Here's the rewritten content in a well-structured article format:

Kind: captionsLanguage: en(afterburner blasting)

Plenty of us have fallen in love with cars through movies. Whether it was the upbeat music that accompanied those sleek and powerful rides, or the stories they told on screen, cars have become an integral part of our culture.

(upbeat music)

WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: en(afterburner blasting)- Plenty of us have fallen inlove with cars through movies,(upbeat music)whether it was the "Fast and the Furious,"(tires squealing)"James Bond,"(tires squealing)or my personal favorite,"Herbie Fully Loaded."(tire bouncing)I love you Lindsay.(antenna vibrating)Movies can be a great showcase for cars.Some fans fall in lovewith a movie car so muchthat they decide to build a replica,but what happens whenyour, "Jurassic Park," Jeepor your love bug goesfrom a fun fan project,to copyright infringement.In case you've been living under a rock,our friends over at B isfor Build, are finding out.In May of this year, thechannel had their Mustangbody swap project seized, andthen they had to take downall the videos of the car.So why did that happen?Well, I'll tell you.Chris, over at B is forBuild is an awesome guy,and makes cool videos that I love.I watch him all the time.This year, he and his shopwere working on a ground upresto-mod of a 1967 Fastback Mustang.They took a 2015 Mustangchassis, engine, suspension,all the cool modernstuff, and fitted the 67'sbody panels around itto make a perfect blendof classic Mustang looksand modern performance.But one thing about the carcaused a lot of problems.They named it Eleanor.Eleanor is the name givento the silver and black67 Fastback Mustang in the 2000movie, "Gone in 60 Seconds."The copyright of that namealso owned by a companycalled Eleanor Licensing, LLC.The LLC claimed that B is for Build,was infringing on their copyrightand they had the channeltake down every videofeaturing the Mustang,and then they took away the Mustang.- No (crying)- It turns out the rightsholders for the Eleanor namehad a history of doing this sort of thing.They even sued Carroll Shelby and won.They basically own anything named Eleanoras it pertains to "Gone in60 Seconds," or Mustang.That's a crazy amount of legal power.That basically means that any Mustang,regardless of what it looks like,can be seen as an infringementon the LLC's copyrightif it gets named Eleanor.And to show how they havethe grounds to do that,we need to look at the original Eleanor.(engine roaring)No, the original.(upbeat music)The main rights holder toEleanor and "Gone in 60 Seconds,"is the widow of H.B.Halicki, who was the creatorof the original, "Gonein 60 Seconds," in 1974,not the film you may knowwith Nic cage from 2000.The 1974 film featureda yellow, 1971 MustangMach One named Eleanor.Look, the movie wasn't a big hit,but because Eleanor existsas two different Mustangs,this copyright seems to havegrown to encompass any Mustangnamed Eleanor, since the characteris not a specific Mustang.So now 46 years later, a project carthat doesn't resemble the original,isn't being sold forprofit, and isn't finished,gets taken from its builder,all for having the same name.And it's not like cars even have names.I mean, I know car peoplelike to name their cars,but it's not like it'setched into the bodylike a VIN number.How do you prove in courtthat a car is named something?Do you put it in the middle of the roomand call out names, and seewhich one that responds to?No.And if you don't name the car, Eleanor,do you have the right to owna pepper gray metallic 67,Shelby GT 500?A car and paint colorthat were both availablelong before the 2000 movie was made?I know it might be a bit ridiculous,but the name makes a difference.It changes this build projectfrom a car, to a character.As a car, the design patentfor the 1967 Mustang Fastbacklasted for 14 years, which meansthat if you built a replicaof a Fastback and sold it with no badges,Ford may not be able to stop you,but a copyright is different.It can last for 90 years fromthe creation of the character.So we could be seeing lawsuitslike this around Eleanorfor another 44 years.You know, I have to wonder ifthis company is just sittingon a warehouse full ofincomplete Eleanor replicas.That's gonna be one crazyepisode of "Storage Wars."It's sucks that B is for Build'sresto-mod Mustang projectwas taken down from YouTube.Eleanor or not, I thoughtthe idea of the swapwas just really cool.And if you did too, don'tworry B is for Buildis doing it again with a67 coup this time around.So go check it out,those guys are awesome,and I love their channel.They deserve more subs.Okay, so the, "Gone in 60 Seconds," campis pretty litigious, butwhat other movie cars?Is this something that couldhappen with any replica?("Batman Theme")Gotham Garage is a customfabrication and hot rod shopbased in Temecula, California,that built up a businessbuilding and selling replicasof the 1966 Adam West Batmobile.(Batmobile roaring)They use a mold pulled fromone of the original carsand drop a fiberglassshell onto the chassisof a C4 Corvette.That sounds really bad ass.Gotham Garage owner, Mark Towleloved building these cars,but he also had his eye on the1989, Tim Burton Batmobile.He got a mold, waited 14years for the design patentto expire, and then started buildingthose Batmobiles as well.And unlike B is for Build,these weren't resto-mods,these were full blown replicas,with screen accurate interiors,working canopies, and even machine gunsthat would pop out of hood.But that didn't stop DCcomics and Warner Brothersfrom coming after the little SoCal shop.The court case madeheadlines in the prop makingand movie replica communities,especially because otherbuilders were worriedabout their own projects.Towle's defense hingedupon an interesting caveatin copyright law.Copyright is for creativeworks and does not allowfor useful articles to be copyrighted.Towle argues that a caris a useful article,and not a character?The argument looked good whenit came to the 66 Batmobile,especially when you comparethat one to the Ford Futuraconcept car on which it was based.There was not a lot added toit to make it a Batmobile,but the argument fell apartwhen the conversation turnedto the '89 Batmobile, which isnot based on any existing carand has an iconic design work all over it,that doesn't serve anyfunction or purpose,other than to look the part.Gotham Garage lost the case unfortunately,and was asked to stop selling Batmobiles,and to destroy their molds.Customers that had carsthat were in progresswere left in a tough spot,but Gotham Garage wasable to sell a few unique,custom hot rods to those loyal customers,and keep the business going.Gotham Garage is actuallystill up and running,and they've got a series on Netflixthat you should check out.It's called, "Rust toRiches," and when you takeinto account that theyused to build Batmobiles,they're builds, start tomake a lot more sense.They are ridiculous.So it looks like the Batmobileis a character as well,and I guess that makes sensebecause while it doesn'thave a name like Eleanor,it still has a uniquetitle, the Batmobile.Now I'm no lawyer, andeven though court casescan hinge on precedent,there's always a chancethat a bad decision gets made.So something qualitative,like how much of a characteror useful article is yourcar, literally ends up beingdecided on a case by case basis, it seems.A car having a name seemsto be a good indicatorthat it can be copyrighted as a character.But what about a movie carthat doesn't have a name?(upbeat music)The junk covered DeLorean from1985's, "Back to the Future,"is one of the mostrecognizable cars in the world.It has inspired plenty of replica buildsand is one of the onlyreasons most people knowabout the DMC 12 at all.So are these road going replicais getting seized as well?Well, no, not really.Take a look at Bob's Prop Shop.They've built and sold nearly 30,"Back to the Future," DeLoreans.They've taken them to charity events,rented them out for weddings,even got the cast to signsome of them.They're making money offof someone else's IP,just like Gotham Garage was,and they aren't the onlyfabricator doing this.Plenty of other time machinebuilders use the DeLoreansto make a profit.So why aren't DeLoreans getting seized?It could be that because the DeLoreanin "Back to the Future,"never gets a name,it's only ever referredto as the DeLorean,or the time machine.While it is stylized, it's atool that the characters used.It's a useful article,'cause people are stillusing the logos and IP like Mr. Fusion.Also let's face it, if acompany like universal wantedto sue you for copyright infringement,they'd be able to bleedyou dry with any legal feesbefore you get anywhere near a courtroom.No, I think there'ssomething else going on here.I'd like to think that the rights holdersfor, "Back to the Future,"are just cool that way.They don't see copyrightinfringement that cutsinto their profits.They see it as an opportunityfor fans to get to show lovefor their franchise and by doing so,they fall more in lovewith that franchise.By not suing any of these builders,Universal basicallywaived their rights to suein the future.They're not protecting their copyright.At least not to the sameextent that others have.That could have been a bad decisionfor the, "Back to theFuture," rights holders,but as it turns out, it's a long play,and it turns out to havepaid off for Universal.Around 2012, Universal wantedto restore the original,"Back to the Future," time machine.The A-car as it's known,was parked on the back lotat Universal Studios,Hollywood and had falleninto major disrepair.They set about doing afull museum restorationand the community was there to help them.Parts of the restoration were much easierbecause the research hadalready been done by the fans.Certain components weresourced from peoplebuilding replicas, andeven fans who hadn'tbuilt a time machinecould donate to the bill.Our writer Joey, actuallydonated to the restorationand he's got a few of the piecesthat needed to be replacedin a display box.Probably cost a lot of money (laughing).All of this was done in timefor the 30th anniversaryof the film in 2015, the year Marty McFlywent back to the future.So what are the rules forbuilding a replica car?I guess it all comes down tothe rights holders themselves,and if they want topursue litigation or not.It seems the real problem isthe fact that these copyrightslast for so freaking long now.90 years, are you serious?And this isn't problemisolated to the car world.When copyright was firstestablished in 1790,it was a max of 28 years,but the copyright termhas been extended multiple times,and one of the maincontributing factors to thatis Disney's copyright on Steamboat Willie,the first Mickey Mouse cartoon,which is currently undercopyright until 2023.And if history repeatsitself, that copyright termwill be extended yet again,not only protecting MickeyMouse for a longer time,but Eleanor as well.Disney now owns therights to a huge portionof our popular culture, andnobody outside the companycan show off their interpretationof these charactersand stories without fear of getting sued,which flies in the face of art history,wherein our entire humanexperience is built offinterpreting and changing existing art.I'm going a little toointo the weeds here,but the B is for Buildcase is a perfect example.Not only was Chrisinterpreting a character,but he was making itbetter and pushing a car,we collectively love, forward,but it got taken away from us.Now I don't want to unfairly demonizeEleanor Licensing, LLC.Truly, okay?They've exercised their rightto protect the copyright they own.A few months ago, we talkedabout Ferrari sending Deadmau5a cease and desist over his Ferrari.These are different cases,but the principle is the same.If you let just one personinfringe on the copyright,that opens you up to more people doing it,more easily in the future.And if you depend on thatcopyright for income,then you kind of haveno choice to defend it.What we should be focusing on, is the lawsthat let these ridiculous legal decisions,like taking Chris's car away,happen in the first place,and that's when we'll see things change.Until then though, I'll be right here,hanging out with you guysand reading those comments,so leave one for me, please.I'm alone in my apartment.Follow Donut Media on allsocial media @donutmedia.Follow me @NolanJSykes.Subscribe If you'd like to see more.Be kind, I'll see you next time.