Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Stolen Ideas

This is topic Stolen Ideas in forum Open Discussions About Writing at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002958

Posted by Spark (Member # 3292) on :

Everything that follows is completely hypothetical. I have not stolen any ideas (that I know of). Say you write a story, a great one, but it turns out your book is much the same as someone elses. You had no idea about this other person's book, and now you have two books basically about the same thing.

So is it just a race to be published, or does someone have the right of way (print?). Thanks

Spark

Posted by Christine (Member # 1646) on :

We did an exercise here a while back about how everyone could intentionally write about the same idea and end up with different stories. I tink that eventually the monthly fairy tale challenges made way for the weekly flash challenges at Liberty Hall, but here's the point:

No two authors will take the same idea and come up with exactly the same story.

Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :

I agree. Furthermore, it's not only the idea that makes a story, but also the characters. And no two authors will end up with the same characters either.

Posted by Susannaj4 (Member # 3189) on :

Tell that to Dan Brown. He is being sued for 'DaVinci Code' as we speak. I'm guessing because his book sold and I can't even think of the other guy's book Brown was supposed to have copied.

Posted by Christine (Member # 1646) on :

LOL!

Sorry, it amuses me everytime a RICH and FAMOUS author gets sued for copyright infringement. If there's many to be had, folks, people are going to try to get their grubby little hands on it!

But how many of those cases have been successful? Anyone can sue anyone at any time and waste the courts time for months if they have enough money...but winning a law suit? It is difficult to prove this kind of copyright infringement. You basically have to show that the work was plagarized (maybe with a few changed names and dates).

[This message has been edited by Christine (edited March 16, 2006).]

Posted by spcpthook (Member # 3246) on :

Here's another thought. In another group I am in I was regularly critting a novel as it was being posted. The further I got in the story the more I thought the world seemed very much like the world of a published trilogy. I know it's possible to pull the same schematics out of thin air.

I myself have read other works and discovered my wondrously unique thoughts were not really so unique. So I emailed her off-list to ask if she had ever read this trilogy. Her reply to me was "I loved those books, I'd like to think BNA had something to do with my writing because I really enjoyed hers." Does it become stealing if your world and characters begins to resemble those found in a published work that you admit you've read.

In this case it only took another chapter being posted for somebody else to recognize the world that this person was pulling from. Where is the line that says this is my book, and this was stolen from somebody else.

Posted by Christine (Member # 1646) on :

Now you're getting into whether or not there's ever a truly unique idea. In a sense, no story is unique and everything is just a new spin on old ideas, perhaps with a different character, a different twist on the plot, or even just a diferent voice.

When it comes to fantasy (I assume you're talking abou fantasy), most of the worlds sound alike to me, to be honest. You do get problems then when you steal the exact world..same place names, historical figures, people, etc. Without the author's permission, you cannot do this and this is why Kathleen does not allow such stories on this site.

Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :

There's nothing really new, it's just the spin you put on it that makes the idea yours. Just make sure you don't steal somebody else's spin on the idea...which, I gather, is the gist of the argument over "The DaVinci Code."

Posted by J (Member # 2197) on :

It's not copyright infringement if you came up with it all by yourself, even if someone else happened to come up with it first. In fact, one of the elements the plaintiff has to prove in most copyright infringement cases is that the accused infringer had some sort of exposure to the allegedly infringed work.

Posted by Grimslade (Member # 3173) on :

The whole Dan Brown case is bunk. The book he "borrowed" from was written as Non-fiction. Dan Brown used the 'scholarship' of the original book and used it as background in DaVinci Code. You can not copyright an idea.
Otherwise, the entire genre of historical fiction is a violation to historians.

Posted by rstegman (Member # 3233) on :

It is common when editors will get the "same story" and they nearly always take the first one. The same story in this case could be a boy and girl fighting an evil warlord using a magic sword, with an elf and gnome as sidekicks.
They could be completely different, but since they have the same theme, they take only one.

In writing classes I have had, no two students came up with the same results from our assignments. One teacher would give us three things to be included in the story (argument, broccoli, and driver's licence was one example) and the stories had nothing to do with each other, other than those three points. I depend on that when I post my story ideas. I figure no twenty people will write the same story.

I've been posting daily story ideas since 1997, and I doubt I copied the same idea twice in nearly 4000 posts. There are a good number with similar format, style and results, but the starting concept and emphasis is always different.

Also, taking the world created by someone else and writing a new story from it, is the bread and butter of the star wars and star trek books that fill the shelves. The girl you mentioned likely took that world and wrote her own.

Posted by Christine (Member # 1646) on :

quote:
It is common when editors will get the "same story" and they nearly always take the first one.

Oh really? Which editor, precisely, told you this? I find it incredibly difficult to believe. For one thing, we are forgetting that some 90% of stories submitted to editors for publication are not worthy of publication, however creative the story. Let's not get so wound up in clever ideas that we forget that very few writers implement them in any kind of successful manner.

Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :

I was told that if you wrote a story, and that it dealt with a theme the editor was overstocked on, you would have a tough time selling it (but it's not a matter of ideas anymore, but of subject matter).

But that's all.

Posted by pantros (Member # 3237) on :

The problem Mr. Brown is facing is that, in the process of researching "DaVinci", his wife paraphrased or copied whole sections of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and he in turn copied or paraphrased his wife's notes directly into the text of his book.

What he did is called plagarism, though it may have been inadvertant. I do not think that he intended to copy someone else's copyrighted material. This is before a judge because it is a question of how closely you can copy and not cross the line of copyright infringement.

He definitly used the same ideas present in the previous work, in some cases the paraphrasing is minimal. He certainly could use the ideas presented in a non-fiction work as a basis for a fictional story. The problem is that he used the actual text of the non-fiction book and that is a copyright violation. As I mentioned, the justice system just needs to determine if he crossed the line between referencing and copying into copyright violation.

Posted by Elan (Member # 2442) on :

I disagree with pantros. The authors of "Holy Blood Holy Grail," Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh (co-author Henry Lincoln has not joined the lawsuit) are not claiming Brown lifted text directly, paraphrased or not. They are claiming copyright violation because Brown used their "ideas and themes."

An article on MSNBC states (SPOILER ALERT TO DA VINCI CODE PLOT) : "They say that Brown “appropriated the architecture” of their book, which explores theories that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, that the couple had a child and that the bloodline survives."

Brown has admitted he used HBHG as a resource, but it was published as non-fiction... it is not like you can copyright an idea or a theme.

The reality is the Mary Magdalene theme has been around for years. I read about it a couple of years ago, and not from HBHG. The authors of HBHG don't own this "idea." The book of Sophia in the Nag Hammandi library, part of the Gnostic Gospels found years ago in the middle east talks about the divine feminine. If you go to Amazon.com you'll find a lengthy listing of titles with similar premises. I think Baigent & Leigh will have a hard time proving that they own an "idea". If they succeed, we are ALL screwed.

[This message has been edited by Elan (edited March 16, 2006).]

Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :

spcpthook, if the novel you are talking about is not different enough from the book that inspired it, editors will consider it derivative fan fiction and will not be at all interested in it.

You might want to mention that to the writer, unless the writer has no interest in trying to get the book published. When it comes to publishing, imitation may be flattery and it may be sincere, but it won't make the author being imitated happy, and it will call down that author's lawyers on the one doing the imitating.

Posted by pantros (Member # 3237) on :

You don't disagree with me Elan. I never said why Baigent and Leigh were suing Brown. I just said why Brown might actually have a problem on his hands.

The concept that historical facts can be copyrighted is ludicrous. I never said otherwise. A paragraph of historical text, however, can be copyrighted. Reprinting without the author's permission, rephrased or not, is a copyright violation.

If all Brown did was use the facts and arguments from HBHG, he's fine. If he reworked sections of the book into his, he's screwed.

edit: added word: permission

[This message has been edited by pantros (edited March 16, 2006).]

Posted by krazykiter (Member # 3108) on :

According to law, you CANNOT copyright an idea, only an "original work of authorship."

It IS possible to reprint part of an author's work, without permission, under the "fair use" clause, as long as such use is limited to: "purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research."

So, if you're writing a book review or a news article, you can reprint *short* sections, but, as pantros rightly stated, you cannot use them as part of your own work, such as a novel.

Federal law on copyright, what it is and isn't (and thanks to certain file-sharing applications, there's a HUGE misunderstanding on the subject) is located at:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Copyright

Posted by J (Member # 2197) on :

Copyright law is fairly complicated. If anyone has serious questions about the issue related to their own work, they should contact an IP attorney.

[This message has been edited by J (edited March 17, 2006).]

Posted by Matt Lust (Member # 3031) on :

Pantros do you actually know which children Brown kidnapped?

Historical aside
Plaggiri were dangerous pirates who would steal children and hold them for ransom.

To put it another way what would he have copied/stolen?

The facts, as they are, surrounding the marriage of christ? or the merilvengians(sp) link to christ? If its a matter of public record/academic record it can't be plagarised and as long as Brown rewrote the words how can it be plaggarized?

Posted by CoriSCapnSkip (Member # 3228) on :

Here's an article on the topic of not being able to copyright an idea: http://www.freelancewriting.com/news-083004-03.html