| Author |
Comment
|
Kate
Unregistered User
(4/26/01 10:40:37 am)
|
The Wind Done Gone
Has anyone been following the lawsuit related to this recapitulation of Gone with the Wind? It's a novel--on hold with the publisher now--by Alice Randall. The New York Times reported yesterday that "On Friday a Federal District Court in Atlanta found that Ms. Randall had engaged in "unabated piracy" for borrowing 15 characters, several famous scenes and even some dialogue from the original." Needless to say I find the court's judgment questionable at best. There is a long literary tradition of so-called 'borrowing.' (E.g. Wide Sargasso Sea, by Jean Rhys.)
Out of mere curiosity: does anyone know of a similar suit related to folklore or fairy tales (in their literary, published versions)? The question of copyright arose for me with my novel, which draws upon certain translations of Russian, Yiddish and German tales; I gained permission for use of the tales--even when my work greatly abstracted from them--from the publishers of the volumes I used, just to be safe. But I know that this was not necessarily a requirement at all. I am curious about historical precedents in folklore. (This might be a really boring topic for everyone but me--sorry if so.)
The link to the article is www.nytimes.com/2001/04/2...6AUTH.html
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(4/26/01 11:53:22 am)
|
Re: The Wind Done Gone
I've been curious about this as well, especially if there is a distinction between folklore that has no recognized originator vs. say Hans Christian Andersen's tales or the Hasidic fairy tales of Rabbi Nachman.
Anyone know more about this? Laura Mc
|
janeyolen
Unregistered User
(4/26/01 12:09:26 pm)
|
Borrowing
Tthere is a difference between borrowing from something long out of copyright (Sargasso Sea is a preequel" to Jane Eyre I believe) and something still very much in copyright, as Gone With the Wind is.
I would very much object to other people doing books in my Pit Dragon universe, for example, or books about the women in the Hames of the Dales unless I gave them permission and got some form of remuneration. After all, those are my inventions, my characters, myh babies. But we can all play in Arthurian times because those stories are well in public domaine.
Copyright now lasts life plus 99 years.
Jane
|
Eirenical
Registered User
(4/26/01 1:33:07 pm)
|
Copyright
I have also been very interested in the "Wind Done Gone" lawsuit, although I hadn't heard about it until yesterday. From my understanding, Randall is calling her book a political satire, which--if it's accepted as such--would make its copyright infringement problems go away. I'm not a legal expert, so someone please correct me if I've misunderstood.
What about a book like "Ahab's Wife"? (In case anyone has not heard of this one, it retells "Moby-Dick" from Captain Ahab's wife's point of view.) Is this book exempt from copyright infringement because original runs of "Moby-Dick" are in the public domain, or is it accepted as a satire in the way "The Wind Done Gone" is not, or is it approved by the Melville estate?
The whole thing makes me think of the definition of a public figure.
Again, my understanding is hazy, especially when it comes to the
far extending implications, but Public Figure is a "term usually
used in the context of libel and defamation actions where the standards
of proof are higher if the party claiming defamation is a public
figure and therefore has to prove defamatory statements were made
with actual malice." www.lectlaw.com/def2/p117.htm
So, if a person is a public figure then their names and actions can be used in a book, movie, political cartoon, etcetera, without too much legal stress.
I know a book can't be a public figure, copyright is too strict for that, and rightfully...but I can't help thinking there is a crossover of ideas. A book can become a cultural icon, for example, and take on a life of its own. Star Wars and Star Trek (even though their copyrights are closely watched) are like that, and the result is a movie like Galaxy Quest. And somehow, even though I think that intellectual property such as worlds and characters created by an author should be protected (cetainly Jane's!), I still think The Wind Done Gone should be published.
I also think I need to learn more about the copyright laws.
|
Kate
Unregistered User
(4/26/01 1:54:52 pm)
|
More Thoughts
These are the issues I am also mulling over--it is one thing to lift a character out of a book and imitate the work and try to pass it off as original (thinly veiled plagarism), but it is an entirely other thing to work from an existing text and provide a response to it. The Wind Done Gone by no means plagarises the original novel; it is very much a satire--and a serious one at that. By no means is the book a one-off rip-off of anything in Gone with the Wind. [There was a book a few years ago that was really a rip-off of copyrighted material--it reprinted nearly verbatim about half of Gone with the Wind, and I think it ought to have been stopped, and it was.]
I believe that yes, copyright can last life plus 99 years, but it can actually also last longer, if an estate or other entity can manage to make a case for a body of work's protection for longer, even indefinitely . . . I have heard.
So a question that interets me, to refine it further that is, is when--and can--or ought--a work that has always been considered public domain move into potentially copyrighted domain? As I was working from fairy tales that had been translated by specific writers, this issue arose for me in terms of syntax and vocabulary, even though the stories themselves are commonly used by many writers and artists as inspiration or for other purposes, and may be considered 'public domain' as tropes in a sense. To rephrase the question, when might a Briar Rose novel be considered too close to Robert Coover's? Many novels share that title. Or, when might a Little Red Riding Hood story be too close to Angela Carter's Company of Wolves version? Etc. I know there are no answers to this question; it'd be a case-by-case issue, of course. I am just wondering if anyone has ever heard of a case like this.
p.s. Yes, it's Jane Eyre that Sargasso Sea replies to, quite lovingly.
|
CoryEllen
Registered User
(4/27/01 9:21:15 am)
|
Re: More Thoughts
Just to add a dimension here, copyright is a major issue for storytellers. There is not only the issue of literary tales, which is fairly easily navigated (get the copyright holder's permission before telling), but also of "cultural copyright;" i.e., the telling of one culture's tales by someone who is not a member of that culture. For myself, if I'm telling a story that originated in another cultural tradition, I make an effort to know enough about the role of and rules surrounding story in that tradition so that I don't unintentionally disrespect that tradition. The most oft-used example being American Indian tales that were/are traditionally told only in wintertime - should the non-Indian or other-Indian storyteller also reserve those tales for the colder seasons? Joseph Bruchac has written about this.
Also as a side note: cultural copyright is a major, major issue in the fine art world, particularly in Australia, where Aboriginal designs/representations are often abused. It ties into the question of what distingishes art from artefact, and the role of art (or whether that concept is meaningful at all) in Aboriginal cultures. I wrote a long paper on this in college.
|
Kerrie
Registered User
(4/27/01 1:12:45 pm)
|
A lot of Wind...
I don't know too much about it, but since I work at HMCo, the topic has been in discussion amongst my coworkers. From what I understand, the book is a parody, and that is why it was set for publication- that we would not dare break copyright law. One example given was this:
"For decades we have let stand Bored of the Rings, a Harvard Lampoon parody of one of our most valuable literary properties, J.R.R. Tolkien's epic The Lord of the Rings."
(I think this may have something to do with the movie coming out)
There are statements in the HMCo Newsroom for any interested.
ir.hmco.com/ireye/ir_site...script=400
From what I know they are also planning an appeal. I can keep you updated if you like.
I'll reply more later on the rest of this topic.
|
janeyolen
Unregistered User
(4/27/01 3:24:04 pm)
|
parody
Well, the Wind Done Gone folk weren't using the word "parody" (which is defined--I believe--as making fun of, satirizing, being humorous about something) until they were brought to court.
I think this case stands or falls on the use of the word parody and whether it can be made to stretch out of all proportion to its original size!
Jane
|
erectionpants
Registered User
(4/27/01 7:04:50 pm)
|
Re: parody
I'm certainly no expert, but these are my impressions, from what I've witnessed in my own research.
From what I understand, satire and parody have very wide latitudes for usage of the original works; it's understood that some, and occasionally a great deal, of the original work will have to be referenced to make the point the satirist/parodist is trying to make.
The only reason I know anything about this is because of a project I'm doing on fanfiction, specifically real people fic. A writer friend of mine wrote a parody of a 300-chapter saga about the members of N'Sync, and the original author accused her of plagiarism. My friend clearly stated that her work was a parody of the first author, and even linked it under the title "Petty Larceny." It bled into issues of fictional representations of real people, libel, etc. What it came down to was that ideas, and even plots, are not copyrightable, but actual words are. As my friend said, if ideas and plots were protected, "There would only be one Harlequin romance novel."
For fairy tale authors, I would think the same thing applies. You can write a story about the sexual awakening of Little Red Riding Hood via a werewolf-figure, and as long as you're not using Angela Carter's words, you're not in violation of the law. However, if you're writing a parody, than you can use as much as you want, as long as it is clearly intended as a parody. But if you're merely retelling a classic tale, it's difficult to prove, unless you're going word-for-word from another version. It gets hairy, because, for example, the Grimms don't own their versions of their tales to the same extent that, say, Charles Perrault owns his.
Again, I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that folk texts seem to be more or less in the public domain, unless referring to a specific retelling. Any thoughts?
Catja
|
janeyolen
Unregistered User
(4/28/01 1:54:21 am)
|
Wind Done Gone
Again, I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that folk texts seem to be more or less in the public domain, unless referring to a specific retelling. Any thoughts?
Catja
The story in a folk text is in pd, but the way of telling it is copyrightable. And if a teller adds some "stuff" or lines are copied, that is considered plagerism.
There is no carte blanche in satirizing/parodying copyright material. For example, doing a Caroll Burnett skit with Carol wearing the drapes AND the curtain rod as a kind of mindless Scarlett is allowable, but writing a 100 word novel, chapter by chapter copying of Gone With the Wind only setting it in the War of 1812 is probably not.
I say probably because this Wind Done Gone case is certainly going to make precedence and set some parameters. Follow it closely, folks.
Jane
|
Gregor9
Registered User
(5/7/01 4:51:38 am)
|
Pat Conroy
When Pat Conroy was once asked by the Mitchell estate to write an official sequel to GONE WITH THE WIND, he says he was told of two conditions: no miscegenation and no homosexuality. He rejected signing any pledge and wrote back in high dudgeon with this first line to "his" sequel:
"After Rhett Butler made love to Ashley Wilkes, he lit a cigarette and said, 'Ashley did I ever tell you my grandmother was black?'"
|
Eirenical
Registered User
(5/25/01 8:50:17 am)
|
News
Everyone,
I just noticed this article on the NY Times website (from the Associated Press):
www.nytimes.com/aponline/...-Gone.html
It looks like the injunction preventing the publication of the Wind Done Gone has been lifted today by the federal appeals court.
Eirenical
|
Jeff
Unregistered User
(5/25/01 8:42:47 pm)
|
Gone with the draft
I'm no expert, either, so I feel comfortable here with all the other non-experts.
To begin, I guess I should say that I don't think that copyright should be life+99. Didn't the Disney corporation push for that so they could keep the monopoly of little brown girls making Mickey Mouse T-shirts for little white girls? I think they did, but I may be wrong. Regardless, could someone explain to me just why a copyright should extend past the author's life?
Too, derivative works are indeed very common, and the work in question would have to be a political work by definition, wouldn't it? After all, there's no getting around the black/white issues in the original, nor what has happened since.
Beyond that, GWTW is a cultural icon. I think that is safely said.
Should McDonald's be able to sue over bumperstickers that say "McVegan"
and have the "golden arches" on them? Howsabout when they
are called McDeath, as I've seen in print? How far is trademark
infringement from copyright infringement? By the way, is The
Wizard of Oz in the PD? If not, Wicked should have ruffled
some feathers.
Jane wrote:
"I think this case stands or falls on the use of the word parody and whether it can be made to stretch out of all proportion to its original size!"
But how do you know it's "out of all proportion?" I'm assuming that none of us have read the book, yes? I disagree with this a priori condemnation.
Jeff
|
Laura
McCaffrey
Registered User
(5/26/01 7:45:15 am)
|
Re: The Wind Done Gone
Heard the story on NPR the other today. The injunction is indeed lifted, however the court did not in any way rule on the copyright issue. The family is sure to bring a suit.
As with any case where someone fights so hard to keep something off the shelves or unavailable, I'm dying to read the book. Laura Mc
|
Stacy
Unregistered User
(5/26/01 7:58:00 am)
|
Mc Death
I know nothing about copyright in general, but I did read about this specific instance last year. It is my understanding that Mc Donalds did sue over the use of the terms Mc Death & Mc Torture by 2 PETA members in England who were distributing pamphlets. I think they lost because the defendants proved that Mc Donalds allowed preventable cruel treatment of the beef cattle provided to them by factory farms...
My guess is that this differs in the fact that it relates to a specific term or word usage, the "Mc", whereas the Wind Done Gone relates to both verbage and content of an entire novel / cultural icon.
...?
Stacy
|
Jeff
Unregistered User
(5/27/01 5:48:21 pm)
|
McLibel
There may have been another case, but it sounds like the "McLibel"
suit, the details of which can be found at www.mcspotlight.org/.
With 21,000 files, all questions are probably answered there. And,
when it comes to "corporate identity" issues, the law
generally sides with the Big Money Boys, as Aimster
has recently discovered.
Now that the injunction has been lifted, we will see if TWDG is indeed a parody. From seeing the author holding a copy on CNN, it looks to be only about 120 pages long. That's just a guess, but it was a thin book. It's not a retelling, from what I understand. Of course, truth and justice have never stopped us from keeping blackie down.
Jeff
|
Tim Phillips
Unregistered User
(6/6/01 7:13:28 pm)
|
literary borrowing
"janeyolen" wrote:
>
> Copyright now lasts life plus 99 years.
The term of copyright in the U.S. is life plus 70 years for author copyrights. For corporate copyrights it is 95 years. Further information about how these ridiculously long terms became law can be found at:
www.public.asu.edu/~dkarjala
|
|
