Copyright issues

[TELLE]

The Rusty Brown story is protected, or at least defendable, because the character is fantasizing about a doll --an actual product that exists in the real world (I think it's the very sexy a Mego Supergirl)
It does seem that the one area where DC/Warners may draw the line in issues of copyright infringement and art (as opposed to commerce, like someone starting a for-profit fan magazine about Batman and using lots of copyrighted imagery on the cover, as was the case about 15 years ago) is when we get to actual visual representations of a characters sexuality, especially where that depiction contradicts "canonical" DC depictions --depicting Batman as gay, for instance, seems a big no-no. DC refused to allow images to be used in an academic book of essay/queer readings of Batman a few years ago.  Or the current art controversy:

http://blog.stayfreemagazine.org/2005/08/gay_batman.html

Text infringements are less likely to provoke legal ire, as the millions of fan-fic and slash fiction sites attest:

http://www.superstories.net/story/Class/mm.html

By not prosecuting every infringement, however, DC harms its position, IMO.

DC is guilty of a few infringements itself over the years, most recently with the suit over the Winter Bros.

http://www.ncac.org/action_issues/Copyright.cfm

http://www.ncac.org/action_issues/Copyright.cfm

[ShinDangaioh]

Marvel has ran afoul of copyright issues as well.

Royal Roy-Richie Rich

Champions went toe to toe with a small RPG company called Hero Games and LOST, since Champions was their Superhero RPG and their trademark.

[jamespup]

This essay on Royal Roy makes some interesting points:

http://www.fortunecity.com/tatooine/niven/142/recycleb/rb47.html