Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Therapeutic Cloning Essay Example for Free
Therapeutic Cloning Essay Introduction            Cloning is the practice of creating a genetically the same copy of an original creature. And although it seems like twentieth-century idea, cloning is actually a part of natural processes, and had taken place many decades before though it was attainable. Since a variant of the cloning process plays such a large role in stem therapies, it’s worth taking a look at how cloning processes work (Cohen, 2002).            Most public attention has been focused on the area called reproductive cloning – reproducing an entire creature be it frog, sheep, dog, or human being. As the twenty-first century unfolds, it is far more likely that what has been called therapeutic cloning – cloning used to cure disease – is going to have a more immediate impact on all our lives. Your chances of getting a cloned liver are greater than your chances of seeing a cloned you (Avise, 2004). Therapeutic Cloning            Relative to genetic testing, therapeutic cloning is a technology very much in its infancy. Whereas we can plausibly predict, that genetic testing methods and the scope of such tests will dramatically improve in the proximate future, a like projection in the case of therapeutic cloning is more of a stretch. This view notwithstanding, analysis of current regulation of therapeutic cloning does have something to gain from postulating a future world in which therapeutic cloning is in clinical application (Savulescu Hendrick, 2003).            One likely application of therapeutic cloning is in the treatment of leukemia, and more broadly in various types of tissue and organ transplantation. Therapeutic cloning is important for four seasons. First, there is a shortage of tissue for transplantation. Second, there are problems with compatibility of transplanted tissue form another individual, requiring immunosuppressive therapy with serious side effects. Cloned tissue would be compatible without the infectious risks of xenotransplants. Third, the role of transplantation might be expanded to include common diseases such as heart attack and stroke. Fourth, cloning may prove to be a cost-efficient means of preventing disability and morbidity, and of promoting distributive justice (Shannon, 2005).            In considering the ethical aspects of therapeutic cloning there are two separate issues: should embryos produced during in vitro fertilization (IVF), which would otherwise be discarded, be available for research (with the consent of the couple who produced them); and, should we deliberately create embryos for use in research? It is difficult to argue against using embryos that would otherwise be discarded. The main ethical issue raised by both the production of ES cells and therapeutic cloning, is that of destroying embryos for the purposed of research or tissue for transplantation. If the embryo is considered to have a moral status similar to, say, a child, them embryo research would normally be wrong. On this view, IVF and almost any termination of pregnancy would also be wrong. A less absolute position would be that what is wrong with destroying embryos is a need to respect human life in general. But that wrong need to be balanced against the value of such research. Furthermore, for every live birth, up to five embryos will miscarry. In attempting to have a child by natural conception, we implicitly accept that this loss is a price worth paying to produce a new life. If the loss of embryos is an acceptable price to pay to produce a new life, is it not also an acceptable price to pay to save an existing life (Avise, 2004)? Tissue Therapy via Therapeutic Cloning            More than 40 years elapsed since Joseph Murray and his colleagues at a Boston hospital successfully transplanted a kidney between identical twins. This landmark approach was later extended by the medical community to other organs (e.g., heart, liver, lung, and pancreas) and to transplants involving more distant relatives and unrelated individuals. Transplants between unrelated individuals are especially challenging because, unless ameliorative actions are taken, the immune system of a transplant recipient sooner or later rejects the alien cells. To alleviate this problem, donor and recipient typically are matched as closely as possible for genes underlying immune responses, and immune-suppressive drugs also are administered. Such procedures are fairly common and have saved many lives. Nonetheless, modern transplantation surgery remains risky due to inherent immunological intolerances of patients to foreign tissue (Cohen, 2002).            Thus, many research professionals are excited about â€Å"therapeutic cloning,†a new genetically modified (GM) approach that in theory should avoid the immunorejection problem. In this procedure, genes in cells to be transplanted originate from the patient, who therefore serves in effect as both donor and recipient. Because the donor and recipient tissues have identical genotypes, presumably the immune system would not recognize the implanted tissue alien. Another reason for enthusiasm about therapeutic cloning is that this research gives scientists welcome opportunities for basic research on human genetic disorders as they unfold during cell and tissue development (Bellomo, 2006).            The notion of therapeutic cloning for tissue or organ reconstruction in humans traces to the development of nuclear-transfer cloning methods for sheep and other farm animals. As applied to human cells, the procedure might work as follows: A suitable cell is removed from a patient and its nucleus is inserted physically into an enucleated egg. The egg then begins to multiply in a test tube, and, from the developing mass, pluripotent cells (those that possess a capacity to differentiate into multiple tissue types) are induced to grow replacement cells needed by the patient. Nerve cells might be grown to treat Alzheimer’s disease or spinal cord injuries, skin cells could be used to repair burn damage, retinal cells for macular degeneration, pancreatic cells for diabetes, hematopoietic cells for leukemia, neuroglia cells for multiple sclerosis, and so on. When returned to the patient’s body the cloned cells in such tissues or organs ideally would repair or replace the damaged body part, without evoking immunological rejections (Avise, 2004).            Several technical challenges must be overcome before this approach is medically viable. First, nuclear transfer (NT) techniques developed for farm animals will have to be improved and adapted to our species. Second, cells in the proliferating mass must be generated in such a way that they indeed are pluripotent at the outset. Third, the developmental potential of those flexible cells then must be channeled to produce the specialized kind of tissue that the patient requires. Fourth, methods must be devised to put those now-dedicated cells together properly to make therapeutically useful tissue or organ. This may take place naturally when the cells are placed in a patient’s body, or in some cases it may be accomplished initially in vitro. For example, replacement skin tissue for burn victims might be constructed by seeding the cloned cells onto sheets of a polymeric scaffolding substance. Finally, tissue therapy must be conducted such that the cloned cells do no harm when returned to the patient. It would be disastrous, for example, if even a few cells in the transplanted tissue began to divide in an unregulated, cancerous fashion (Shannon, 2005).            Of course, ethical issues will have to be addressed as well. When the initial oocyte created by NT begins to divide into two cells, then four, then eight, and so on, when does the cloned mass become a new human being worthy of protection under the law? Opponents of therapeutic cloning often contend that an individual arises at the exact moment that the first appears, such that any sacrifice of an early cell mass, even for medical purposes, is tantamount to slaughter. Proponents of therapeutic cloning view this notion as nonsense. How, they as, can a few amorphous cells be granted legal rights that take precedence over those of sentient human beings is desperate need of cell therapy? Remarkably, in US society, most of the debate over the possible legalization of therapeutic cloning hinges on this one emotion-laden philosophical issue (Bellomo, 2006).            In such public discussions, a common error (or often, an intentional argumentative ploy) is to equate therapeutic cloning with reproductive cloning. Although the initial laboratory steps in the two procedures are identical – both begin by inserting a cell nucleus into an unfertilized egg – that is where the similarity ends. In reproductive cloning, the GM egg would be re-implanted in the womb and allowed to grow into a fetus and baby, the intent being to generate a fully functional and independent human being genetically identical to its predecessor. In therapeutic cloning, the early clump of pre-implantation cells that comes from the GM egg would be grown in vitro and used to produce replacement tissues for medical rehabilitation (Avise, 2004). Elimination or Treating Heritable Diseases via Therapeutic Cloning            Although therapeutic cloning does not reproduce an entire organism to develop in utero and live life outside the womb, one motivation for reproductive cloning might be therapeutic. Reproductive cloning could allow genetic engineering interventions to correct defective genes before they have a chance to exert detrimental effects. Correction at the earliest stage would also free germ or reproductive cells and hence subsequent generations from carrying the defective gene (Savulescu Hendrick, 2003).            Certain genetic disorders may enhance certain universal human vulnerabilities, such as those to infection, bleeding, and aging. Beyond increasing these, everyone has inherited vulnerability to some disease or diseases. We would all like to be free from the threat of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, hypertension, and Alzheimer’s disease. Therapeutic cloning might substantially improve the treatment for these diseases since therapy for these is currently limited by the availability or immunocompatibility of tissue transplants (Avise, 2004).            Among the genetic disorders, some are so highly heritable and horrific that we might wish to employ reproductive cloning to enable the use of genetic engineering to correct the defective gene. That would free the clone and all subsequent generations from their ravaging impact (Savulescu Hendrick, 2003).            However, reproductive cloning is an inefficient and error-probe process that results in the failure of most clones during development. For a donor nucleus to support development it must properly activate genes important for early embryonic development, it must properly activate genes important for early embryonic development and suppress differentiation-associated genes that were transcribed in the original donor cell. Inadequate â€Å"reprogramming†of the donor nucleus is thought to be the principal reason for the developmental loss of most clones. In contrast, reprogramming errors do not appear to interfere with therapeutic cloning, because the process appears to select for functional cells (Shannon, 2005). Ethics of Therapeutic Cloning            Can therapeutic cloning be ethically tolerable? Debates about the theory of proportionality, the slippery slope and the principle of subsidiarity here center again in a little dissimilar way (Savulescu Hendrick, 2003).            It is uncertain whether the principle of proportionality offers a believable a priori opposition against therapeutic cloning. If it is well thought-out suitable to make embryos for study aiming cryopreservation of oocytes; in vitro maturation of oocytes and the like, then it is contradictory to decline therapeutic cloning in advance as being disproportional (Avise, 2004).            A consequentialist opposition, as a slippery-slope disagreement, is that therapeutic cloning will unavoidably direct to reproductive cloning. This objection firstly presumes that reproductive cloning is necessarily and categorically wrong, a premise still debated. Clearly, it would be premature, if not criminally irresponsible, in view of the serious health risks for children conceived by cloning to start clinical trials on reproductive cloning right now. But what if, somewhere in the future, these risks could be controlled? Would cloning then still be entirely baseless – even if it were ‘safe’ – then it is practical to exclude reproductive cloning, and not to forbid other, non-reproductive, relevance of cloning (Bellomo, 2006).            Are there suitable alternatives to therapeutic cloning? First, it is important to note that therapeutic cloning strictu sensu, starting with the first clinical trials, will not come up soon. Much basic research is needed, about the question whether it will be possible to control the differentiation of human embryonic stem (hES) cells in vitro. This study can, and ought to, be made with additional IVF embryos. At the same time, research into potential ‘embryo-saving’ alternatives for therapeutic cloning should be stimulated. For the relative ethical examination it is once more essential to evade the drawback of one-dimensionality. Amongst others, the following options are suggested in the literature: a) the use of adult stem cells; b) transferring a human somatic cell nucleus into an enucleated animal egg; and c) the direct reprogramming of adult cells, i.e., to reprogram an adult cell to make it revert to it unspecialized state so that it can then be influenced to develop into a specific type of tissue (this involves the development of undifferentiated cells without the need to create an embryo) (Shannon, 2005). Summary and Conclusion            Cloning can be divided into therapeutic and reproductive cloning. Therapeutic cloning is the use of cloning technology to produce, for example, tissues for transplantation to people with disease. Reproductive cloning is cloning to produce a liveborn offspring (Avise, 2004).            The possibility of therapeutic cloning focuses on the concept of stem cells. Stem cells have the ability to develop into different mature cell types. Totipotent stem cells are cells with the potential to form a complete animal if placed in a uterus. They are early embryos. Pluripotent stem cells are immature stem cells with the potential to develop into any of the mature cell types in the adult (liver, lung, skin, blood etc.), but cannot by themselves form a complete animal if placed in a uterus. Human embryonic stem (ES) cell lines obtained from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst or pre-implantation embryo have recently been established. ES cells are pluripotent. Possible future clinical applications of human ES cell technology include: hemopoietic repopulation (‘bone marrow transplant’); treatment of diseases or spinal cord injury; screening of drugs; and as vectors for gene therapy (Cohen, 2002).            We should distinguish reproductive cloning with a therapeutic intent from therapeutic cloning to produce stem cells. Most of us are familiar with the nightmare scenario of reproductively cloning a person in order to use him as possession for â€Å"spare parts.†Parents who conceive children in the hope that the new child would be a good match immunologically to donate an organ needed by an existing child contribute to this image. With a child cloned from the original, there would be no doubt that the needed organ would perfectly match the recipient immunologically. Creating a person to be a source of spare parts is not what therapeutic cloning is about (Bellomo, 2006).            Therapeutic cloning provides hope for cures or better medical treatment for people with many diseases. These include many of the genetic disorders for which reproductive cloning with a therapeutic intent might be entertained, but they also include diseases that are not necessarily genetic. A therapeutic cloning, cells are extracted from an embryo to clone specific bodily tissues for medical use, particularly transplantation. Type I or juvenile diabetes is one example of a disease that might be cured by therapeutic cloning to produce stem cells. Without contradiction, we can condemn reproductive cloning and at the same time, if we choose, support research with embryonic stem cells (Cohen, 2002). References: Avise, J. C. (2004). The Hope, Hype Reality of Genetic Engineering: Remarkable Stories from Agriculture, Industry, Medicine and the Environment. New York: Oxford University Press US. Bellomo, M. (2006). The Stem Cell Divide: The Facts, the Fiction, and the Fear Driving the Greatest Scientific, Political, and Religious Debate of Our Time: AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Cohen, D. (2002). Cloning. Brookfield, Connecticut: Twenty-First Century Books. Savulescu, J., Hendrick, J. (2003). Medical Ethics and Law: The Core Curriculum. New York: Elsevier Health Sciences. Shannon, T. A. (2005). Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy : a Reader. New York: Rowman Littlefield.
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
George Melies Tripto the Moon :: essays papers
George Melies Tripto the Moon In the early 1900’s Georges Melies introduced his film â€Å"A Trip To The Moon†to audiences in France. This film, when first seen by viewers at this time, was jawdropping. Melies who happened to be a magician, and illusionist before becoming a filmmaker, made one of the first-ever narratives in motion picture history. Similarily throughout â€Å"Trip To The Moon†and many of his later films, Melies, who also worked in theatre, took full advantage of what is known as Mise-en-scene. Mise-en-scene is defined as: All the elements placed in front of the camera to be photographed: the settings and props, lighting, costumes and make-up, and figure behavior. In â€Å"Trip to the Moon†Melies created a world to which no one had ever seen on film, and utilized all the characteristics to which mise-en-scene is based upon. In probably using only one camera for his film, Melies had to basically film in a theater style setting. Almost every shot of the film is a long shot which is taken from the audiences’ point-of-view angle. There were no close-ups in â€Å"Trip To The Moon†no dolly shots, or handheld shots..etc. Throughout the film the same angle and longshot is used, however that does not take away from the film, knowing that he could only utilize this shot, Melies went on to first: Decorate his set like no one had ever seen. For instance in the beginning of the film we can see what looks like an abundance of individuals who seemed to be gathered in what resembles a castle of some sort. This is where the so-called â€Å"wizards†have gathered and have figured out to take their trip to the moon. The following scene shows us a large cannon type figure, an extremely large cannon to be exact, very abnormal looking. The concept of space travel at this time was unheard of and thi s being a silent film, allows us to realize that just by looking at this contraption that this is how they are going to get to the moon. It is by these elements that Melies utilizes mise-en-scen, and in other cases such as the rocky hills of the moon, the bullet shaped space-ship that encapsulates the wizards and sends them on their trip. The costumes of the actors that are used in the film also give us the feeling that these folks are not from our time, but we can identify with their â€Å"wizardly†presence.
Monday, January 13, 2020
What do we learn about the society of Messina in the play ‘Much Ado About Nothing’?
We define society as somewhere where we live, our surroundings, something in which we live, or as the oxford dictionary would say A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a common culture. There are many things that play a part in our society, such as education and leisure pursuits, and this is no different to the Elizabethan times and Messina. Messina is the town in which the play ‘Much Ado About Nothing' is set. There are many different points in the play that tell us of the many different parts of society in Messina and what the town is like as a whole. However it strikes me as rather odd as to why Shakespeare set this play in a town many people at the time would not have known about. He could have just as easily set it in the hustle and bustle of London, but instead chose Messina. For one Shakespeare chose Messina because of the ease he could use ‘noting'. He could include it in his play and the audience would know it suited Messina, this is because like London, Messina is a very busy town, and in towns like that news spreads fast, another reason is that because many in Messina are not as well off as others, people will want to know things that they can use against others, a way of getting money, and a very quick way. Other reason why Shakespeare has chosen Messina is that some because they suit the play better, and some because they suit him better. Firstly, Messina is a very hurly burly seaport town, which was in turn a lot like London, however Shakespeare would have also chose it because he could have created humour easier. He could mock the public figures, and the royalty, and even mock the Spanish for losing to England (Messina was part of the Spanish empire, and not too long before had the English defeated the Spanish – the Spanish Armada) without fear of anything, whereas if he would have done this in England he could have been put up for treason. Despite him setting the play in Messina, which is a fairly unknown place to most of the audience, he still gets the audience to associate with certain characters in the play. The most noticeable character in the play, and the one most Elizabethans could have associated with would have been the two watches, Dogberry and Verges. This would have been because watches like these two would have also been around in London, but not quite so idiotic. All of these reasons are very important in the play and the image of the society of Messina we receive from the play. Noting is all the way through the play however it is in some cases purposely done, the most obvious is when Don Pedro, Leonato and Caudio are playing a trick on Benedick into thinking that Beatrice loves him â€Å"O ay, stalk on, stalk on, the fowl site – I never think that lady would have loved any man†Act 2 Scene 5 Line 89-90 (The conversion continues from line 86to line 206) Employment is a major contributing factor to any town's society. In Messina I get the feeling most are employed on the port, something in which the town was famous for. I have also picked up the idea that most in the town are working class, however the main characters in the play tend to be higher class. Leonato is the governor of Messina, however he is the not the highest ranked person in the play. Leonato is a wealthy man, with one daughter, Hero. I get the idea he is the wealthiest person in Messina, with Antonio close behind. However, when Don Pedro, Don John and Claudio enter they give us a different insight into employment in Messina. I feel that no one in Messina is actually involved in war, as these three are congratulated when they arrive home. Thus showing that it was rare to have people in Messina fighting in Battle. Don Pedro is royalty, and is also a very wealthy man. He has received all his money from inheritance and has only ever worked with the army, fighting in battles. Dogberry is a typical working class man, and I ame shown this as he is in the job of watch at Leonato's castle. A very poorly paid, boring job that anyone can easily qualify for. As we know many Messinians do not appear to be tied down with work, and have a very active social life. They often like to dance and sing, which is a very often occurrence in the Elizabethan days. I find out about a masked ball that many of the town members go to, and it appears that they are all happily enjoying the event. This seems like it is a regular occurrence in the town that everyone happily enjoys. It is also an excellent place for ‘noting' to go on. It is also a very important part in the play as this is where most noting can go on, but the twit is that no one knows who each other is, it creates the theme of illusion and deception as we find out when Beatrice is talking to a ‘masked chum' but we all know the it is really Benedick. Why, he is the Prince's Jester, a very dull fool; onlhis gift is devising impossible slanders. None but libertines delight in him, and the commendation is not in his wit, but in his villainy; for he both pleases men and angers them, and then they laugh at him and beat him. I am sure he is in the fleet; I would he had boarded me†Act 2 Scene 1 Line 120-126 (The conversation carries on from line 120 to 137) The behaviour of people on the town seems to be on the whole very good. However that is the first impression, we actually see how Messina is quite corrupt with many sneaky villains. Firstly though I feel that the Messinians treat outsiders very well, especially royalty, as we see from the greeting Don Pedro, Don John and Claudio receive. â€Å"Never came trouble to my house in the likeness of your grace. For trouble being gone, comfornt should remain, but when you depart from me, sorrow abides and happiness takes his leave†Act 1 Scene 1 Line 86-89 Leonato pays the royalty much respect and shows them utmost formality. The Messinians make everything go up in standard, and this shows signs of them going out of their way to the arrival of the royalty. Also the introduction to everyone in Act 1 Scene 1 is very long, it goes on from lines 83 to 141 until everyone is introduced to each other. However there is a much more corrupt side to the town of Messina, as we find out later in the play, anyone will be two faced and betray people if it involves a little money. The evil on comes into the play when Don John arrives as he is the main villain in the play, and we find out how he is the brains behind most of the plots, but never wishes to get his hands dirty. â€Å"Therefore I have earned of Don John a thousand ducats†Act 3 Scene 3 Line 105-6 This shows us how Don John is happy to give money away as it gets the evil deed done but also leaves him out of the equation when someone is receiving the blame. Men and women both play major roles in this play, however are treated very differently. Men are obviously the superior gender in this play, which is very normal for the time this play was performed. The man they are either married to or a father and they literally own the women. When the wedding day comes along they father of the daughter will pass her to the husband to now ‘look after'. â€Å"Give me this maid your daughter? Act 4 Scene 1 Line 23 â€Å"As freely son as God did give her me†Act 4 Scene 1 Line 24 Claudio speaks of Hero as if Leonato owns her, and then Leonato is confirming that the ownership of Hero is changing from himself to Claudio. They also seem to have other attitude towards love and marriage. They seem to abide by arranged marriages, however some obviously don't. Most of the younger chara cters in the play are single, however are chasing love but just cannot find it. If they are married they have to be very similar, as in from the same background, with the same upbringing. They also deem it very important for a woman to be unchased before her wedding day, as this is the best thing a father can offer. I can tell this as when Leonato finds out hero is ‘unchased' then the bursts into a fit of rage â€Å"Wherefore? Why, doth not every earthly thing, Cry shame upon her? Could she here deny, Do not live Hero, do not open thine eyes†Act 4 Scene 1 Line 118 – 120) (This enragement carries on from line 118 to 141) The social status also gives us an excellent insight to the society of Messina. Someone like Benedick or Don Pedro, both very clever, typically shows us someone from the upper class. They both have a good education, very well spoken and also very witty. â€Å"Then is courtesy a turncoat. But it is certain I am loved of all ladies, only you excepted, and I would I could not find in my heart that I had a hard heart, for truly I love none. †Act 1 Scene 1 Lines 109-112 This shows how witty and quick-fired Benedick is when speaking with Beatrice from lines 109 to 130 in Act 1 Scene 1 of the play. However the lower and working class is a completely different story. The character from which we receive most information about the working class is Dogberry, for one his name is very well chosen as Dogberry meant Dog Rose, this is a very common rose, and is purposely chosen to suit his class in the play. However we also learn about his class through his lines in the play. â€Å"Your are thought here to be the most senseless and fit man for the constable of watch†¦ †Act 3 Scene 3 Line 21-23 We can see form his spoken language he is also very common, he tries to be witty in the play, but is always making mistakes, by saying the wrong word, like in this extract where he says â€Å"senseless†instead of sensible. This is a very effective way of creating humour but also an effective way in showing us to the social background of this character. â€Å"She's but the sign of semblance of her honour Behold how like a maid she blushes here! †Act 4 Scene 1 Lines 31-32 This is the part in which we find out Hero is not a Virgin. Claudio describes the blushes of guilt and nothing to do with her modesty. However Leonato does not follow, and misunderstands what Claudio has said to him. â€Å"Dear my lord, if you not in your own proof Have vanquished the resistance of her youth, And made defeat of her virginity-†Act 4 Scene 1 Lines 44-46 He only thinks Claudio is confessing that they have had sex, and not Hero with another man. Upon this misunderstanding Claudio has to explain himself once more, and then Leonato realises what he is saying. Instead of jumping to the rescue of his daughter, he chooses to disown her, by slapping her and yelling at her on her wedding day. Proving to the audience how chastity of your daughter was a very important thing in Messina. To conclude, I feel we learn a lot about the society of Messina in this play. However Shakespeare does not put it straight in front of you, he hides it behind his writing, and the characters lines. We learn of all the different social statuses in Messina and also the superiority of the male gender. I feel the most striking thing about Messina though, is how corrupt it is. You get the impression that it is a very friendly, peaceful town, however as we delve further into the play we find out the truth. The audience watching this would have been able to recognise many people and parts in this play, because it is so much like Elizabethan England at the time this was performed. Many families suffered from the divide on employment and social status, and many families also saw the chastity of their daughter the most important thing a father could offer, however the thing they would most be able to associate with would have been Dogberry and Verges. The watches would have been a very strong figure in England, and would be instantly recognisable from the moment they stepped on stage and one that would be guaranteed to raise a lot of laughs in the crowd.
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Original Work Of Dc Comics Copyright - 2437 Words
Because the Batmobile is the original work of DC Comics, the district court told Towle he was wrong by saying that DC Comics does maintain a copyright for the Batmobile as it appears in both the 1966 television series and the 1989 film based on their rights to merchandising and because the appearance and idea originated in the comic books (caselaw.findlaw.com, para. 13). The district court than put this Batman fight to an end by stating that Towle did infringe on DC Comics copyright because of how he replicated the Batmobile as it appeared in both productions (caselaw.findlaw.com, para. 13). Clearly this is an open and shut case because the district court granted the summary judgment to DC Comics for both the copyright and the trademark†¦show more content†¦It was agreed that all claims would be dismiss and on February 22, 2013 the court entered an agreement that is consistent with stipulation, which would later result in Towle appealing (caselaw.findlaw.com, para. 16). For DC to be able to win their case, they must be able to prove that they own a copyright for the Batmobile as it appeared in the 1966-television show and the 1989 movie. They must also prove that Towle’s replicas infringed on their copyright and that the creation of them was unauthorized (caselaw.findlaw.com, para. 18). In the appeal court, it is concluded that the Batmobile character is the property of DC and is copyrightable; therefore Towle did infringe upon DC Comics’s rights when he produced unauthorized works of the Batmobile. The ruling of the district court is then affirmed (caselaw.find.com, para. 49). The court first answered Towle’s original argument that the Batmobile is not copyrightable as it appears in not only the television series and the motion picture by using the case New Line v. Bertlesman Music Group. In this case, it is argued that Zomba, a musican, has infringed New Line’s copyright on the â€Å"A Nightmare on Elm Street†in the music video â€Å" A Nightmare on My Street.†Bertlesman Music Group represents Zomba in this case (law.justia.com, para 1). This case acts as a precedent for DC Comics v Towle, because the music video was not related to the film series yet featured a character that was
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)