Talk:Bobby Bumps Adopts a Turtle
Transcriber's notes edit
The title card looks somewhat suspicious to be unoriginal as it has no copyright notice (see also cases like the one on Talk:Bobby Bumps' Fly Swatter with unoriginal title cards), but I am unsure. It at least seems to be part of a recorded print, but I'm sure editing software could emulate that look. Alas, I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt and transcribing it for Wikisource despite my suspicions. Also, it's warranted to do this, as this title card, unlike the one on Bobby Bumps' Fly Swatter, only contains simple text/lines, and thus it is too simple for copyright in its own right, even if it is unoriginal and recently made.
If anyone finds future evidence that this title card is unoriginal, it should be removed from both the video at Commons and from our transcribed text of it at Wikisource. PseudoSkull (talk) 04:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
The intertitle cards are definitely reconstructed. It follows that so would be the title. The intertitles are probably written loyally to the originals, but the title is clearly (probably) not. As such, I am not including this "reconstructed" placeholder title in the transcription, as it is most likely not anything like what the original would've looked like (see the notes at Talk:Bobby Bumps' Fly Swatter, several of those reasons apply here).
As for the intertitle contents (which alone might be PD-simple anyway), as they are probably loyal to an original public-domain work, and the only different addition to them is the font, background color, etc., they are not copyrightable as reconstructions in this way. Unless the creator just made up the intertitle contents (unlikely), then this remains true. Note that if a more original print is recorded and uploaded to the Internet, that recording may render this one obsolete and reveal some of its text to be slightly inaccurate.
By the way, instead of using a "`" symbol for the quotations like the reconstructed dialogue for that one line did, I used regular quotation marks, as I am sure that that would be what the originals would have done. I am unsure why the encoder decided on that quotation style for this encode... PseudoSkull (talk) 05:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)