Tintin Charter for the use of the visuals of the Hergé's Work [pdf]

> themes which harm the author's honour [...] alcohol

Billions of blistering blue barnacles! Captain Haddock was an alcoholic to the point he smuggled some drink in a hollowed-out book on a trip to the moon.

Most of the original books are full of social and political commentary on the kinds of topics supposedly banned here.

As a Belgian (Hergé being Belgian), it's well known that the estate (first his wife and later the holding) is very strict with the copyright and basically forbidding anything. Shame as I feel adaptations or other work could be nice.

Dall-E readily generates an image of Tintin fighting Godzilla in the style of the Hergé comics.

How much more IP liability exposure do LLM companies have? NYT just the biggest so far…

But it's not true. There are plenty of authorized reproduction that breaks the strictly prohibited rules.

> To modify the original text of the speech bubbles, covers and so forth, or to add any text to the selected visual(s).

Obviously they are giving publishers of translations an exception to this strictly prohibited, no-exceptions rule.

> To change the colours, line or orientation of the image. The film "Tintin and I" re-animates large parts of several scenes.

So why publish a document saying "when we've granted you the right to re-publish some of our stuff, you can't do the following with it", when they obviously will allow you.

Also, shouldn't the copyright date be the year of the original being reproduced? Or what exactly is the point of the copyright year here?

Starkly different to the laissez-faire approach to Asterix copyrights by whomever holds them, assuming someone still does, which have allowed countless parodies and cameos in stories by many other authors (a long tradition of the French comic scene anyway).

Which reminds me, I'm re-reading "Tintin et les Picaros" and there is a, presumably unlicensed, reproduction of the likeness of Asterix, and another of Mickey Mouse, in it.

They're both in the last panel of page 54 in my copy of the book by Casterman (I reckon that's the canonical edition, yes?). The panel shows the carnival in Tapiocapolis and there's two revellers dressed as Asterix and Mickey.

But, you know. Copyright. It's good when it's protecting us, ey?

Utterly unenforceable in cases of fair use or fair dealing. Maybe Belgium doesn't have legal equivalents for those, but this text is all but useless outside of commercial contexts in most territories.

well that is the way it is until copyright runs out. I think in the case of Herge that should be in 2053 - in EU. Maybe less in some cases in U.S.

First tactic of lawyers is to scare off people. Only resourceful and knowledgeable entities can challenge such claims.