Who Owns a Tarot Spread?

Teheuti

So if acknowledgment is to be given, then shouldn't mkg have given acknowledgment to the person who had previously done that spread of hers?
I did acknowledge Butler as also creating the Court Card spread and named the book it was in. Furthermore, I explained in my book the whole weird set of circumstances as an example of how the Tarot teaches us its own truths!

The reason an idea is seen as being original is that one person becomes more well-known for taking the same idea and actually doing something with it.

Have you even read my posts here? An idea is not copyrightable! Titles are not copyrightable (they can be trademarked). Ideas are rarely truly original.

I just don't understand the big to-do about this.
The "big to-do" is that most people don't understand copyright (getting it mixed up with having rights to ideas). A spread may be a small thing but at what point should rights be taken seriously? A poem may also be a small thing - should it be protected?

Do you know that no one can use the standard "Happy Birthday song" in a book, TV, movie, etc without getting permission and paying royalties? It doesn't matter if you personally think this is right or wrong - it's the law.

And especially since the person who used it showed up and set the matter straight, removed the spread, and that should be that.
It's not about a particular use of the spread, although I think it's great that someone was responsive to this situation. Kudos! Rather, it's about understanding the principles and the laws involved for future situations. It's about understanding rights and what anyone can and can't do to protect their tangible creations. It's about correcting misconceptions.
 

Chrystella

I feel like we're going around in circles and repeating ourselves.

Have you even read my posts here? An idea is not copyrightable! Titles are not copyrightable (they can be trademarked). Ideas are rarely truly original.

I've also mentioned this - as have others - and it keeps coming up. Is the thread tl:dr at this point? Maybe folks are just reading the OP and responding without realising the ground has been covered.
 

EarthAngel2911

These spreads are nothing alike except for the non-copyrightable idea - which was actually proposed, in one case, by someone named Sheri.

No copyright infringement here!!!

Agreed, aside from the name of the spreads and the shape of the card layouts, they are very different!
 

Grizabella

I did acknowledge Butler as also creating the Court Card spread and named the book it was in. Furthermore, I explained in my book the whole weird set of circumstances as an example of how the Tarot teaches us its own truths!



Have you even read my posts here? An idea is not copyrightable! Titles are not copyrightable (they can be trademarked). Ideas are rarely truly original.


The "big to-do" is that most people don't understand copyright (getting it mixed up with having rights to ideas). A spread may be a small thing but at what point should rights be taken seriously? A poem may also be a small thing - should it be protected?

Do you know that no one can use the standard "Happy Birthday song" in a book, TV, movie, etc without getting permission and paying royalties? It doesn't matter if you personally think this is right or wrong - it's the law.


It's not about a particular use of the spread, although I think it's great that someone was responsive to this situation. Kudos! Rather, it's about understanding the principles and the laws involved for future situations. It's about understanding rights and what anyone can and can't do to protect their tangible creations. It's about correcting misconceptions.

Yes, I've read all the posts in this thread and I've known you can't copyright an idea for as long as I've been writing myself. In fact, I mentioned that in post #14 of this thread very early on.

I agree that this thread has shed light on some important issues of the law concerning this.

And as far as you acknowledging Butler, I wasn't inferring that you hadn't. I used you just in passing to ask the question, not intending that it be taken to mean you hadn't. It was a question not an accusation.
 

Laura Borealis

These spreads are nothing alike except for the non-copyrightable idea - which was actually proposed, in one case, by someone named Sheri.

No copyright infringement here!!!

That's because once Arcane Mysteries became aware that the spread he posted on his Tumblr was Metafizzypop's, he took down MFP's and replaced it with his own (on Tumblr) and also posted it here (at the link magicjack shared, above).

Prior to that, the spread on AM's Tumblr was the same as MFP's. However, AM was given permission to use it, by someone who didn't own it (a third party - details further back in the thread, I don't feel like digging them out). AM explained, apologized for the confusion, and rectified the situation.
 

Teheuti

as far as you acknowledging Butler, I wasn't inferring that you hadn't. I used you just in passing to ask the question, not intending that it be taken to mean you hadn't. It was a question not an accusation.
Thanks. I didn't really think it was an accusation. I just wanted to make the point that it's worth acknowledging someone else's similar work, even if your own is not in copyright violation. It's always nice to have your own efforts noticed.

Also, I apologize for my tone. It wasn't warranted. I misread you as saying that ideas are original works, but I see now that you weren't.
 

Metafizzypop

That's because once Arcane Mysteries became aware that the spread he posted on his Tumblr was Metafizzypop's, he took down MFP's and replaced it with his own (on Tumblr) and also posted it here (at the link magicjack shared, above).

Prior to that, the spread on AM's Tumblr was the same as MFP's. However, AM was given permission to use it, by someone who didn't own it (a third party - details further back in the thread, I don't feel like digging them out). AM explained, apologized for the confusion, and rectified the situation.

Thanks LB!

Yes, that's exactly what happened. There's no problem with infringement on the AM site now because the issue has already been fixed.

Anyway, if that spread in the Spreads forum here (that magicjack linked to) had been a problem, I think I would have said something about it already.

While I'm here I wanted to touch on the topic of ideas. I see the term being used here a lot.

I have no problem if others come up with the same idea that I do and put it to use. In fact, I expect it. I don't care if a billion trillion other people come up with the idea of a Haunted House spread, and if they create HH spreads of their own. What bothered me was that my exact spread, word for word, was used. People keep saying that an idea can't be copyrighted. That is totally true, but also irrelevant. What bothered me was not that my idea had been used, but that my spread, which was phrased in a specific and colorful way, was used exactly as is, word for word, even down to the fussy punctuation. Countless other people may come up with the idea of creating a spread based on a Haunted House. But what are the odds that someone would use the exact same words that I did to create it?

I never had issue with anyone using the "idea." I was complaining about someone using what was effectively a small piece of my writing, the equivalent of a small poem, for example. I don't care if someone else gets the idea of writing a poem about a Haunted House, and if they write their own poem about a Haunted House. But if they use my exact poem, exactly as is, word for word, without permission, that's another story.

An idea is up for grabs because it only represents potential for what can be created. But an executed idea, that is, one that has been written, given form, and turned into something that others can use or appreciate, is no longer an idea, but a finished work. And works can be copyrighted even if ideas and titles can't.

(Unfortunately my "work" is still all over Pinterest, and several other sites, too. At least it gets a lot of "Likes.")