Legally Correct, But Common-Sense Wrong

"While Warner Brothers does seem to be coming across heavy handed here and could have handled it in some other manner, remember that as computer security professionals, we are obligated to uphold intellectual property rights." Link

I disagree. I don't feel I'm obligated to uphold anything, save for common sense - and sometimes, intellectual property rights are excercised in ways that are incredibly damaging to the brand they're supposed to protect. I used to work as an artist. As a result, I have been / still am involved in many things that I have a personal and vested interest in with regards protecting various portions of my own IP rights.

In addition, I'm fairly well known (scroll down on that last one) as a comics blogger, and I write at length on the numerous strengths and weaknesses of the comics industry. I know many of the artists, writers, publishers - all sorts of people working in the field. The traditional comics industry is a niche genre, where there are no new readers coming through.

It's an industry with an increasingly aging - and likely slowly shrinking - audience.

Consequently, one of the last saving graces of the comics world - the one thing that really keeps it alive at all - is the Internet. The comics industry works hand in hand with comics bloggers, journalists and anyone else who gives a damn to turn a blind eye to what are effectively endless copyright violations, because they're keeping the punters coming back for more.

Sites such as Scans Daily are effectively breaking every IP law in the book, yet it is tolerated because it keeps the money coming in. Hell, many artists and writers from DC themselves have contributed to the site on many occasions. Comic memes are rife - whole comics are reproduced online with text altered, images changed - and the industry not only turns a blind eye to the infringements, but effectively encourages it by actively taking part in the IP violations.

Because it's the only way it can hope to keep the message out there that these comics actually exist, and actually, we'd like you to buy some too. This has become especially important since the "traditional" comics of Marvel & DC have pretty much vanished from newsstands, relegated to the shelves of Barnes & Noble and Waterstones while Manga fills the void they once occupied.

So that's the precarious state of comics circa 2008. And then you throw in the heavy handed actions of parent company Warner - who have never seemingly understood how the comics industry actually works, because the way they operate is not really how DC Comics operate - and you have something a little more complex than a straightforward reading of IP law and copyright violations.

One of the crucial things that Warner IP legal teams don't understand - a fundamental failing, if you will - is that they don't appreciate the possible impact of negative PR when pondering whether to swing the banhammer. They don't see it as an issue, and as such, are actually acting in a careless, negligent way towards the very brand they're supposed to be protecting. One commenter on another site replied to that notion with the following:

"Negative PR has nothing to do with the decision making process."

The reaction to the events that have taken place suggest otherwise. Someone working in IP should take into account the blowback from every decision they make, because it only takes one screwup to inadvertently damage your own brand with actions such as this. When your comics aren't selling huge amounts to begin with, positive PR is pretty much all you have to keep the punters coming back. Screw with that PR, and you're going to leak money at an alarming rate.

Someone working in IP that doesn't consider negative PR when shutting down a charity auction for kids with cancer just proves that point. A longtime purchaser of DC material (and beyond that, a consumer of things Warner related), I find myself sufficiently appalled to not want to buy or partake of anything DC / Warner related again unless (by some miracle) they try to fix this mess somehow.

I might have had another 20 or 30 years of purchasing power left in me for their products, and I spend a *lot* of money on those products. Suddenly remove that purchasing power, and you've impacted your earning power through not taking into account the negative impact of bad PR during the decision making process.

What happens if lots of people who feel the same way about this incident do the same thing? Comic readership is creaky enough as it is without lots of long term readers and buyers suddenly saying "Wow, cya!" Indeed, this story has ripped through many, many high visibility comics sites (including blogs by past DC writers) who have also chimed in with various comments expressing their shock / dismay / insert feeling here at what has happened. Many people have also commented that they won't be buying anymore products from DC / Warner unless something is done to correct this.

I'm pretty confident that removing the money that *would* have gone to DC from myself and all those other people over the next 20 or 30 years - perhaps more - is more damaging to their IP (along with all the negative word of mouth that now ensues) than an auction for some kids somewhere.

Yes, they "protected their brand". Hooray. At the cost of people continuing to pour money INTO that brand?

Doesn't sound so smart to me.

When you make a small circle of buyers even smaller and dilute the money value of your brand to nothing, your brand suddenly isn't worth protecting anyway. Especially as there are currently piles of bootleg / unlicensed DC paraphenalia for sale - for profit - right now.

Gay naked Batman kissing Robin, anyone?

That auction has finished. Someone made a profit. Warner did not step in. There are many, many more like it. Any claims of them "preventing dilution of the brand" by their clamping down on a one-off charity auction is blown into the wind with a ceaseless stream of crap that is still being sold, right now, for profit.

As the title says - there is legally correct, but there is also common-sense wrong.

Sometimes, it is more beneficial to your IP to let things go. Sometimes, it does less harm and more good. Sometimes, realising that you have the power to be benevolent - and that that benevolence carries just as much weight as simply saying NO - is a good thing.

There are many times when I've seen things related to my own IP effectively being violated. Perhaps it's the arts background I grew up with - perhaps ultimately I just don't care - but I let those things slide, effectively at some potential financial cost to myself - because I could see how swinging the banhammer would be more damaging to myself in the long run.

Indeed, Warner have apparently already had someone wake up today and think "Oh shit", because sure enough - there has been an interesting new development. They know they can't do an about face and let everything back on the auction. However:

Dear Mr. Denton:

We made a exemption for the item that was relisted.

Thank you,

Craig M. Hoffman

Director

Worldwide Anti-Piracy and Technical Operations

Corporate Communications

Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.

Would you look at that - though they'd never admit it, this basically says "we screwed up, this probably shouldn't have happened the way it happened and we'll throw you a bone".

Look at the image they allowed to be relisted. There is no real reason why they should have allowed this. The image contains numerous, recognisable DC Comics characters. Yet there it is.

Just for once, perhaps, common sense wins out.

Just a little bit.