The Tobermory Cat-Troll

[Tobermory Cat]

I don't claim copyright of a real cat – that would be foolish. I claim copyright on my fictional work called Tobemory Cat and a fictional celebrity cat character entirely of my making. My star is not one cat, he is a construct, I use [SIZE=+0]t[/SIZE]hree cats, non of which has the given name Tobermory Cat. I have self published a book, produced many thousands of postcards, paid for adverts on tourist maps and made poster. I also have a facebook page, started in Feb 2011, which, for those who dismiss facebook at a glance, it is a platform, it has its uses. Some see [SIZE=+0]a[/SIZE] cat snap page, others read something more.

Though the cat is a construct, many believed the cat is [SIZE=+0]real. [SIZE=+0]T[/SIZE][/SIZE]his did not trouble me but bothers me now. [SIZE=+0]M[/SIZE][SIZE=+0]y [/SIZE]stories, many fictional, are passed around by word of mouth – with some people having no knowledge of the source. [SIZE=+0]A[/SIZE] local book shop owner, not a facebook user, encourages[SIZE=+0] a [/SIZE]publisher to pick up both the [SIZE=+0]celebrity [/SIZE]idea and Tobermory Cat. He is Scotland's biggest independent publisher, the artist is very successful ( and rather good) – I struggle to make a living. In November 2011, the publisher is directed to the source – me. In December 2011 we meet. I have are range of plans for my work, a film, merchandise, all based around the Tobermory Cat name, the hope being to create something to fund further work. [SIZE=+0]R[/SIZE][SIZE=+0]eluctantly I agreed to meet to [/SIZE]discuss mutually beneficial ways exploit my creative work. The publisher made me an offer which I rejected ( my picture on the back of their book and I could earn click through revenue earned from selling their book on my facebook page). I continue to post on facebook, my subject, the process of creating a celebrity cat

Their book is out, same ginger cat, same title, same car surfing antics, extracted details, the story of a cat becoming a celebrity cat – a graphic story, the prequel to my story but ending with a celebrity cat. If this book is the first of a series, they have occupied the ground. [SIZE=+0]T[/SIZE]hey brush me off, preferring to spend thousands on lawyers rather than supporting my work – but I [SIZE=+0]try to secure the future rights or they will own the lot. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=+0]W[/SIZE]riters here seem to be defend the idea that a publisher need not [SIZE=+0]p[/SIZE]ay to use an authors work. I feel I have a right to earn a living, and for adaptions of my work. I have heard of writers being paid in such situations – but not with me. I feel I should be allowed to defend my work, robustly, decently, reasonably, without being accused of being a troll – whatever that may be.[SIZE=+0] Thanks for your time, now test me, beat me up, help me if you chose. I will try to respond when I have time. Thanks[/SIZE]

 

[Terie]

I don't claim copyright of a real cat – that would be foolish. I claim copyright on my fictional work called Tobemory Cat and a fictional celebrity cat character entirely of my making. My star is not one cat, he is a construct, I use [SIZE=+0]t[/SIZE]hree cats, non of which has the given name Tobermory Cat. I have self published a book, produced many thousands of postcards, paid for adverts on tourist maps and made poster. I also have a facebook page, started in Feb 2011, which, for those who dismiss facebook at a glance, it is a platform, it has its uses. Some see [SIZE=+0]a[/SIZE] cat snap page, others read something more.

Though the cat is a construct, many believed the cat is [SIZE=+0]real. [SIZE=+0]T[/SIZE][/SIZE]his did not trouble me but bothers me now. [SIZE=+0]M[/SIZE][SIZE=+0]y [/SIZE]stories, many fictional, are passed around by word of mouth – with some people having no knowledge of the source. [SIZE=+0]A[/SIZE] local book shop owner, not a facebook user, encourages[SIZE=+0] a [/SIZE]publisher to pick up both the [SIZE=+0]celebrity [/SIZE]idea and Tobermory Cat. He is Scotland's biggest independent publisher, the artist is very successful ( and rather good) – I struggle to make a living. In November 2011, the publisher is directed to the source – me. In December 2011 we meet. I have are range of plans for my work, a film, merchandise, all based around the Tobermory Cat name, the hope being to create something to fund further work. [SIZE=+0]R[/SIZE][SIZE=+0]eluctantly I agreed to meet to [/SIZE]discuss mutually beneficial ways exploit my creative work. The publisher made me an offer which I rejected ( my picture on the back of their book and I could earn click through revenue earned from selling their book on my facebook page). I continue to post on facebook, my subject, the process of creating a celebrity cat

Their book is out, same ginger cat, same title, same car surfing antics, extracted details, the story of a cat becoming a celebrity cat – a graphic story, the prequel to my story but ending with a celebrity cat. If this book is the first of a series, they have occupied the ground. [SIZE=+0]T[/SIZE]hey brush me off, preferring to spend thousands on lawyers rather than supporting my work – but I [SIZE=+0]try to secure the future rights or they will own the lot. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=+0]W[/SIZE]riters here seem to be defend the idea that a publisher need not [SIZE=+0]p[/SIZE]ay to use an authors work. I feel I have a right to earn a living, and for adaptions of my work. I have heard of writers being paid in such situations – but not with me. I feel I should be allowed to defend my work, robustly, decently, reasonably, without being accused of being a troll – whatever that may be.[SIZE=+0] Thanks for your time, now test me, beat me up, help me if you chose. I will try to respond when I have time. Thanks[/SIZE]

Ahem. You own the idea of a ginger tom Tobermory cat as much as, oh, say, Saki does. Debi Gliori stole her idea from you as much as you stole the idea from Saki.

As in not.

You weren't the first one to go there, and now you're pitching a tantrum that you can't be the last.

Go study up on copyright infringement before you accuse innocent people of doing it.

Also?..............

If the idea belongs to anyone, it belongs to Saki.

- Victoria

Tobermory, by Saki, has been on the Web since 1995. I know. I put him there.

If the Tobermory Cat "belongs" to anyone, it would be to Hector Munro (1870 to 1916) who wrote under the name Saki, and published the lovely story "Tobermory" about a ginger Tom who talks.

 

[Alessandra Kelley]

Hello, Tobermory Cat, and welcome to the boards. You may wish to post on the New Members' thread to introduce yourself to the community.

I'd also suggest reading the Newbie Guide, which is full of good and helpful advice for navigating this community.

I found your argument a little difficult to follow, I must confess.

 

[StormChord]

Oh my god, a ginger cat? Somebody go sue J. K. Rowling, as this creative genius has had Crookshanks stolen from him. -_-

 

[Mr Flibble]

I claim copyright on my fictional work called Tobemory Cat and a fictional celebrity cat character entirely of my making.

What fictional work? Where can I see this work? Are you talking about the FB page? Or something else? If it's a book then yes you have copyright on your story, not on the idea, or even the name. Unless someone has copied your story, there is no infringement.

Apart from the location, and them being ginger, are there any similarities between your 'cat' and the other one? How does this differ between your use of the cat and Saki's?

Two people can write about a cat (even the same cat) without any infringement whatsoever. It depends on the execution, and the details. You realise that, right?

[SIZE=+0]W[/SIZE]riters here seem to be defend the idea that a publisher need not [SIZE=+0]p[/SIZE]ay to use an authors work

Where is the evidence that anyone has used your work?

Tbh, if there was a shred of evidence of you being plagiarised/had your CP infringed, we'd all be right behind you.

 

[Tobermory Cat]

Debi does not do Saki, she has made a book about a celebrity cat called the Tobermory Cat. Had she done Saki she may have taken the title "Tobermory".

 

[escritora]

Their book is out, same ginger cat, same title, same car surfing antics, extracted details, the story of a cat becoming a celebrity cat – a graphic story, the prequel to my story but ending with a celebrity cat.

Your post is a bit hard to follow. Though what I understood or think I understood, is interesting. Interesting as in interesting. Not interesting as in me being condescending.

Can you elaborate on the bolded part? Are you saying it's not just the ginger cat you're objecting to, but that the book also has traces of your story, including a scene or two of the cat car surfing and other details specific to the story you wrote? Can you outline the similarities in more detail?

 

[Mr Flibble]

Debi does not do Saki, she has made a book about a celebrity cat called the Tobermory Cat. Had she done Saki she may have taken the title "Tobermory".

No, we know she didn't do Saki - the point is, Saki was already a story about the/a Tobermory cat. So if she infringed you by writing a different story about the same cat, then you've done that to Saki. Sooo....?

Point being, it is possible for two people to write about the same cat and not infringe on each other AT ALL.

Also, titles aren't copyrighted. (they are, on occasion, trademarked. But I doubt it in this case)

 

[Alitriona]

I look at this in the same way ideas have been recycled in Young Adult fiction. There have been a huge number of angel stories, many using The Books of Enoch and the fallen angels for reference. Many share the basic idea of angels who couple with humans, but no one can claim they have the right to be the only artist to use the story and no one claims copyright of someone else's book just because they use the same basic idea.

No one owns an idea, especially an idea based on something with an established history. An artist only owns their own individual work.

To be honest, I think the publisher and author in this case were very fair to even offer the artist advertisement in the back of the book. They didn't have to acknowledge him at all. Maybe this is what led to the artist's confusion about what is his work and what is the work of another person. Personally I don't know how that can be. I know the difference between my work and work I didn't do. I don't expect to be paid for work I didn't do. I expect most people don't.

 

[Tobermory Cat]

No, we know she didn't do Saki - the point is, Saki was already a story about the/a Tobermory cat. So if she infringed you by writing a different story about the same cat, then you've done that to Saki. Sooo....?

Point being, it is possible for two people to write about the same cat and not infringe on each other AT ALL.

Also, titles aren't copyrighted. (they are, on occasion, trademarked. But I doubt it in this case)

Saki's did not title his book Tobermory Cat. Two writers write about the same fictional cat, an interesting idea. Mine, as I say, is a construct of 3 cats. If she writes about my celebrity construct I am being flattered.

 

[Williebee]

I would offer a more recent (than, say Saki) and more public example of the point.
Sherlock Holmes
and
Elementary

An idea, with similar elements, but a different end product.

 

[Mr Flibble]

Saki's did not title his book Tobermory Cat. Two writers write about the same fictional cat, an interesting idea. Mine, as I say, is a construct of 3 cats. If she writes about my celebrity construct I am being flattered.

But she isn't writing about your construct, only her own construct (from perhaps a similar inspiration, but the details are different). This is not infringement, unless you have proof otherwise? (ie can show direct parallels between the two that are more than superficial)

Even if you did, some of the actions perpetrated in the name of this fictitious 'infringement' are...questionable. At the least.

An idea, with similar elements, but a different end product.

Yup, looks like that. Which is not a problem for anyone with any working knowledge of this.

 

[LindaJeanne]

I'm confused as to why you think her storybook has anything -- anything at all -- to do with your Facebook page.

 

[StormChord]

Mine, as I say, is a construct of 3 cats. If she writes about my celebrity construct I am being flattered.

Um. No. That would be plagiarism, or fanfiction. Make up your mind - is she copying you or flattering you?

 

[RichardGarfinkle]

Saki's did not title his book Tobermory Cat. Two writers write about the same fictional cat, an interesting idea. Mine, as I say, is a construct of 3 cats. If she writes about my celebrity construct I am being flattered.

I'm perplexed. What evidence do you have beyond the use of the fairly obvious name "Tobermory Cat" and that the cat is ginger that this book uses your construct or character?

 

[Momento Mori]

Tobermory Cat:
I claim copyright on my fictional work called Tobemory Cat and a fictional celebrity cat character entirely of my making. My star is not one cat, he is a construct, I use three cats, non of which has the given name Tobermory Cat. I have self published a book, produced many thousands of postcards, paid for adverts on tourist maps and made poster.

You can claim copyright in your fictional work, which seems to be some photographs of a ginger cat in Tobermory. Your copyright extends to the pictures and the text accompanying it.

You also own copyright in the postcards, the adverts and your poster.

Unfortunately, you do not own the idea of a cat in Tobermory as copyright does not extend to protect ideas. You therefore cannot stop someone from producing illustrations of a ginger cat in Tobermory. You also cannot stop someone from writing their own text and putting together their own, completely different story based on a ginger cat in Tobermory.

There is a lot of case law on this - most of which can be found on line. I suggest you review it carefully. Debi Gillori did not steal an idea from you because ideas are, by their legal nature, incapable of being stolen. They are part of the common good and the law recognises them as such.

You clearly don't like that. It's unfortunate but you need to build a bridge and get over it.

Tobermory Cat:
I also have a facebook page, started in Feb 2011, which, for those who dismiss facebook at a glance, it is a platform, it has its uses. Some see a cat snap page, others read something more.

Yes, the Facebook page is a platform. It's a platform for your work. Debi Gillori hasn't tried to steal it or shut it down (although Lord knows, I would have been straight onto FB if I'd been in her shoes because your little incitement activity seems to me to breach ToU - but frankly if I'd have been in her shoes I'd have been looking at slapping an injunction on you and looking at criminal remedies under the Malicious Communications Act 1998 and Protection from Harassment Act 1997 for some of the shit you've been pulling). Whatever readers read into it is up to them. The fact is you don't own copyright in the FB page either.

Tobermory Cat:
Though the cat is a construct, many believed the cat is real. This did not trouble me but bothers me now. My stories, many fictional, are passed around by word of mouth – with some people having no knowledge of the source. A local book shop owner, not a facebook user, encourages a publisher to pick up both the celebrity idea and Tobermory Cat. He is Scotland's biggest independent publisher, the artist is very successful ( and rather good) – I struggle to make a living.

We all struggle to make a living. I can understand why you'd be pissed off but that doesn't excuse what you did.

Tobermory Cat:
In November 2011, the publisher is directed to the source – me. In December 2011 we meet. I have are range of plans for my work, a film, merchandise, all based around the Tobermory Cat name, the hope being to create something to fund further work. Reluctantly I agreed to meet to discuss mutually beneficial ways exploit my creative work. The publisher made me an offer which I rejected ( my picture on the back of their book and I could earn click through revenue earned from selling their book on my facebook page). I continue to post on facebook, my subject, the process of creating a celebrity cat

Again, I can understand why you'd be pissed off but that doesn't excuse what you did. You went after the artist, not the publisher. You behaved with vindictive spite against someone who you felt had what you deserved. That wasn't Debi's fault. By your own words, she wasn't responsible for these slights against you. Yet you decided to direct all this shit at her. That's not the action of a man, let alone an artist.

Tobermory Cat:
Their book is out, same ginger cat, same title, same car surfing antics, extracted details, the story of a cat becoming a celebrity cat – a graphic story, the prequel to my story but ending with a celebrity cat. If this book is the first of a series, they have occupied the ground. They brush me off, preferring to spend thousands on lawyers rather than supporting my work – but I try to secure the future rights or they will own the lot.

If you can show that their book directly copies your book, then you have a possible course of action, but I doubt it. We're talking generics here and broad ideas. The law has never wanted to protect that.

You can't seek to protect future rights because there are no future rights unless and until work is corrected. You may be able to trade mark the Tobermory Cat but again, the previous use by Saki and the fact that it's arguably part of popular culture would seem to me to be solid grounds for rejecting registration of the term (although you may have luck with a device mark).

However, the fact that you're resorting to incitement of an internet hate mob rather than go and discuss your legal actions shows the type of person you really are. And I pity you for that. Because with that attitude all you'll ever be is a struggling artist and leader of internet trolls. That's a pretty miserable place to be.

Tobermory Cat:
Writers here seem to be defend the idea that a publisher need not pay to use an authors work.

Writers here defend a real artist who is being unfairly targeted by a silly little boy upset that someone burst his balloon dreams.

Tobermory Cat:
I feel I have a right to earn a living, and for adaptions of my work. I have heard of writers being paid in such situations – but not with me. I feel I should be allowed to defend my work, robustly, decently, reasonably, without being accused of being a troll – whatever that may be.

In all that self pity sluicing around your head, I still fail to see why you felt it was okay to set an internet hate mob on a fellow artist. I could understand if you went after the publisher (albeit that I'd still believe you're wrong) but you didn't do that, did you? You went after her. That's what I have a problem with.

Tobermory Cat:
Thanks for your time, now test me, beat me up, help me if you chose. I will try to respond when I have time. Thanks

Get off your cross, dear. Jesus needs the wood.

MM

 

[buz]

[SIZE=+0]M[/SIZE][SIZE=+0]y [/SIZE]stories, many fictional, are passed around by word of mouth – with some people having no knowledge of the source.

I'm pretty sure you can't claim copyright on "I said some stuff and people repeated it."

 

[Mr Flibble]

What I don't get (well one of the things) is why, if the FB page owner feels they have a case, they haven't gone to a lawyer rather than stalk an author who may or may not have done something wrong.

Most lawyers (you want one in IP in this case) will give you a consult for free, to tell you if you have a case. If they say, actually, no. Well you have your answer, even if you don;t like it. If you have a case, fine. But taking it into your own hands and stalking an author?

Iffy.

Very iffy ( at this stage a lawyer may turn you down because you've screwed over the case)

Let's give a little context here sahll we?

I can write about a boy going to wizard school.

I can call him Harry if I want (may be inadvisable, but nothing to stop me)

I can have an owl bring him a letter.

Maybe his real family are not so nice to him.

These are all generic descriptions of a story. But if I add a lightning scar, and a dark lord, and two mates called Ron and Hermione...

General ideas ARE NOT COPYRIGHTABLE. They are ten a damn penny.

Details are where it gets tricky.

 

[Tobermory Cat]

My construct is a celebrity cat. I think that is its USP when linked to the name. The cat was not a celebrity prior to my work but now is a celebrity due to me.The cat did nothing – that is why I call it famous for being famous. Its hard to nail. James Bond is a secret agent. You can suggest all manner of different adventures created by different hands, but its the title, James Bond – secret agent that the makers of that work value. Had someone produced a James Bond – window cleaner I dont think the owners of that property would object.

 

[Mr Flibble]

And Ms Gliori's cat is a a different celebrity cat. That happens to be named after where it lives

Again, no CP on titles, or names. I can show you three different books with the same titles. I could name you a couple of different books where the protags have the same or similar names. It's not an issue. If you rally think it is, consult a lawyer rather than attempt intimidation.

 

[Tobermory Cat]

Debi Gliori is a different hand true, but the construct, the celebrity cat is the same. James bond - window clearner is not the case. There are half a million cats in Scotland, many towns, my work existed prior to her work, they offer to put my picture on their book, how strange. That is the value it seems.

 

[RichardGarfinkle]

My construct is a celebrity cat. I think that is its USP when linked to the name. The cat was not a celebrity prior to my work but now is a celebrity due to me.The cat did nothing – that is why I call it famous for being famous. Its hard to nail. James Bond is a secret agent. You can suggest all manner of different adventures created by different hands, but its the title, James Bond – secret agent that the makers of that work value. Had someone produced a James Bond – window cleaner I dont think the owners of that property would object.

I believe what you are talking about falls under trademark law, not copyright. Here's the wikipedia for UK trademark law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_trade_mark_law

Did you register Tobermory Cat as a trademark? Because from what I gather, unlike copyright, trademark isn't automatic.

 

[Mr Flibble]

Debi Gliori is a different hand true, but the construct, the celebrity cat is the same. James bond - window clearner is not the case. There are half a million cats in Scotland, many towns, my work existed prior to her work, they offer to put my picture on their book, how strange. That is the value it seems.

You haven't been reading have you? Perhaps you should try it. It might help.

PS Has anyone else fallen in love with Momento Mori just a little bit more? Obviously not the cat - bit the cat should read, and understand, if they can.

 

[Tobermory Cat]

I actually like Debi's work, I could see benifits from working with them - but not for them. I have suggested ways to work with them, they pay a small percentage to our village Hall, true, I get nothing but as a maker of things, I expect some reward. 2.5% gross from all sales does not sound excessive.

 

[Smish]

But what makes you entitled to anything from the publisher? You still haven't identified any legitimate legal claim.