on copyright -
what is copyright is the brand name "The Floss" - this is because that is what that performer called it - so his brand is when he does a standing Charleston dance on stage - using that "Brand name" is attempting to capitalize on his fame.
If the moves itself could be copyright and trademarked, then this would set a precedent for prohibition laws at clubs charging royalties to do certain dance moves - imagine standing on line with a list of the dance moves you plan to do that evening that dictate your entrance fee, and you could be arrested and sued for dancing like james brown - prince would have been ruined.
Another way to explain it, Calvin Klein - if they had a copyright on t-shirts - then all non Calvin Klein t-shirts would be copyright infringement. No, Calvin Klein owns the brand - so you can not take another T-shirt in any shape or form and stick a Calvin Klein label on it and say it's yours, because you are infringing on their brand, the name itself, not T-shirts in general.
Contrary to the guys claim in the op video - he could have copyright his version of the standing charleson as the Squeegee - because it would have been his brand of when he first performed it on youtube which has now also become famous - so when people hear the Squeegee - everyone knows that refers to the first performer that did the standing charleston dance on youtube, thus a brand. Also why he can't sue the other performer for doing the squeegee, because the performer didn't call it the squeegee, he called it the floss which represents his live performance of the standing charleston dance on saturday night live
☯🐉
"To define Tao is to defile it" - Lao Tzu
Edited
2 Years Ago by
planetstardragon