Tweak

InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Owls again!"

Username: 
Password:    
Remember Me
  • Create Account
  • IJ Login
  • OpenID Login
Search by : 
  • View
    • Create Account
    • IJ Login
    • OpenID Login
  • Journal
    • Post
    • Edit Entries
    • Customize Journal
    • Comment Settings
    • Recent Comments
    • Manage Tags
  • Account
    • Manage Account
    • Viewing Options
    • Manage Profile
    • Manage Notifications
    • Manage Pictures
    • Manage Schools
    • Account Status
  • Friends
    • Edit Friends
    • Edit Custom Groups
    • Friends Filter
    • Nudge Friends
    • Invite
    • Create RSS Feed
  • Asylums
    • Post
    • Asylum Invitations
    • Manage Asylums
    • Create Asylum
  • Site
    • Support
    • Upgrade Account
    • FAQs
    • Search By Location
    • Search By Interest
    • Search Randomly

randomsome1 ([info]randomsome1) wrote,
@ 2009-06-03 18:31:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:in ur novel eatin ur book

once more, with classics!
Is it just me, or do we seem to be revisiting "Copyright: You're Doin' it Wrong" fairly frequently as of late?

The latest chapter: J.D. Salinger doesn't like when people try to make money off of him by professionally publishing fanfic of his work. Who'd have thought?

I still don't get why these little publishers would even want to risk the lawsuit and recall expenses that could come from taking something like this on. It's probably a combination of ignorance and greed that brings out defense statements like this:

    Silverman, whose company distributes books by about 150 publishers, called "60 Years Later" a work of "social science fiction," saying that California doesn't plagiarize, but sets a well-known character in an alternate place and time -- as literature has done for centuries.

Fail and epic fail! This person needs to sort out the differences between plagiarism and copyright violation. Technically, only one is illegal--and that one's the one we're looking at.


Methinks this particular author and Lady Potato Moon need to get together and justify themselves to each other, in a vacuum, for the rest of eternity.

(Post a new comment)


[info]threeoranges
2009-06-04 02:14 am UTC (link)
With a name like JD California
Day was gonna come when I was gonna mourn ya


This is the first I'd ever heard of this "Potato Moon" thing. Love this statement from the attempt at making RUSSET MOON legit, quoted here:

“When fictional characters become such an intricate part of the popular psyche, as is the case with the Twilight Saga, legal boundaries become blurred, and copyright laws become increasingly difficult to define... Copyright laws protect writers from unauthorized reproductions of their work, but such reproductions only include verbatim copying. Characters are only copyrightable if their creator draws them or hires an artist to draw them."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA NO.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]randomsome1
2009-06-08 01:25 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, the crazy + the entitlement complexes all around make for some hardcore headdesking.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]shikomekidomi
2009-06-13 04:16 am UTC (link)
Potato... Moon? That's almost a cool name. Either that or I have bad taste when I'm sleep deprived and its late at night.
And I think she's using Japanese copyright laws (ah, Japan, where sale of Dojinshi for profit is totally legal) or just plain crazy. Her defense is less based on entitlement and more on what appears to be a really loose, really really loose, sense of 'public domain'. According to her it has to do with how famous the characters used are, not how old the copyright is. Though she (and her mouthpiece) seem to lack the smarts to actually know the phrase "public domain".
And that's just Potato Moon, I haven't even looked at the other guy yet as his name is less interesting.

(Reply to this)



Home | Site Map | Manage Account | TOS | Privacy | Support | FAQs