[leadpenny]

Bradbury, who is a registered political independent, said he would rather avoid litigation . . .

I thought I heard or read somewhere a number of years ago that copyright laws do not apply to the titling of books?

[longtermmemmory]

I think it means if you use a generic copyright. Leo Boscalia used to make a big issue over the fact nobody had every copyrighted the "Love" as the title of a book.

I do believe Bradbury has legs to stand on legally. The damage however has been done and that "handshake" better be accompanied by a check.

Seriously, Farenheit 451 is an excellent book. It is not aligned with any "wing" it is just a deep warning. It should not be marginalized with left wing politics. In the future some over reactive parent will associate it with Moore's R rated tripe and prevent children from reading it or seing the movie.

[Commie Basher]

Copyright law doesn't apply to titiles, generic or otherwise. However, trademark & unfair competition law does, provided the title is famous enough to confuse buyers into thinking the new book's title refers to the old book.

[atomicpossum]

I thought I heard or read somewhere a number of years ago that copyright laws do not apply to the titling of books?

In general, copyright cannot be extendded to titles. But what Bradbury can claim is that the title is a deliberate play on his older, more established work, and is an attempt to appropriate some of the legitimacy and reputation of his work, and even to associate Bradbury with it. The title 'Fahrenheit 451' is a known quantity with the public, and deliberately selecting a title to associate another work with that one is attempting to appropriate the reputation and legitimacy of someone else's work. The use of the 'temperature at which...' tagline adds to this assertion.