Does copyright law apply to kung fu forms?

[Fu-Pow]

Some of the discussions from other threads got me thinking. If you can copyright a song, film or written work then could you copyright a sequence of movements ie a form? It seems as though it could count as "intellectual property."

That way anytime someone performed one of "your" sets, at least in public, then you could demand a royalty fee. I know Judge Pen reads this forum, perhaps he has some idea.

[Ou Ji]

Sounds like a possibility but if it were true there would be a mass of applications trying to corner the market on the well known forms. Would you have to proove some type of ownership or could you register them like you do with domain names, first one gets it. Then sell to the highest bidder. Schools would be forced to buy their own forms back. Can't imagine that ever being allowed.

I would think that only the original creator could claim ownership and all those guys are pretty much dead so I don't see it going anywhere. How would you prove you are the legitimate owner if not the creator?

[David Jamieson]

I'm only guessing, but I'd have to say no you can't copyright human movement anymore than you can copyright the sound of a human voice.

You can copyright your form poems though. :p

[Yum Cha]

Fu-Pow,
You don't work for Micro$oft do you?


Ever seen or heard of a copyrighted dance?

Cheers

[Ou Ji]

You can't copywrite the moves but the sequence is something different. You can't copywrite standard english words but you can copywrite a sequence of those words (stories, poems, songs).

Something to consider.

[Vajramusti]

Even if one rushes to copyright- things can still end up in litigation by one party or the other.
Yoga is very old- but as I understand Bikram has copyrighted his version of sequences and has gone after people falsely claiming to teach Bikram's yoga.
joy chaudhuri

[sean_stonehart]

I don't believe it's possible to do so.

The written poem/lyrics yes or maybe even specific motions in a certain order, but if a person changes something, enough to cause change to the technique to make it not the same, then it may be possible.

I'd suggest asking ye old Judge Pen.

[yutyeesam]

my guess is that if you did not invent it, you can not copyright it. i would imagine you could copyright your own sequence. the problem would lie in disproving someone's claim that they invented it.

people could copyright all they want, but someone could make a small change to it and say, see it's not the same, so i don't owe you jack! if you look in the "about" option in the help tab of internet explorer it says:

Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

NCSA/UIUC does not get one red cent of bill gate's profits.

Man, it would get reallly ugly if people started copyrighting traditional forms.

[Fu-Pow]

my guess is that if you did not invent it, you can not copyright it. i would imagine you could copyright your own sequence. the problem would lie in disproving someone's claim that they invented it.

Ideally I think that is true. However, we know there are copyrights and patents that are legal yet the owner "stole" the invention, idea, song, story, etc. and was simply the first to copyright it.

So why not forms? How 'bout dance routines, that would be the closest in terms of content.

BTW, I recall hearing somewhere that they were trying to trademark the name Shaolin.

[Galadriel]

Here's some info on the whole Bikram "Copyright"

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1110021.cms

He "created" this sequence, so I suppose somebody could attempt the same for Kung Fu, but for him it was a big money making scheme....

Don't know how much money you could make for copyrighting a few forms - you'd need to copyright an entire style and make sure everybody wants to learn it....

[GreenCloudCLF]

From what I understand, you do have a right to copyright your creation, be it written of physical. However the traditional forms that we all practice would fall into public domain. Even had they been copyrighted, the copyright on them would have expired long ago.

[Innocence]

hello~
I think copyright is automatically granted when you post (at least poetry) online, and put your name and a date with it.

Thats my understanding of it anyway haha~
You dont need to apply for a copyright. It's not like trademarks where you need to be granted the right to it, or a patent.

[David Jamieson]

copyrights and the laws that govern them vary from country to country.

They also expire and the material becomes public domain.

I don't think there is any siginificantly new technology in martial arts. Rediscovered stuff sure, resequenced stuff, extrapolated stuff, new focus, different emphasis, but essentially, it is pretty much all public domain stuff.

It is discernable by it's shape in regards to an origin, but who made what first is always going to be a matter of debate.

[Mulong]

We must look at this case, i.e., yoga school, like McDonald… Hence, you didn’t create a product per say, but a way of presenting it; hence, you copyright your business. Therefore, the product falls under that banner; meaning if someone, teaches the same formula or presentation you are able to sue them.

That what seems occurred in this case. Therefore, can this be done with martial arts, possibly, but it has to be a new presentation; meaning a new name, and actual curriculum, with a step-by step instruction in how to teach it and most of all how to run the business.

This only works if you are actually making money; hence, taking money out of this individual’s pocket; therefore, making it liable.

[Judge Pen]

I think the responses have hit the nail on the head. A traditional form can't be copywritten because they aren't yours to begin with. Other people have been taught the form. If you "create" the form, then maybe, but it's so easy to change enough to overcome the liability. I'm sure it's been tried, but it probably won't be sucessful.

[Mulong]

If I vaguely recalled one instructor, actually attempt this; however, at the end he was only able to get a trademark for the name of his style.

For example, Bruce Lee’s estate is trying to copyright Jeet Kune Do and actually trademark his name; let’s be realistic, it isn’t a style, but a notion and a name is just that a name. Therefore, how can you copyright a taught?

As we can see this can get ridicules so quickly, but the problem is- there is enough ambulance chaser, i.e., lawyers, willing to take on a cases like this.

[Judge Pen]

As we can see this can get ridicules so quickly, but the problem is- there is enough ambulance chaser, i.e., lawyers, willing to take on a cases like this.

Not all are ambulance chasers. Some of us profit off of the ambulance chasers that sue our clients. :cool:

[Mulong]

May I share in the profit?

[Judge Pen]

May I share in the profit?

Sure, court reporters, copy centers, process servers, private investigators, Computer techs, office space property management, paralegals, secretaries, receptionsist, clerks, librarians, human resource, accounting, etc. etc.

Hey Mulong, why the Georgia font? I like it; it makes your posts stand out.

[ngokfei]

FONT]I guess we should take Bikram's lead as well as the Coaches in China who put together their routines from standard/widely known actions/techniques. But I guess in the end TCMA is based on preserving what is old.

hey I like this font changing thing, :D
oooh color too ;)

[Mulong]

The fonts are cool!

[YuanZhideDiZhen]

a copyright would not be as useful for a form as say, a patent. but the patent could be easily violated by say, changing a move. then you could patent your teaching method and have the same problem. which is why entire families went to the certification route, IMO.

so put some kind of protection on your forms. what are you going to do? sue someone for practicing? if your arts are so cherished that a group of people would stalk you to watch or record your practice don't be offended: offer that they become paying students! :cool: :D

[Mulong]

In actuality the notion is a bit foolish; however, in this day in age of lawsuits, everything is possible. Therefore, we need to be conscious of the business dealing, if we teach publicly, because one day we can wake up and realize that the particular style we teach has been trademarked.

[YuanZhideDiZhen]

In actuality the notion is a bit foolish; however, in this day in age of lawsuits, everything is possible. Therefore, we need to be conscious of the business dealing, if we teach publicly, because one day we can wake up and realize that the particular style we teach has been trademarked.

that would be true unless it was a style so generic in legal terms as to be considered "public", like tkd or karate. where as kung fu is not as ****genised and generic it can be considered proprietary, especially if it is a hybrid. :cool:

the principle problem is: that when you copyright or patent something it does not prevent other people from using it. rather it has the opposite effect in that it makes the government aware of what you can do and makes the public aware of what is possible.

there is even a 'right to use/right of use' clause which specifically allows rivals to use your property and develop it for business purposes and create derivative works for which you would recieve no royalty, much like the recent emminant domain battle.

if you want to protect what you practice such that no one ever sees you practice you need to buy a chunk of desert and dig it out like a mine. go deep enough such that the ambient temperture is 100 degrees F. that will obscure heat sensing satellites available to corporate raiders.

[MasterKiller]

I think the responses have hit the nail on the head. A traditional form can't be copywritten because they aren't yours to begin with. Other people have been taught the form. If you "create" the form, then maybe, but it's so easy to change enough to overcome the liability. I'm sure it's been tried, but it probably won't be sucessful.

I don't want this to turn into an SD argument, but didn't Sin The' successfully prevent someone from teaching his forms by taking them to court?

[Judge Pen]

I don't want this to turn into an SD argument, but didn't Sin The' successfully prevent someone from teaching his forms by taking them to court?

I don't want to turn it into an SD argument either. All that was well before my time in SD. Golden Tiger was around then and may have more details. I believe that the lawsuits were resolved without a trial so I'm not sure on the exact out-come.

[hskwarrior]

so lets say that i created a form, video taped the progression of its development, documented the movements, and then had lets say a public notary witness it's creation and the naming of the set, would i be able to copy right that?

but, on the other hand, i think all one has to do to find loop holes is to change a move here and there, change the name and then claim that as their own creation, therefore copywriting that.

just a question.

hsk

[Judge Pen]

so lets say that i created a form, video taped the progression of its development, documented the movements, and then had lets say a public notary witness it's creation and the naming of the set, would i be able to copy right that?

but, on the other hand, i think all one has to do to find loop holes is to change a move here and there, change the name and then claim that as their own creation, therefore copywriting that.

just a question.

hsk

That type of documentation would certainly make things easier (but the notary just certifies that the signature is authentic).

It wouldn't stop someone from changing things just enough or claiming that they had learned the set years before your documentation. It comes down to proof available and credibility.

[Ben Gash]

If we look at the copyright laws for literature, it expires after 100 years, so most of us are safe with most forms.
If you look at the laws pertaining to plagiarism, taking an original and subtly modifying it is still plagiarism. However, if you can prove that you were doing before the copyright, then you'd be safe, which really makes it impossible to copyright or patent traditional forms, as several other people are already doing them. It would be like traying to patent the wheel.
You could only really copyright/patent something new that you'd formulated.

[Ou Ji]

It's my understanding that with music you can only have a certain number of notes the same. So there's basically a formula or guidelines for determining violations.

I'm sure those rules and others that pertain to the writing industry would apply to forms.

[Mulong]

Copyrighting is much harder, but a trademark seems simpler, because you can trademark the name of style and the curriculum; hence, the form.

[YuanZhideDiZhen]

Copyrighting is much harder, but a trademark seems simpler, because you can trademark the name of style and the curriculum; hence, the form.

that's legal kungfu! :cool:

[Ben Gash]

Again, it would be all but impossible to trademark the names of forms, as others are already using them.

[CLFNole]

I can't believe this thread has lasted as long as it has. It is like creating a thread about what you would buy when you win the lottery. None of this is going to happen.

[Mulong]

Actually Ben, you can, even though the name is being used; you just simply get it trademark. For example, when J. Lo introduce her Glow perfume, the name was already own by someone; hence, she simply brought her out. Another example, a lot of artist, i.e., actors, musician, don’t own their own domain name on in the internet, because someone purchased it before this artist became famous, e.g., Howard Stern.

[Ben Gash]

Yes, but J-Lo had to buy out the name, and domain names are owned property.
You cannot trademark a name that is being used commercially by soemone else.

[Mulong]

Ben, Indeed, you are right, but that is why you create a new name, i.e., judo from jujutsu.

[mantid1]

If you can copy right a form then I am going to copyright a form of movement called walking. If you step with your left or right foot first to begin this movement patten then you owe me $100 for each step that you take.

I do not plan on copyrighting walking backwards or to the side. I do not want to seem greedy.

[YuanZhideDiZhen]

If you can copy right a form then I am going to copyright a form of movement called walking. If you step with your left or right foot first to begin this movement patten then you owe me $100 for each step that you take.

I do not plan on copyrighting walking backwards or to the side. I do not want to seem greedy.

nor can you copyright or patent something in common use or from a forum. :cool:

it's considered like a letter: the writer of the letter owns the information and can distribute the right to utilize as he or she sees fit.

[GeneChing]

There was this rumor floating around last year about this time that Jet Li was seeking to trademark his Wong Fei Hung 'beggar's hand' move. Clearly, it was his signature move, although derivative of Bruce Lee's invitation stance. I actually had the pleasure of being part of a discussion with Kwan Tak Hing about Jet's take on beggar's hand (of course, KTH being the traditionalist, said Jet's move was too open and not good for fighting). The rumor never got ****her than a rumor and all the people that I talked to at that time seemed to think the notion was not legally possible.

Of course, there's been lots of talk about Shaolin trademarking its name. We've banied it about a bit on the Shaolin forum already. It doesn't look like they're having too much success with that internationally yet.