On Mar 29, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Brian Jones (Trancendance) 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I’d say it already is
>  
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of LAR
> Sent: 29 March 2013 20:29
> To: feistfans-l
> Subject: Re: Discussion with friend about Kelewan
>  
> As you mentioned before, Plagarism is a very specific legal term and has a 
> high level of scrutiny to be actionable. All work is derivative to one extent 
> or another, there are only so man scenarios and variation that echo the human 
> condition sufficiently to entice an audience. For me what it comes down to 
> is, how well is it written. Stealing dialogue is to me true plagerism. 
> Utilizing defacto-standards, common themes and plot devices - not so much. My 
> biggest worry about the expanded patent and copyright systems is that they go 
> well beyond protecting IP into crushing innovation
>  
> 
> 

Borrowing themes and situations will get you into court.  It will not win your 
case.  I spent enough time around Intellectual property lawyers when I was 
Chairman of the Contracts Committee to have picked up a couple of things.

As for all work being derivative, there are two things I commonly point to when 
that assertion is made: 1) you've got eight Greek plays and then everyone else 
started stealing and 2) Shakespeare stole pretty much everything he wrote, but 
we remember him and not the guys he stole from because he did it better than 
they did.  It's not what you do, it's how you do it.

As for your paranoia about expanding protections, you're lumping patents and 
copyrights together, which is a mistake.  Trademark/Patents are completely 
different critters from copyright.  The former are issued by the US Patent 
Office and your first burden is to show you're not treading on someone else's 
trademark or patent.  The second is create the instant you write a song, paint 
a picture, pen a novel or poem, or take a photograph, and you need to 
nothing--there are legal advantages to registering a copyright, but it's not 
necessary.  You can lose a trademark or patent if you don't defend it.  You 
can't lose a copyright by inaction.  Lots of other differences too.  Whatever 
issues code and chip patents and the like might bear down on innovation, 
copyright laws do not keep people from creating music, books, etc.  In fact, if 
anything they've been reigned in a little with the change to copyright which 
limits a corporations hold on copyright to 90 years, since corporations rarely 
"die."  That doesn't mean Disney doesn't have other ways to crush you if you 
try to make free with Micky Mouse stuff that's become public domain, but that's 
a whole 'nother discussion.

Best,R.E.F.

----
www.crydee.com

Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by 
stupidity.





Reply via email to