So, I read through the full court filing, and I promise you it's at least five times funnier than whatever you're thinking lol. In addtion to the above, we've got some real heavy hitters here:
"The heroines of both works are female teenagers with supernatural abilities. But Freeman’s copyright “do[es] not entitle [her] to protection of the idea of a character with superhuman powers who battles the forces of evil.”"
"....Rather, it is a perfectly normal reaction from someone who has just been kidnapped; it is impossible to imagine a character who would not be fearful in this situation. And there is, of course, nothing remotely original about using breathing techniques to cope with anxiety."
"Freeman’s position that the romantic leads are substantially similar because they both feel a responsibility to protect the heroine from supernatural creatures wanting to harm or kill her exemplifies the weakness of her argument. There is nothing original about a romantic lead who wants to protect the heroine; it is perhaps the ultimate teen romance trope. A romantic lead who does not want to protect the heroine from evil supernatural creatures would never be found in a young adult romantic fantasy novel."
"Of course, both BMR/Masqued and Crave include the inevitable love story between the heroine and a hot boy who turns out to be a paranormal – this is “romantasy” fiction, so there has to be a romance, and hot boys are a staple of the genre."
"The only apparently “diverse” character in Freeman’s drafts is Brendan, the protagonist’s friend, who is both multiracial and gay. The symbolic presence of one multiracial, gay character – especially a character whose race and sexuality do not factor into Anna/Mia’s (or even Brendan’s) story arc in a major way – does not make “diversity and inclusion” a protectable theme of Freeman’s work. It is significant that Brendan is totally closeted; he does not even have a same-sex attraction to another character in BMR/Masqued and only Anna/Mia knows about his sexuality. As for his race, it is mentioned once, then dropped; it is irrelevant to the story. It is, in short, tokenism."
And my personal favorites...
"A live but enchanted parent is not the same thing as two dead ones. And children are generally traumatized when a parent dies; suffering physical and psychological scars is hardly uncommon – or copyrightable."
"And of course, there is a massive difference between getting drunk at a party and having one’s inhibitions loosened, and being poisoned so that one can be tied up and used as a human sacrifice."
"I will not bother to critique Freeman’s notion that choosing between potential boyfriends represents a high expression of feminism. But her characterization of what the two heroines do misrepresents what is actually found in Freeman’s and Wolff’s works."
"Freeman’s contention that the works treat the theme of “feminism” similarly because both protagonists take advanced classes at high school, quote great works of literature, love reading, and discuss French philosophers is hardly worthy of comment."
"(footnote) I would not have characterized Anna/Mia’s introspectivity in this manner if left to my own devices, but I will accept Freeman’s characterization in order to explain why it does not create substantial similarity."
"But Freeman did not invent an attack scene that starts with a confrontation and capture, progresses to the heroine’s rescue, and concludes with the aftermath of the attack. An attack sequence structured any other way would make little sense."
vaporwave
izzy806
blakekathryn
discoholicmusic
janainaart
areudirty
