posted
Where is the line between stealing and using something another author created?
For instance the Ansible, which OSC used even though LeGuin created it in 'The Dispossessed'. Would that be seen as stealing? There's no point in re-inventing something slightly different when that does exactly what I want.
Would I have to acknowledge it or would the fact that I am using it by name to do exactly what it was created to do be the acknowledgment. I guess if I called it the FlubberDoodle, but it did the same thing then that would be stealing.
According to the Asimov FAQ (http://www.asimovonline.com/asimov_FAQ.html#series12)
"The television program Star Trek: The Next Generation included an android character, Data, whom we are specifically told (in the episode "Datalore") was created in an attempt to bring "Asimov's dream of a positronic robot" to life. ... Asimov tended not to let other people use his specific Laws of Robotics, but his essential insight -- that robots will have in-built ethical systems -- is freely used. ... Data is an "Asimovian" robot because he does have an in-built ethical system. He does not have the three laws however ... Asimov stated that Roddenberry asked for his permission to make Data a positronic robot after the fact. Asimov himself had no input into the character."
So it seems that sometimes you can and sometimes you can't.
posted
Someone posted OSC's thoughts on this recently (and I had read it in his book on writing fiction). He borrowed ansible. In the posted quote, OSC said he coined xenocide but knows he can't own a word and expects that others might use it.
In his book, if memory serves, he thinks that using established terms, like star-drive makes sense, so that the avid reader of SF does not have to struggle to find out if an astro fargle engine is really just a ho-hum star-drive. Only if you're describing something new in the literature do you invent new terms.
Borrowing substantially from someone else's characters or created world is another matter altogether. A new word does not have the gravatas of a new world or complex character.
[This message has been edited by WouldBe (edited August 25, 2007).]
posted
Ursela LeGuin specifically gave other writers permission to use "ansible", so that's ok. George Lucas trademarked the word "hyperspace" but, since the word is in common use, and the trademark has not been contested or upheld in court, that's probably ok too. On the other hand, do not us "Tarzan" as the name of a hero who lives in the jungle, or you will find yourself in court. You can use Tarzan as the name of a horse, however.
Plagiarism consists of stealing somebody else's words. If you begin a story, "In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit," that is plagiarism and it is against the law. On the other hand, if you begin a story "A halfling lived in a hole," you probably won't sell it, but I don't think you are breaking the law.
Trademark violation consists of trying to profit from a word, slogan, logo, or symbol invented by someone else, and used in competition with the person or company holding the trademark. You can sell "Chevrolet" ice cream, but cannot name a new brand of car Chevrolet.
Use common sense. Robot, halfling, warp drive, utopia, dark lord, and superhero are probably ok. "Superhero" is a trademark jointly owned by Marvel and DC, but it is also in such common use it is doubtful that the trademark would hold up in court. (To avoid violating the trademark, Alan Moore coined the word "science hero".) On the other hand, avoid Godzilla, Transformer, Spider-man, Harry Potter, and Ender Wiggins.
posted
I doubt if George Lucas's trademarking of "hyperspace" would hold up...its use in the SF field predates his birth, much less his "Star Wars" triolgies. He'd have better luck with the names of his characters and planets and movies and such. (Of course, he once wrote a fan letter to Mad Magazine about their parody just as his lawyers wrote a cease-and-desist letter...they wrote "Gee, your boss seemed to like it" or somesuch on the fan letter and mailed it to the lawyers, and never heard another word.)
Robota is, I gather, the Czech word for "worker," which is what Karl Capek's robots did in the play R. U. R., which stands for "Rossem's Universal Robots." The original translators left the word alone---probably to preserve the initals in the title---and the word stuck around. (The robots in the play would be called "androids" today---it was in the science fiction field that the term came to be applied specifically to "mechanical men"---long before Asimov.)
posted
it seems to me that the issue is as much about courtesy and ethics as anything. If something is associated with a particular author, ask for permission. If they refuse, honor that.
Posts: 1304 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you're taking a creative writing course at a college campus (or still going to college), it might be a good idea to sign up for a Communications' Law class (offered by most colleges and usually offered through the Communications or Technical Communications departments). These courses usually give pretty good insight into what to do and what not to do in terms of copyright.
Also, keep in mind, just because it's legally not plagiarism doesn't mean that it won't be seen as plagiarism. I pointed out in the "How Important is Originality?" thread the massive backlash Eregon got because people saw it as a Lord of the Rings rip-off; Disney's/Pixar's computer-animated film The Wild, released about a year or so ago, did very poorly in the box office because it was very similar to, and seen as a rip-off of, the Dreamworks computer animated film Madagascar (although it's interesting to note that it's actually the other way around: Pixar Animation Studios laid off a few key CGI artists who were working on The Wild, who later went to Dreamworks and rushed their movie to get the jump on Disney). Similar products develop intense competition amongst each other; take a look at two similar reality shows or other types of shows that conform to the latest trends in television entertainment, and see which ones lasts and which ones are off the air in less than a month.
And finally (and this is primarily incidental), just because there isn't a "Chevrolet" ice cream brand doesn't mean you can name an ice cream brand as such and not expect a multi-billion dollar global industrial giant to send an army of top-dollar lawyers your way. There are differences between "trademarks" (noted by "TM") and Registered trademarks (noted by "(R)"). In short, registered trademarks mean that the company has total ownership of that name over all domains, which means no used car sales lots named "Wal-Mart" and no grocery stores named "Boeing."
Printer-friendly view of this topic
