Carol Burnett Sues Over 'Family Guy' Cartoon

[johnnie]

"LOS ANGELES -- Carol Burnett has filed a $2 million copyright infringement lawsuit against 20th Century Fox, claiming her cleaning woman character was portrayed on the animated series "Family Guy."

The Los Angeles federal court suit filed Thursday said the Fox Broadcasting show didn't have her permission to include her cleaning woman character Charwoman in an April 2006 episode.

The episode shows Charwoman as a porno shop maid and it uses what the lawsuit calls an "altered version" of Burnett's theme music. Her suit said the characters in the show also perform Burnett's signature ear tug."

http://www.wesh.com/entertainment/11280340/detail.html



That's funny.

[WindRavenX]

1. Eh, this is probably going to get tossed out of court

I believe you have the right to use copyrighted material for satirical uses.

[terrya]

2. Well, she's not a stranger to lawsuits.

Years ago, she sued the National Enquirer over a story that she considered damaging. And she won the lawsuit.

Not to criticize Seth MacFarlane, but if he includes a character rather obviously based on her character, that's portrayed in a way she doesn't approve, with "altered theme music" AND performs Ms. Burnett's signature ear pull...than he probably might have considered that legal action may result.

[Goblinmonger]

5. It's satire

you can do that. If they did it in a political cartoon in the newspaper, they wouldn't get sued.

[johnnie]

9. I wonder whatever happened to that Evel Knievel case

Didn't he file against some rap person? It is like the same thing as this one I would guess.

[ghostsofgiants]

12. Yeah, I think he sued Kanye West.

Spoofs are supposed to be legally protected though, so I doubt either has much of a case.

[realisticphish]

14. as already posted, satire

happens all the time

[Goblinmonger]

3. If everyone that Family Guy pissed off

got to sue them, we would have SERIOUS backlog in the courts.

[ironflange]

10. Absolutely

Nary an episode goes by without some sort of zinger aimed at a celeb. It's funniest when the target actually supplies the voice, eg. Alyssa Milano.

[Deja Q]

4. Good luck.

For the music, making a sufficient alteration renders it different from the original copyrighted entity.

For the parody. Uh, it's called "parody". It happens to most famous entities.

As far as I know... but I wouldn't know if getting permission to parody is now the in-thing to do, don'cha'know...

I don't blame her for disliking "Family Guy", but she's not going to win.

[Goblinmonger]

6. Plus she should be thanking them

Like anybody even gives a shit about Carol Burnette anymore. The fact that they brought her up gives her a boost, if anything. Like the "Charwoman" character gets any milage anymore.

[Deja Q]

8. That is a way to put it. 'Homage'.

Maybe it'll spur people wanting the show released on DVD...

[thefool_wa]

15. NO SHIT!

She should get down on her kness and thank them for bringing her back into the spotlight.

There is another angle to this: what if she's pissed they didn't ask her to actually come in and do a voice. Use her image but not let her get any of the fun of a day on the Family Guy set? That would piss me off enough to sue.

[Deja Q]

16. Put another way, let's say you were famous... 20 years later,

someone else, on a show known for being shamelessly gratuitous and vulgar for no other reason than to shock and annoy people in the name of comedy, mocked you - right down to little signature moves - wouldn't you feel a little insulted too?

True, it is bringing her back in the spotlight. And it is true homage and imitation are inevitable. It's a matter of degree as to how perverse the scene was imitated, and "Family Guy" is known for really being crass. It's not an intelligent show and even for lowbrow it's had to dig beneath the ground because there's nothing left with even an ounce of taste above ground that the masses finds funny.

And you're right on the other angle - for example, Leo DeCaprio turned down a request to appear on Futurama in their "Titanic" spoof. As a result, they changed the scene and had (him headless in a jar as all 20th century celebs were treated in that show) christen the ship and his head bounces out. He starred in the real movie "Titanic", hence the request for him to be involved. But there were not signature winks or anything. Which goes back to sadly defending this garbage show, parodies are allowable and always have been. The line was crossed when they copied her direct material, rather than parodying it.

Which is sad, they'd even pay for clips of Conway Twitty from Hee-Haw.

[thefool_wa]

20. The show qualifies as parody though

So fair use is extended to it as they were making fun of the character.

It was not really crude visually, the shot just portrayed the character as a jerk-house jizz-mopper. There was nothing more crass than an implication, and implication is subjective. Plus, under fair use, there is no guideline for "fair use under certain standards of decency", it can be G-rated parody or X-rated parody.

This show has done this type of thing over and over and over again and gotten away with it. I'm sure this time they will as well. And, honestly, I hope they do. I love Family Guy, its frickin hysterical. I'm sure they have legions of copyright attorneys who go over this type of thing to make sure that copyrighted material is used within the guidelines of fair use for parody.

Carrol Burnett should get over it and laugh along with the rest of us (or at least the rest of us who enjoy the show).

[GoneOffShore]

7. Funny like Disney suing bakeries

over Mickey Mouse cakes. :sarcasm:

[thefool_wa]

11. I've seen the episode

And IMHO (and I am no lawyer) what they did falls under the "fair use" that ALL parody is afforded. I don't think she will win.

Also, IMHO, this sounds like a washed up old actress trying to reclaim some fame in her last years. Its kinda sad.

(was that too harsh?)

[Goblinmonger]

13. Not too harsh

Not as harsh and my #6 above, anyway. We certainly had similar thoughts.

[Darth_Kitten]

18. Just because she's not in her prime anymore makes her "washed" up...

she's quite a talented lady, and if she fills she really has a case, what's the problem?

[terrya]

19. No shit.

I like Carol Burnett very much. Just because she does something that someone may laugh at or scorn, doesn't mean that she's "washed up". She is a very talented performer...Friday night, I watched again, a film she made, directed by Robert Altman, "A Wedding". Ms. Burnett was very good in it. She also, last year, starred in a remake on ABC of "Once Upon a Mattress", which in fact, she herself starred in on stage back in the 60's.

I've always like Carol Burnett. She is talented and she seems like just a very nice person. Hardly "washed up".

[Earth_First]

17. Link to video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzfwQrg_OtI