Star Trek-themed Dr. Seuss parody is not “fair use”, rules Circuit Court in appeal
DECEMBER 20, 2020 - After four years battling it out in the courtroom, the United States 9th Circuit Court has ruled against the Dr. Seuss parody book Oh, The Places You’ll Boldly Go!, preventing the publication of the book and reversing a 2019 ruling from the United States District Court. The Hollywood Reporter brought us the details of the court’s decision, which found the book doesn’t fulfill the requirements to be considered under the terms of “fair use”.
In 2016, Dr. Seuss Enterprises, or DSE, filed the copyright infringement claim against Comic Mix LLC, publisher Glenn Hauman, and the book’s authors, award-winning comic writer Ty Templeton and Star Trek’s own David Gerrold. The latest ruling comes following an appeal by DSE, which argued that Oh, the Places You’ll Boldly Go! is not an appropriate use of the source material, infringing on the copyright held by DSE.
Circuit Court Judge Margaret McKeown began her opinion on the case by quoting the Dr Seuss book Oh, the Places You’ll Go!, saying:
“I’m sorry to say so
But, sadly it’s true
That Bang-ups
And Hang-ups
Can happen to you.”
McKeown went on to say, “If he were alive today, Dr. Seuss might have gone on to say that ‘mash-ups can happen to you.’ ... The creators thought their Star Trek primer would be ‘pretty well protected by parody,’ but acknowledged that ‘people in black robes’ may disagree. Indeed, we do."
Ultimately, the court’s decision was that the book is not actually a parody, nor is it a transformative work. The judges also cited that while Oh, the Places You’ll Boldly Go! may not technically violate trademark claims, it does not present any of the factors which would qualify the book as fair use of the Dr. Seuss source material.
While you won’t be able to pick up your own copy of Oh, the Places You’ll Boldly Go!, you can read the full story on the appeal process for the book at The Hollywood Reporter, where you can also find the 42-page summary of judgment from the 9th Circuit Court, detailing the case.