Copywriting Martial Arts

[Makalakumu]

I know it is possible to get a trademark on a name and a copyright on a peice of art, but is it possible for this protection to extend to a martial art in general?

Here is an example. Lets say that Art A is a trademarked name and only certified instructors may use that name. Now, lets assume that the kata in Art A were created by the Founder of the art and they are passed on through their certified instructors. Do these kata have copyright protection?

What if one of the instructors quit the organization and started teaching on his own? Would he still be able to teach the kata that he was taught?

upnorthkyosa

 

[Makalakumu]

The reason I ask this question is because the original art that I trained in, Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan, is a trademarked name. They claim that the forms that Hwang Kee created, the Chil Sung series, the Yuk Ro series, Hwa Soo, etc are copyright protected. Although there is no witch hunt to find uncertified teachers who are teaching this material, several prominent Masters have been threatened with legal action. I have not been able to find a single court case, however.

 

[Andrew Green]

Wait for it, another 3 years and kata will be DRMed

Ok, serious answer:

I see no reason why they couldn't be. And it wouldn't surpise me to find out that top competitors have protected their personal routines. An organization might do it as well... I has a suspiscion the ATA might have.

I do think it would be very difficult to enforce though, and would likely fall under the same sort of rules as dance routines.

Whether it would hold up if challenged in court is another matter, I don't imagine it's ever been tested...

 

[SFC JeffJ]

Wait for it, another 3 years and kata will be DRMed

Ok, serious answer:

I see no reason why they couldn't be. And it wouldn't surpise me to find out that top competitors have protected their personal routines. An organization might do it as well... I has a suspiscion the ATA might have.

I do think it would be very difficult to enforce though, and would likely fall under the same sort of rules as dance routines.

Whether it would hold up if challenged in court is another matter, I don't imagine it's ever been tested...

I'm pretty sure the ATA already has.

Jeff

 

[Makalakumu]

Wait for it, another 3 years and kata will be DRMed

Ok, even though I scored way high on the Nerd Test, I don't know what DRMed is...

Ok, serious answer:

I see no reason why they couldn't be. And it wouldn't surpise me to find out that top competitors have protected their personal routines. An organization might do it as well... I has a suspiscion the ATA might have.

I do think it would be very difficult to enforce though, and would likely fall under the same sort of rules as dance routines.

Whether it would hold up if challenged in court is another matter, I don't imagine it's ever been tested...

I knew there was precedent with dance routines, but people get around that by changing it just enough so that copyright doesn't apply anymore. Would the same apply to a form or any other aspect of a martial art?

 

[bignick]

I'm sure changing it enough would, because once there are so many differences, it is considered a different material.

The ATA has either a trademark or copyright on their forms, and Taika Oyata has trademarked the name of his style to prevent others from using it.

 

[Flying Crane]

I had this exact same discussion with my wife, who is an attorney with some trademark experience, but she is no expert in the area.

she believes that yes, it is possible. I was rather floored by this, but she believes you could be sued for infringement if you tried to teach someone's material that is protected. You certainly can't use their name, that much is obvious, but it blew me away that they could copywrite a series of movements like a kata.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

I'm pretty sure the ATA already has.

Jeff

They have, as well as the name of their style - Songham Taekwondo.

 

[tsdclaflin]

I am a software developer. Several years ago, I came across a law pertaining to software which stated that a new software product at to be only 10% different.

 

[RevIV]

If this were true... I think that it would of happened and we would all know every detail of how it was done. As i say this, i say it with absolutely no background or expertise in the area. But look at all the huge break offs with people doing the exact same curriculum, with just another board above the door. I would think that if it were possible to trademark the kata and techniques, everytime a large portion of a franchise left that parent co. the parent co. would go after them for copyright infringement. ie. using their forms. Myself, being a break off, of a break off, of a break off.. (man thats long) the forms are somewhat similiar if not exact in a lot of areas. I remember being told that it was threatened in the past about not being able to use the material, but nothing ever came of it. It is almost like being taught at one university and not being able to one day teach at another. This was just my understanding.
In Peace
Jesse

 

[still learning]

Hello, Americans are the only ones who wants to own things. Will it be possible to copy write the technque sequence too?

To kick with the front leg...this belongs to Joe...who has the copy write on this....please seek permission to use this technique. Send $5.00 not including return letter of permission, additional charge will be $15.00 for each kick. Limited warrantee...to life of the shoe.

This is a copy write...you will need permission to read this......Aloha

 

[bushidomartialarts]

master packer of the akka organization has his system under copyright.

legally, it means that if you teach his system of techniques as set down in the manuals, you're violating copyright.

realistically, many people have broken off and taught his stuff. much of it is derivative, so it hasn't held up in court very well.

i think if he made the cases about the parts of the system he did invent (kata are the best point here), he'd be more successful.

finally, manuals and videos are often copyrighted, even when the material is public domain.

just my 1.7 cents canadian.

 

[HKphooey]

In some styles it would be vaey difficult to take to court. Most of the arts come from hundreds of years ago and it would be easy to show that most people have already "bogarted" material from long ago. You can be sued for using a registered name or slogan, but the actual movements would be next to impossible to defend.

 

[MartialIntent]

I know it is possible to get a trademark on a name and a copyright on a peice of art, but is it possible for this protection to extend to a martial art in general?

Here is an example. Lets say that Art A is a trademarked name and only certified instructors may use that name. Now, lets assume that the kata in Art A were created by the Founder of the art and they are passed on through their certified instructors. Do these kata have copyright protection?

What if one of the instructors quit the organization and started teaching on his own? Would he still be able to teach the kata that he was taught?

upnorthkyosa

I think copyrighting in the arts - although intended to protect intellectual property from unauthorized use by others - is in today's society simply a way to stop others from making the $$ from your idea.

Having said that, it's an indictment on the martial arts that we're so commercially driven we've got a dogged selfishness with our ideas which could after all benefit *all* martial artists. Or are we saying when it comes to the money in martial arts, it's each to his or her own?

Is that a naive attitude? Maybe. What worries me more is that copyrighting a martial art smells of egotism. In my opinion, the martial artist who seeks to copyright a system, doesn't just want to be the only moneymaker from the idea but moves with the ulterior purpose of self-aggrandization ie. ME and MY system: not yours. One can set oneself up as founder and grandmaster of one's own system and because it's copyrighted, no one can question, query, prove or disprove whether or not it's "as advertised".

The founders of most of the great systems we practise today threw their art into the public domain with the greater good in mind. It seems today this enlightened attitude has gone the way of the bottom line...

Respects!

 

[7starmantis]

I still want to know what DRMed means

7sm

 

[CuongNhuka]

I heard that there is a guy trying to copyright Krav Maga. Even though:
A. It was developed by and for the Israeli military
B. The Israeli government has openly stated that Krav Maga is a general term. Not to mention a few words in Hebrew.

I think that you could patten an idea, or a style like that, but you would have to give an overwhelming amout of material to the patten office. Otherwise you might end up with a guy that is in the ATA sueing the World Judo Association for copyright infringment. If you just say, this is our way of doing Tae Kwon Do, but that Judo guy stole some of our material, even though TKD is only standing and strikeing, and Judo is mostly ground material and completely grappling. I just used those as examples.
But then substyles will have issues. The one that did the copyrighting first can sue the others, even though they are differnit styles. So, I kinda think it sounds stupid anyways. Martial Arts should have plently of room to chance and adapt, but when you patten it, you create a dogma. A dogma that should not exist. Mostly since no two schools do things alike. Even people within schools do things differntly.

Sweet Brighit Bless your Blade,

John

 

[AceHBK]

Wing Chun is a good example. One varation of the spelling is copywritten.
I think when u get into copywrights and stuff becomes political and money driven and in the end somewhere the student and the art suffer. I say this because it then becomes, "my way is better than any other way" which is wrong to me. It doesnt promote coming together and sharing information.