in the u.s, as long as you aren’t using it commercially, at least
(I mean besides that I’m for the abolition of copyright, but just purely talking about what’s allowed in law as of current)
in the u.s, as long as you aren’t using it commercially, at least
(I mean besides that I’m for the abolition of copyright, but just purely talking about what’s allowed in law as of current)
this is more prevalent in furry circles but not limited to there. when someone makes an original design for a species, they can decide whether to make it an open or closed species.
a closed species means that the creator forbids other people from creating characters from that species (though sometimes compliance rules are made instead). as you can guess, this is mostly unenforceable; some people respect those wishes, others don’t. some will shun the latter, some others won’t care.
btw I made it sound simple, but by god, the people of both sides often have very strong opinions about it
While I don’t care either way really. I can say iv literally never seen a closed species that was legally enforceable per the way the creator wants it to be or a single creator of one that didn’t violate basically every copyright law and fair use law possible in an effort to enforce it.
About the closest closed species I can think of is hobbits from LOTR and the whole kerfuffle with WOTC creating halfling. Even then it wasn’t over the appearance, traits, design, it was just the name and the fact it was commerical.
While the joke is furries are always in IT, they sure aren’t lawyers.
Yeah it’s because names can be Trademarked, and in the case of Hobbits, that is Trademarked, and the holders are currently paying and fighting to retain their Trademark.