Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#2OK, so if Paramount loses (as I would expect), does this then mean that the lawsuit between Oracle and Google around speaking the language 'Java' gets an interesting precedent?
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#3OK, so if Paramount loses (as I would expect), does this then mean that the lawsuit between Oracle and Google around speaking the language 'Java' gets an interesting precedent?
I am not sure APIs being subject to copyright and pretend languages being subject to copyright are really the same argument?
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#4OK, so if Paramount loses (as I would expect), does this then mean that the lawsuit between Oracle and Google around speaking the language 'Java' gets an interesting precedent?
Isn't it a crucial feature of a precedent that it actually precedes the question to be resolved?
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#5What we have here is one of the true great footnotes in legal history:
"2. Mr. Okrand himself has asserted that the Klingon language, tlhIngan Hol, was received by him from a captured Klingon named Maltz. See Okrand, Marc, The Klingon Dictionary (1985). Thus, Plaintiffs may be estopped from asserting otherwise for the purposes of this litigation. See Arica Inst., Inc. v. Palmer, 970 F.2d 1067, 1075 (2d Cir. 1992) (author who disavowed inventing enneagrams publicly cannot claim invention inconsistently to improve a litigation position)."
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#6What we have here is one of the true great footnotes in legal history: "2. Mr. Okrand himself has asserted that the Klingon language, tlhIngan Hol, was received by him from a captured Klingon named Maltz. See Okrand, Marc, The Klingon Dictionary (1985). Thus, Plaintiffs may be estopped from asserting otherwise for the purposes of this litigation. See Arica Inst., Inc. v. Palmer, 970 F.2d 1067, 1075 (2d Cir. 1992) (au…
As long as they can convince the court that their original claim was not meant seriously, this shouldn't matter.
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#7OK, so if Paramount loses (as I would expect), does this then mean that the lawsuit between Oracle and Google around speaking the language 'Java' gets an interesting precedent?
I don't believe so, the brief covers this claim:
> Thus, this case should not be confused with the recent litigation over the Java computer language. As observed by the Federal Circuit, that case “was not a situation where Oracle was selecting among preordained names and phrases to create its packages.” Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., 750 F.3d 1339, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2014) cert den’d 135 S. Ct. 2887 (U.S. 2015). Here, speakers of Klingon are limited to preordained words and syntax. (Page 12)
This is called the 'doctrine of merger', I believe (IANAL):
> Furthermore, the doctrine of merger provides that if an idea “can only be expressed in a limited number of ways,” those means of expression “cannot be protected, lest one author own the idea itself.” (page 9)
Since Klingon words are not an exact transliteration of english words (not a 1-to-1 translation), you can't express the same ideas in multiple ways; so if the language were to be copyrightable, only the person who owns the languages could express those ideas, which seems patently silly.
(My legal analysis isn't; so I'm probably off on exactly why; that's why I spent most of my time quoting from the brief).
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#8What we have here is one of the true great footnotes in legal history: "2. Mr. Okrand himself has asserted that the Klingon language, tlhIngan Hol, was received by him from a captured Klingon named Maltz. See Okrand, Marc, The Klingon Dictionary (1985). Thus, Plaintiffs may be estopped from asserting otherwise for the purposes of this litigation. See Arica Inst., Inc. v. Palmer, 970 F.2d 1067, 1075 (2d Cir. 1992) (au…
As long as they can convince the court that their original claim was not meant seriously, this shouldn't matter.
The fact that this does not detract in any way from this filing just further attests to its greatness.
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#9What we have here is one of the true great footnotes in legal history: "2. Mr. Okrand himself has asserted that the Klingon language, tlhIngan Hol, was received by him from a captured Klingon named Maltz. See Okrand, Marc, The Klingon Dictionary (1985). Thus, Plaintiffs may be estopped from asserting otherwise for the purposes of this litigation. See Arica Inst., Inc. v. Palmer, 970 F.2d 1067, 1075 (2d Cir. 1992) (au…
IANAL, so I'm hoping I'm understanding this right: because Okrand wrote the dictionary, and in it claimed that he learned it from an actual Klingon, he may not now say he invented it? The argument kinda being, if the language is real, and he wrote a non-fiction authoratative book on it... then he can't be inconsistent about the origins?
It's hard for me to wrap my head around it, but it's hilariously clever if I'm reading it right.
Re: Lawyer Submits Brief Partially in Klingon for Paramount Language Lawsuit
#10What we have here is one of the true great footnotes in legal history: "2. Mr. Okrand himself has asserted that the Klingon language, tlhIngan Hol, was received by him from a captured Klingon named Maltz. See Okrand, Marc, The Klingon Dictionary (1985). Thus, Plaintiffs may be estopped from asserting otherwise for the purposes of this litigation. See Arica Inst., Inc. v. Palmer, 970 F.2d 1067, 1075 (2d Cir. 1992) (au…
IANAL, so I'm hoping I'm understanding this right: because Okrand wrote the dictionary, and in it claimed that he learned it from an actual Klingon, he may not now say he invented it? The argument kinda being, if the language is real, and he wrote a non-fiction authoratative book on it... then he can't be inconsistent about the origins? It's hard for me to wrap my head around it, but it's hilariously clever if I'm re…
That's just the lawyer being clever -- it's obvious that claims made in a fictional context don't have the kind of weight he's ascribing to them. It's funny, though.