Linus responds to Blanche and the POS. . .

[Stargleamer]

🙏

— KittyKatGirl😻🙏💞🐞 (@mary1kathy.bsky.social) 2025-09-09T15:29:05.291Z

[LetMyPeopleVote]

1. Great cartoon

[highplainsdem]

2. Copyright violation by whoever did that cartoon, unless they had permission.

[Lifeafter70]

5. Correct but

Charles schulz early cartoon strip "lil folks" is in the public domain. He did not copyright it before publishing that cartoon strip. You can use those original characters but not the names.

[highplainsdem]

6. What we're seeing used here are the Peanuts characters, not the clearly different characters from

Li'l Folks, and it is a copyright violation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li%27l_Folks

It isn't necessary to rip off copyrighted cartoon characters to get messages across.

[Lifeafter70]

7. I agree

Just thought it interesting that his earlier work was not copyrighted

[Ilikepurple]

8. Not an intellectual property attorney, but fair law for memes seems to be a gray area currently.

I won’t venture to guess what the ultimate determination would be here because I’m not qualified to apply the 4-factor test provided in 17 U.S. Code § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107 ). I’m guessing few, if any, are qualified until we get a more settled caselaw in this area. Im not sure why there isn’t more caselaw in this area. I’m guessing there would be more suits if copyright owners were as concerned as you are about this issue or not as sure of the legal win or effect on Q score? The infringement on trademarked name “Linus” in the title is probably an easier argument.

[surfered]

3. Out of the mouths of babes...

[highplainsdem]

4. See reply 2. Most popular cartoon characters are not in the public domain.