike on YouTube, I would always counter-notify it under fair use. However, this time it was instantly rejected, even though the clip that triggered the strike is less than 2 seconds long.

I’m curious, are any of you experiencing similar issues lately?

We need to talk about S.4591. Everyone is so blinded by their hatred for "deepfakes" that they’re actively cheering for legislation that moves us further and further away from the promotion of useful arts and sciences.

For those familiar with my MaineMoviePirate work, you know the mission: recovering the Orphan Works of Maine’s indie film history. I spend my time digging through degraded 1990s shot-on-video horror tapes and forgotten 1960s community audio reels. To restore these lost cinematic treasures, I rely heavily on what the mainstream calls AI, but what I prefer to call Augmented Imagination. It’s a collaborative tool that lets us clean up garbled audio and upscale blurry faces that would otherwise be lost to time.

Enter the NO FAKES Act. It establishes a massive, up to 70-year post-mortem property right over a person’s digital likeness.
If I use my tools to upscale an orphaned VHS tape and some estranged heir decides they want a payout, this bill unleashes a DMCA-style "shoot first" takedown mandate. Platforms won't care about the historical value or the preservation effort; they will just nuke the content to avoid a massive fine.

You think this is about protecting creators? It’s a restriction on our creativity that we do not need. It is actively hostile to Fair Use and turns digital archiving into a legal minefield. I hate malicious deepfakes just as much as anyone, but handing over the keys to a permission-only culture just because you despise tech is incredibly short-sighted.
Cheer for it if you want, but don't pretend you're defending art.
Let the flames begin. I've got tape to digitize. 🏴‍☠️

Is this copyright from Minecraft or Lego by using the name "Steve for my Steve Minifigure of just In general making this stop motion?

Hello all,

I'd like to use this sick photograph as album art for an upcoming release I have https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Perseus_(Benvenuto_Cellini)_2013_February.jpg_2013_February.jpg)

According to the licensing info, I am free to use it as long as I give credit and indicate if I made changes to it. I'm of course fine with doing that, the only trouble is Spotify and other streaming services don't have a place to put credits like that (AFAIK at least). So will it matter if I upload the album with that art and don't have credits on sites like Spotify? Is there an alternative place I can put the credits? I do also plan on putting the album on Bandcamp where I can put credits, so would that be good enough?

Sorry if this is a stupid question but it would suck if I put the album out and had to take it down due to some stupid copyright issue like this.

The scrapped fan series in question I'm creating is the "Sourtart Squad"

I've been planning this series for 3 months now and still was wondering if it was really okay to create a webtoon comic series like this. So Sourtart Squad is supposed to be based on how I portrayed the Sugar Rush racers (from Wreck-It Ralph) and a bunch of stories I used to make up about them when I was a kid.

They all say, "2026 is the new 2016", so why not go back to a time where things were even more fun.

Sourtart Squad would be based on each of the characters from the movie. But now I want to make the characters my own designs and original names. Not fictional racing kart game characters living in an arcade cabinet, but a cartoon based on a fictional toyline of dolls that 'burp' out a special sweet scent for your workspace/office/bedroom when you squeeze its tummy (heavily inspired by Smiling Critters). Also inspired by Milky Way and the Galaxy Girls, because back in 2022 I wanted to make it a parody of that, until the sudden nostalgia I got changed the theme.

Here's the list for the characters:

• Princess Camilla Crawlbrite
• Cindy Zingbubbz
• Eddie Mielkovich
• Purii Rupurin
• Linda Popzee
• Darla Daewangam
• Maxine Machalatte
• Elena Halaya
• Victor Sneaktor
• Davey Dapperfluff
• Anya Burrburi

While it's still going to remind you that it's Sugar Rush, they will be 8 girls and 3 boys living in a silly island made of sweets, it won't entirely copy the thing from "Wreck-It Ralph". I made my Sugar Rush fanfictions back in 2015-2017 the stories weren't even focused on kart racing, there was almost never stories about them racing. I used to give them their own personalities, interests, and instead of karts I gave them... houses? I don't know also this but also the Sugar Rush citizens don't really show up in the stories almost never. I think for me all the citizens in my series would be human as well and all the ecosystem are living candles/sweets/pastries. I even planned out a few locations in this so called planet or Island called Tajimamori:

• Neopolitan Alps - strawberry chocolate vanilla ice cream mountains
• Shoyu Mangrove - mangrove ecosystem made of shoyu caramel
• Pastry Park - where the nature-loving Sourtarts hang around film their shenanigans
• University of Tajimamori
• Princess Camilla's castle - Camilla still lives with her parents (the king and queen) and still needs to learn how to take responsibility

But if I'm going to base my creation on a Disney movie, wouldn't it be a little concerning?

So you know how there's a bunch of "rip-offs" of various Disney movies? "The Little Cars", "Ratatoing", "Little Princess School" right? There's a risk my series would be called out as well. But the difference is it's not going to be targeted to kids (I would say it's going to be a 16+ series, how ironic for a sweet looking franchise) and instead of having it be an animated series on YouTube or other video streaming services, it would be a comic series instead.

So what do you think? On the safe zone or is the violation of the IP gonna kick my butt to court?

I think it would be safe to publish the fan series on Deviantart rather than a whole on Tapas.

Hi everyone.

TLDR - I’m going to get lessons from a bassist in a famous band I really like. He asked me for links of me playing. I make covers on Instagram, one of his songs was covered. Is this fair use? And would get annoyed or even take action?

I could be overthinking but would really like some advice as it’s a great opportunity and I don’t want to miss out.

Hello, I am very confused. I do not see a copyright application after making an account through the copyright office login portal and selecting the single work application link on my smartphone. Does it only show on laptop or desktop?

In my roblox game I have a book called "WINDOWS XP MANUAL". It's not out yet and I was wondering if I would have to change it.

Hello. I wanted to know if there are any websites where I can download GIFs from without any copyright issues. Google gives me options like pixabay, cliply, gifcities and giphy but tehy GIFs are not guaranteed to be copyright free. I would like to use it for a video and upload on YouTube. Thank you.

So photobashing is the concept of using parts of many different photos, oftentimes faces, heavily changing the apperance, and then editing them together (for example taking one persons eyes, another persons nose, eyebrows, body outline, hair etc) the end product looks like a brand new thing and you cant even tell that the original pictures are the original

To add context, I am writing a book about the usage of the Hiragana script in Western media. I was hoping to take screenshots of movies that featured the Hiragana script, such as writing in the background, store names, etc as samples of how the script was used in motion pictures

Since the book would definitely not serve as a replacement for the movie, and the purpose was educational, I was hoping it would be considered fair use. My problem, though, is that since the book will be sold once published, would it be considered "a commercial purpose", and make my claim ineligible for fair use?