Here is a Peanuts postcard issued by Hallmark. This one is coded 50PST 302-8 on the back, whatever all that means. Oddly, the copyright line on the reverse is for Linus only; usually these cards say "Peanuts Characters" are copyrighted. Is each Peanuts character separately copyrighted I wonder?
Sure they are. Rather heavily, too. all characters worth licencing are. if you forget to, they soon become Public Domain, and so whatever licencing you want to do, might end up as free publicity to a now competing product. Remember Superman's "Bizzaro" world, where everything was the illogically a reverse image version of the normal world? D.C. didn't copyright it, and it became a PD term.
ReplyDeleteEver wonder why Bluto became "Brutus?" Because KFS didn't copyright Bluto.
I believe "Bluto" became "Brutus" because some King Features legal minion was uncertain in the late '50s whether KFS actually owned the Bluto character.
ReplyDeleteAt the time, the syndicate was unable to determine whether Segar had created the character for the "Thimble Theatre" strip (which would mean that KFS owned it) or if the Fleischers had created Bluto as a foil for Popeye in theatrical cartoons (which would mean that the Fleischers or Paramount owned copyright to the character).
Since Segar had indeed created Bluto (for a 1932 "Thimble Theatre" continuity), King Features did own the character... but since KFS didn't know that, the company simply developed "Brutus," an amazingly similar character, for use as Popeye's chief antagonist in the hundreds of inexpensive made-for-television cartoons King produced in the early '60s.
Hello Griff,
ReplyDeleteWhen Bluto was created in 1932, it was to specifically have a recognizable adversary for Popeye when the animated cartoons came out. Segar devised Bluto in a 1932 series(a year before the animated version debuted) with this in mind. I guess he didn't have interest in the character to ever bring him back in the strips.
In fact, Bluto reappeared in the strip again briefly in the 1950's when it was done by Ralph Stein. but it was also the last time,as apparently it was determined that Bluto was not ours,as we copyrighted the strips he appeared in, but Paramount copyrighted the characters for their cartoons. "Screen Rights" one would call them. When Sagendorf took over the strip in 1959, he had occasionally used a Bluto-like character who didn't have a name...."Big guy" was about all the name he had, indicating we were hesitant at naming the character, yet definately didn't want him named Bluto. We were gearing up for the TV cartoons. With their launch in 1960, another Blutoesque villian had appeared, as Popeye needs such a story catalyst, but his new handle was "Brutus", a name we could copyright. Sagendorf's "big guy" became "Brutus" too. That confusion would follow was not a concern.
Mark:
ReplyDeleteThanks for the clarification regarding "Bluto" and "Brutus"! I much appreciate hearing the real details on this.