Of course, what with the corporate ownership of the works in question, the legal legs the writers of such fanfic have to stand on is shaky at best. I’m sure Fox could come down like a ton of bricks if they wished to. So even though Joss created Buffy the Vampire Slayer, he probably doesn’t have the actual legal right to say “Write fanfiction.” But that’s a whole ‘nother can o’ worms.

It’s brilliant! It’s also plagiarism. But it doesn’t bother me like Cassie Edwards’ plagiarism because it is transformative, not just a copy-paste job.

I’m not familiar with that book, but based on your description I would have to disagree on your conclusion that Saberhagen committed plagiarism.

To me it soundly like an adaptation with no attempt made to disguise the origins of the source material so therefore he was not trying to fool anyone.

I see that example as similar to writing a screenplay based on a novel. You assume that there will be dialog from the source material used in the adaptation. The difference is since the novel Dracula is in the public domain, no permission was required in order create the work nor were there be any royalties due to Bram Stoker’s descendants.

I hope that helps settle any potential qualms you had.

Linda

It’s brilliant! It’s also plagiarism. But it doesn’t bother me like Cassie Edwards’ plagiarism because it is transformative, not just a copy-paste job.

As far as plagiarism goes, I kind of go by the rule- if your charachter quotes it its ok. If you put in the beginning or end of the written piece “With exerpts from yadda yadda” its ok. Hell get really creative with the footnotes if you want to.

What bothers me the most is that we are talking about more than a sentence, a phrase or an idiom. We’re talking about huuuge tracks of land.. no no we’re not. sorry.
We’re talking about complete paragraphs and in some cases pages of another author’s work. I can overlook a sentence in most cases… in ‘most’ cases… but overlooking an entire passage? It’s harder to swallow for me.

Where I myself get bogged down a bit is actually intent. Did the author intend for this to be an ‘in joke’ or did they expect me to just not notice? Unfortunately, trying to prove intent without having a bias is almost impossible.

Keep up the good work,

Linda

I feel powerless in the face of people dismissing this as minor shenanigans in the face of such overwhelming evidence.

Exactly my feelings, and why I can’t leave well enough alone.

This KILLS me. It diminishes the offense, and mocks the craft of writing. Why do plagiarists continue to publish? Because there are a lot of people who say, so what.

And The Bible crack? So anything less than The Bible is up for grabs? Unless it’s the holy word, it’s not important enough to protect?

You can bet your ass any writer saying these things would sing a mighty different tune if his/her work was lifted.

Am I too cynical in wondering whether there are any original words in CE’s books?

I just had to vent since I can’t post on there.

I had gotten to the stage of overwhelmed numbness at the ever increasing evidence and when I read those statements the rage was reborn. Not having an outlet in the appropriate place, I brought it here. Sigh.

I feel powerless in the face of people dismissing this as minor shenanigans in the face of such overwhelming evidence.

It’s like standing in the middle of a crowd shouting and either being ignored, getting blank stares or outright ridicule.

I think I’ll go read a good book to try to distance myself from this incredible disappointment in my fellow readers and authors.

%%%%%%%%%%%

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 549
“I, alone, the chief’s wife, did as you asked. Do you now truly believe the cornfields will be more fruitful?”
[...]
“You have blessed the cornfields. The passing of your footsteps drew a magic circle around the field of freshly planted maize. No insects or worms shall pass over that magic circle.”

HIAWATHA
Section XIII, fourth & sixth stanzas
To his wife, the Laughing Water:
‘You shall bless to-night the cornfields
[...]
Thus the fields shall be more fruitful,
And the passing of your footsteps
Draw a magic circle round them,
So that neither blight nor mildew,
Neither burrowing worm or insect,
Shall pass o’er the magic circle;

&&&&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 549-550
When night had fallen in their village and all was silent with the spirit of sleep a companion in all the St. Croix’ wigwams, Lorinda had crept from her tent, alone. Once outside, beneath the soft reflection of the April moon, she had laid her garments aside, knowing that Yellow Feather had assured her that no eye would see her.
[...]
she had begun her slow circle of the field, around its borders [...]

HIAWATHA
Section XIII, fifth stanza
In the night, when all is silence,
In the night, when all is darkness,
When the Spirit of Sleep, Nepahwin,
Shuts the doors of all the wigwams,
So that not an ear can hear you,
So that not an eye can see you,
Rise up from your bed in silence,
Lay aside your garments wholly,
Walk around the fields you planted,
Round the borders of the cornfields,

&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 436-437
The odors of the forest, the dew and damp meadow, and the curling smoke from the wigwams [...]

HIAWATHA
Introduction, first stanza
With the odors of the forest,
With the dew and damp of meadows,
With the curling smoke of wigwams

&&&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 424
[...]seeing how warrior-like he appeared today. His face had been painted like leaves of autumn, streaked with crimsons and yellows.

HIAWATHA
Section I, 10th stanza
With their weapons and their war-gear,
Painted like the leaves of Autumn,

&&&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 386
He looked, oh, so handsome in a shirt of white doeskin, decorated with fringe and wrought with even more embroidery and colorful beads. His deerskin leggings and buckskin moccasins were fringed with hedgehog quills and his hair was shining brightly from oil.

HIAWATHA
Section XI, 10th stanza
He was dressed in shirt of doeskin,
White and soft, and fringed with ermine,
All inwrought with beads of wampum;
He was dressed in deer-skin leggings,
Fringed with hedgehog quills and ermine,
And in moccasins of buck-skin,
Thick with quills and beads embroidered.
[...]
>From his forehead fell his tresses,
Smooth, and parted like a woman’s,
Shining bright with oil, and plaited,

&&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 387
[...]seeing how they were attired in their richest raiments, beautifully clad with beads and tassels.

HIAWATHA
Section XI, 3rd stanza
And the wedding guests assembled,
Clad in all their richest raiment,
[...]
Beautiful with beads and tassels.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 392
[...]a smoothly polished bowl of basswood and a spoon of horn-of-bison.

HIAWATHA
Section XI, 2nd stanza
All the bowls were made of bass-wood,
White and polished very smoothly,
All the spoons of horn of bison,
Black and polished very smoothly.

&&&&&&&&&

SAVAGE OBSESSION
Page 146
Tangled barberry bushes with tufts of crimson berries[...]

HIAWATHA
Introduction, final stanza
Where the tangled barberry-bushes
Hang their tufts of crimson berries

From Nikki, again

Headdesk, twice over.

“for the love of goodness – would they leave that woman alone – how is it that Janet Dailey was able to get back into publishing/ Cassie just didn’t add footnotes”

and

“you would think that Cassie had taken the history of the bible and made it hers”

If we don’t get any respect from our own for the written word how can we ever expect it from others? A couple of authors chimed in expressing concurring sentiment.

I wanna cry. I can’t post on there and with Kensington publishing Aphrodisia I can see how it could possibly be difficult to touch the Dailey issue, but … but… words fail me.

I always consider the term “illegal” to apply to criminal acts which, of course, copyright infringement is not. I don’t know of any case or statute that is a wholesale condemnation of fan fiction. Fan fiction, merely by definition, is not infringement and must be studied on a case by case basis. I think it would be illuminating to see a case go to the appellate level on this issue but as it stands, I don’t believe I’ve read a case that finds the entire sub culture of writing to be infringing.

But the problem is that (a) there’s almost too much material there, in vast and dauntingly large quantities, (b) not all of it is relevant to authors of fiction (e.g. there’s stuff there about fair use for educational purposes, and fair use as applied to movies and songs) and (c) it’s focused on what’s legal, not what’s best practice or what’s ethical.

Earlier on in the debate, someone quoted from a response made by Diana Gabaldon, who’d apparently written that it wasn’t plagiarism if the work was out of copyright. In post #11 of 50 (scroll down the page a bit) she says the following:

Oh–with regard to your last sentence…in fact, you _can_ legally use absolutely anything that’s in the public domain (i.e., out of copyright). And in fact, at least two of the “sources” they were mentioning almost certainly are. Given the peculiarities of style in some of the bits quoted, I still don’t know why one _would_–but it’s totally legit to do so.

Bottom line being that no, in fact, you _can’t_ plagiarize a source that’s out of copyright. You can do anything you want to with it.

That’s not true, but the Stanford site is focused on what’s legal, not what’s ethical, and some things may be legal but unethical. So sending people to the Stamford site may just confuse people.

Fair use, as it’s been explained by Robin and Jane, only applies to work in copyright. And the guidelines for use in songs and film may well not apply to novels.

There still seem to be a lot of misconceptions about, for example some people think that it’s only plagiarism if you take more than a certain number of words, or that it’s OK if you rephrase something (but paraphrasing can still be plagiarism, and it’s still plagiarism if you translate something, even though that automatically means you’re using different words, unless you explicitly state that it’s a translation), and that doesn’t even start to deal with complex areas like plot similarities.

Each author is going to react to the infringement in their own way. Some are going to sue, some are going to start hosting contests, some (like the late Marion Zimmer Bradley) might even start editing collections of the fanfic for publication. Regardless, unless the author gives permission, it’s still illegal.

Yes, I’m quoting myself, since I had already pretty much answered the question before it was asked (because I knew it was coming). Is fanfic illegal? It is if the thing the fans are writing about is still under copyright. Are all authors going to sue? No. Each of us decides on our own tack. Some feel that the fan base created and supported by fanfic helps them. Others feel that they lose sales due to there being so many free alternative versions of their work floating around. There’s no one “right” answer, but there is one “legal” answer. And yes, I grew up in the Science Fiction community, so many of the writers that my parents are friends with deal with the issue of fanfic all the time. I’ve always thought Marion’s answer to it was freaken brilliant! Take submissions and publish authorized anthologies. But if she’d chosen to be litigious, she had every legal right to sue.

And that’s all I’m saying on this subject, as there’s no real point in debating it. Facts are facts, and reality is something else.

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/

The fansite is clearly profiting from Rowling’s creation and yet its clear Rowling is the origin and its also clear most of the effort of compiling the information came from fans.

The author of the article supports the fans but I thought it was another shade of gray to consider.
http://www.slate.com/id/2181776/

In contrast, most fanfics which can be found online for free. That’s right, words for free. Novel-sized serials written and exchanged for nothing other than the sheer joy of making other fans happy. Is that really hurting the copyright if no one is profiting from it?

That would probably be something that doesn’t have a single answer, Serenanna. The copyright owner of each work would have to make that decision for themselves and they do… that’s why some push to have fanfic taken down, and others don’t.

I also ask the question, if fanfiction is inherently illegal, and wrong, and a copyright violation, why doesn’t every media company and every author clamp down on it with a flood of C&D or even DMCA orders? Surely, they should be protecting their copyright, right?

The answer to that, though, I suspect is fairly easy. Cost. How many sites out there have Buffy fanfic on it? I don’t know what Wheddon’s take on it is, but if he decided he didn’t like it and wanted it all gone, we’d be looking at HUGE amounts of money. Even those who can afford it might not want to spend the expense.

In contrast, most fanfics which can be found online for free. That’s right, words for free. Novel-sized serials written and exchanged for nothing other than the sheer joy of making other fans happy. Is that really hurting the copyright if no one is profiting from it? Then again, if you think about it, every retelling of Cinderella is really no difference than a fanfiction story. The only difference is the Grimm’s tale is in the public domain and something like Grey’s Anatomy is not.

I also ask the question, if fanfiction is inherently illegal, and wrong, and a copyright violation, why doesn’t every media company and every author clamp down on it with a flood of C&D or even DMCA orders? Surely, they should be protecting their copyright, right?