So I just recently found out Billy West, the VA of Doug Funny,

>>89968060
Not the only time this happened anon. They were able to get Frank Welker to voice several of his characters again on RC. And Porky Pig also kept his usual post-1995 voice on the same show. To say nothing about the [AS] characters keeping their voices, or the live-action Scooby-Doo cast returning.

I think it's more a case by case type of situation here.

>>89968060
>Didn't Nancy Cartwright get in trouble for using her Bart Simpson voice on some Scientology telemarket scam?
I never heard about this but this is very different than briefly appearing in-character on another show.

>>89968751
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLyldQ9u0o4
I suppose, but I'm still confused on the matter.

>>89968060
>>89968728
I think this falls under fair use due to parody where as like
>>89968751 said I believe this would be using a product you dont own (bart) for advertising.

im pretty sure robot chicken is semi-canon for most of warner bro's meta lore.

there is a law to allow satire

File: hqdefault.jpg (22KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 480x360px

>>89968060
Cree Summer did penny for robot Chicken as well
>"Who downloaded dog on dog porn on my browser, as if I need to ask."

https://youtu.be/G-E8IA_sxcQ

It's allowed so long it's clearly meant to be a parody instead of a direct copy/rip-off of the original product. If you're trying to use said character to advertise something without the permission of the owners then you there is legal trouble.

Though I'm sure they're corporations that force their VA's to unable to use their voice to portray a character a certain.

Falls under satire though the RC crew usually reach out to the original creators and voice actors first (Which is how they got so many of the originals). Apparently they asked Jim Jinkins about the Doug sketch and he was all for it (And it took a while because Jim had retired and they needed to track him down). I know Schreinreich and Green have said that they try outline the skit and they try not to piss people off.

>>89971349

>If you're trying to use said character to advertise something without the permission of the owners then you there is legal trouble.

This is where they get you. What Cartwright did also basically ended her career once the Simpsons is over because no one will touch her with a bargepole and Fox even instructed the writers to remove her characters from some episodes in that season so she wouldn't be paid.

If parody is fine under law, then why did Justin Roiland get a C&D from Bill Cosby for House Of Cosbys?

>>89971596
>What Cartwright did also basically ended her career once the Simpsons is over
So what you're saying is she'll have a steady job for the rest of her life?

>>89971641
Their really wasn't any backing to the cease and deceit. The only real thing they could argue of was "defamation" and even then it's a big if.

They could've won that case if they tried but spending the time and money to get the lawyers and not mentioning Cosby having some of the best lawyers around, and multiple of them, it was just decided it wasn't worth the hassle and give him what he wants.

>>89971641
The same reason you wouldn't be able to make Mike Tyson Mysteries without Mike Tyson's okay. At that point, you'd be crossing the line from parody into "using a celebrities' likeness to promote your product".

>>89968060
Copyright is fair use when used for parody.

>>89971596
>once the Simpsons is over


I literally laughed irl for a good 10 minutes after reading this

it should be brought up that they wanted Peter Cullen to reprise as Optimus Prime in the prostate cancer sketch but he turned it down, probably due to Optimus dying being played for laughs.

>>89971641
C&D Isn't the same as its a C&D thats made in good faith, in accord to written contracts.

>>89968781
Yeah, it's really immaterial to the performance who actually gives it: it's whether the whole things falls under parody or not that's important.

>>89968060
They may have, while a show is going/still being promoted but no longer being made - but like 20 years later there's no way anybody would be left who'd even remember a clause like that, let alone the will to enforce it assuming it hadn't terminated along with the rest of the contract.

Put it like this: if you work at McDonalds and they have a rule that you don't post shitty memes about them on your Facebook or they can terminate you and sue for defamation... are they really going to pursue you five years after you quit?

>>89968060
>Didn't Nancy Cartwright get in trouble for using her Bart Simpson voice on some Scientology telemarket scam

Dunno about that, but I seem to recall that early on she wasn't allowed to do Bart outside of the show.

>>89975169
Makes sense, Cullen takes his role as Optimus Prime very seriously.

>>89971596
>basically ended her career once the Simpsons is over because no one will touch her with a bargepole

Pull the other one.

OP here. Thanks for clearing this up guys. I actually have gained a newfound appreciation for Robot Chicken for how they try to get old VAs on the show for the characters (and I mean you DO hear it sometimes, especially if it's not Seth Green's voice).

>billy west reading you-know-whos tweets as zapp brannigan

It works too well

>>89979823
>you-know-whos
Who, the president?

File: Harley_Quinn.jpg (229KB, 1516x2048px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1516x2048px

>>89971242
Tara Strong also voices Harley on RC

File: 1452405767791.gif (290KB, 500x677px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 500x677px

>>89968060
As long as the parody doesn't affect the company that owns the property I don't think there is an issue with a 30 second sketch involving a VA playing an old character from a TV show that is long over. Also yeah fair use and everything plus no one cares about adult swim barely anyone watches it late nights to pay it any mind.

>>89980040
But Tara is the worst Harley.