Cran

hello jimmymuppet, welcome to the forum ...

for the sake of your own reputation, you might try
reading, and understanding, all of the posts in a thread
or discussion before making accusations and generalisations ...

__________________
"I don't know ... I'm making it up as I go ..." - Dr I Jones

Nature abhors perfection - cats abhor a vacuum!

MiloDaePesdan

Allusion is about the indirect approach. I find it a lot like pepper or seasoning. Put too much and you get plagiarism.

It isn't allusion when the hack lifts whole plots, characters, and settings--with the only caveat of changing the name from, say, Mr. Darcy to Mr. Bob--and these people rarely try to "unlock new meanings in them." They like the plot and everything so much they want to write about that world and make it their own. They don't care about the allusion.

Eragon. Pfft. The worst.

Is this plagiarism?

There's an anime called Death Note where, if you write a person's true name in the notebook, you kill the person. Death Gods use that book to extend their lives and make sure people die on the right time. Then, if a person is about to naturally die from say, murder--and the God kills the murderer instead of the victim, the God dies.

A possible allusion is the Book of the Dead--where those whose names are written will go to heaven or something like that on Judgement Day (Bible).

Now Mr. Bob really likes this. He takes it, adds a few tweaks, a major change--like the Death God has to wear polka dot shorts in order to kill someone and he needs to do it with a pink pen backwards--then slaps on several other pieces from different anime settings, lifts the plot from the Wheel of Time, and spews it out in a book.

Wouldn't it be better if he went straight to the source Death Note were alluding to and built his own story from there? Or at least stripped the rules till he's left with the kernel of an idea: using a book to cast magic--and again, built it up from there?

I guess a defining point of alluding to literature is: how old, and how subtle?



Milo

__________________

almostfamous1286

Okay, thanks! I was just wondering about that... It kind of popped into my head.

__________________

jimmymuppet

Just to be clear..I'm not arguing with anyone here. My point is not defending people who produce thinly veiled versions of other works to get profit, I just want to point out that everything you see borrows liberally from other works. It must. It's in the nature of art. If you can recognize similarities to other works, it can even make the experience better. To answer your question, Milo, yes, it would be classier and more sophisticated to go to the original source, but does that make it more "right"? No, if the person wants to draw from an anime he watched, what's the harm? Who has ownership to those ideas? Certainly not Death Note; because they borrowed it from someone else.
Also, to address the possibility of "unintentional plagiarism". By your definition, Milo, plagiarism is lifting plot, characters, and setting directly from a book and altering a few aspects of it. Seems pretty hard to do unintentionally. Even Eragon, as much as I personally don't like it, doesn't do what you defined. And if it did, Paolini would be sued, but he hasn't. I just hope that you don't leap on things so quickly and call them plagiarism, that's all I ask, that's my only point. I've never read a story like the hyperbolic one you described, nothing even close. So I just ask to watch what you're calling plagiarism.

P

__________________
K*R*P

MiloDaePesdan

Won't. Not about to call that between 'Nadia and the Secret of Blue Water' and Disney's 'Atlantis' movie. Or 'Antz' and 'Bug's Life' and 'The Ant Bully.' And you're right--there's no harm drawing a concept from a recent source. Just, please, don't make it so bloody obvious.

Will do. It's just that I get my fur up now and then about things so obviously cliche and recycled--it screams for murder.



Milo
Weiiird. At the same time people want something similar and something new. >_<

__________________

Ragnar

Just wanted to mention that according to the Berne Convention (most nations are signatories), there aren't uncopyrighted works. As soon as it's written down somewhere (here counts) a copyright exists on the work, and all rights are considered to be reserved by the author unless otherwise stated.

There are national copyright offices still, but the copyright is held to be in existence at the moment of writing down the idea.

valeca

Yes, but it's proving the ownership that becomes the problem if there is a dispute and the work is not registered.

__________________
You know you wanna.

Browndragon

I don't believe you can "unintentionally" plagarise something. The laws of plagarism don't even allow for that. It is taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own. Most of what has been discussed here is simply work that is cliched not plagarised.

When the mentor in Eragon blew colored smoke rings that went up the chimney that was not plagarism. It was seriously cliched and I was appalled that any editor let it slip in. But it wasn't plagarism.

Plagarism is a VERY serious accusation. It isn't made lightly by anyone who isn't a nut case. Telling people to avoid cliches is one thing. Telling them that they might accidentally plagarise something is I believe totally unwarranted.

Sorry to come across as harsh on this subject, but I think you are scaring people needlessly. If you aren't copying the work, you aren't plagarising.

valeca

I recommend you go back and re-read the first post in its entirety.

__________________
You know you wanna.

Browndragon

I did read it in its entirety. I still think you should be very careful about accusing people of plagarism. It is a serious word to throw around.

Sorry if I offended you, but that is my honest opinion.

Edit: Not only did I read the first post, I read the entire thread.

valeca

No offense taken. I will respectfully disagree with your opinion and say that I think you've missed the point of the post.

BTW, welcome to WF. Enjoy the boards!

__________________
You know you wanna.

Browndragon

I think we do have an honest difference of opinion. Thanks for not taking offense.

And thanks for the welcome.

Edit: I don't think I missed the point of the post. I think you misunderstand the fundamental concept of plagarism. But, obviously, you will disagree with that.

Nuff said. The people who read can decide for themselves. I'm not going to try to convince you.

valeca

Heh, you're right, I will. I've a better-than-decent understanding of plagiarism. The whole post was done because a year ago we'd had a rash of fanfic being posted, and sadly an episode of plagiarism reported.

__________________
You know you wanna.

Browndragon

The date was the part I admit I DIDN'T look at. Sorry about that.

Plagarism is something I am well acquainted with in an academic setting, since it unfortunately happens in academia more than one wants to consider.

Fanfiction is pretty much always a form of plagarism. Most copyright holders feel that they get more advertising from it than harm it seems to me, which is why it is tolerated. (My own theory, obviously, but why else do they put up with all the sites that do publish fanfic? )

Edit: But to be clear, I absolutely agree that fanfic is plagarism and doesn't belong on a writing forum. The fact that copyright holders tend to tolerate it is simply an observation. The fact that it is tolerated doesn't make it any less plagarism.

Xtlk 1

Hello. My name is Xtlk and I am an unintentional plagarist.
*Cheering*

__________________
-Xtlk - My Hopeful Book!

A shattered daimond does not mend,
Yet pieces of glass are fused again.
The purest hearts are the ones that break,
The guarded and stained are the ones that remain.