http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html
"Material prepared in connection with a game may be subject to copyright if it contains a sufficient amount of literary or pictorial expression. For example, the text matter describing the rules of the game or the pictorial matter appearing on the gameboard or container may be registrable."
Oh.. wait.. I posted another pesky link didn't I. You'd rather we just talked in circles about the topic without actually nailing it down.
Your talking about two characters named John with same specific rules pertaining to them both. Game rules constitute an infringement on the original copyright.
There is some wording in the above that you are not acknowledging. I modified the text to give you a little hint.
You are missing a key element of copyright law. Just like in the case of trademarks, not everything can be registered/protected. There is no copyright on a lot of the language on X-Wing's, for example, elite pilot talent cards that would survive litigation. It is too generic. If language like that could be copyrighted, there would not be any language left for future rule writers to utilize. This is intentional. The fact that you seem to think that the name John could be protected by copyright shows that you have not bothered to read anything other than the wikipedia page that you posted a link to earlier. If you really are interested, go read some case law. If not, continue spouting nonsense.
You need to learn when you've lost the argument. Which you clearly and by your own volition have.
Right.
The only thing that I can do for you is point you in the right direction.
- Fisher v. United Feature Syndicate, Inc., 37 F. Supp. 2d 1213, 1219-20 (D. Colo. 1999) - This one is fun because it expressly disproves your belief that something like a name can be protected by copyright.
- Interactive Network, Inc. v. NTN Communs., Inc., 875 F. Supp. 1398, 1400 (N.D. Cal. 1995) - This one provides some basics on certain mechanics that cannot be protected by copyright.
Maybe you can come back and tell me that I am wrong with some justification other than you think that I should be. If so, I won't complain about learning something new.
Or, don't read the cases. You seem very confident that your opinion is 100% correct even without doing any research or having any knowledge on the subject. Also, feel free to continue declaring victory. It is very convincing.
Edited by Rapture