Oft times Shakespeare appropriated works only a few years old; Othello (1603) was based off Un Capitano Moro (1565), less than forty years old, still in copyright in most copyright systems. If you want to discuss principle, not law, then don’t dismiss that as “old folk tales”; wrestle with the fact that Shakespeare’s works could not be written with your principles.
Copyright law does work like this, at least in the Southern District of California; the judge said so. Wishing may not make it so, but if this decision is overturned, then we may in a democracy petition our representatives to make it so. Stop bringing law up as a shield if you’re talking about principle; in law, in theory we the people can do pretty much whatever we want.
How are they doing something at someone else’s expense? How is this costing Dr Seuss Enterprises? It’s not high art, but these type of works can be amusing, and it doesn’t hurt anyone else. Star Trek might have more of a complaint; copyright law often turns on careful study of the works, so I’d find it hard to say without reading the book.
These types of questions are much harder than you’re giving them credit for. One artist does something, and many others follow the same lead, sometimes in clearly fair ways, sometimes rather closely. The Monkees were a ripoff of the Beatles, as were many other bands. D&D and Shannara cribbed quite a few things from Tolkien. Without Anne Rice, there probably wouldn’t be Twilight. Without Sherlock Holmes, probably no Poirot.
