For The "which Mutual Am I" Thing!

For the "which mutual am I" thing!

pretty blue, sage green my beloved, peach (scone)

hope you have a lovely day <3

aaaaaa thank you, let's picnic

And yeah, I am a simp and proud of it :>

Have a lovely day too <33

Hi! First of all, I love your writing.

As I write myself, I wanted to ask how to prevent getting TOO inspired by something. Also, how do you know that it's too much?

Thanks!

I'm not entirely certain what you mean by 'TOO inspired'? But my brain understood you to mean the line between taking inspiration from something, and plagiarism. So I'm going to write/chat about that.

This is also going to get long, because it's a big, complicated topic and I have a lot of feelings. So I'm going to put it under the cut. 

Please note I am not a copyright lawyer by any means, but I kinda have to start there for this post.

What is plagiarism/copyright law 

Every time someone creates a piece of work (that is original - e.g., a product of one's own skill and labour, not a replica or someone else's work, and tangible - e.g., it has to have been expressed in some physical way, it can't just be in your head, but with regards to a story for example the second I write a paragraph down, it's mine) they automatically have copyright over that piece of work.

Copyright = a kind of intellectual property right which means the creator has exclusive rights over a piece of creative work. This means that you are not allowed to directly copy someone else's work and/or claim it as your own. This  applies to ideas, not just specific words or lines.

Copyright law varies in its specifics from country to country, and can vary on factors like publication date and the reason something was created in the first place (a piece of educational material, for example, is different to a novel).

In the UK and I think the US, the main thing to be aware of is that copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator. After that, a work becomes public domain, which can be used in more ways. See, for example, the amount of people who can use the character of Dracula in their work, without being susceptible to copy-right fees or being sued.

I'm not going to go into the whole shindig, because that would make for an extremely long technical post. Suffice to say, you can research copyright law yourself if you are in doubt. For example:

You can find out more about copyright here at the British Library.

Inspiration vs plagiarism, how much is too much - my view

Inspiration = wow, reading the-modern-typewriter really made me want to write my own story about heroes and villains. So I'm going to do that, with my own characters and my own plot.

I sometimes get requests in my inbox that people note are “specific.” For example, this post.

I was wondering if you could write something about a protagonist that is hallucinating the antagonist wherever they go, and the antagonist is taunting them but also being kinda gentle, and eventually the protagonist succumbs to the antagonists power willingly

However, if you and me, anon, both sat at a table and got told to write a story based on that ask we would come up with different stories, with different dialogue, likely even if we got given the same hints for each character’s personality. It’s a bit like that. Same ‘source’, but the final product would be original to each of us. That would be an example of us both being inspired by the same thing, but it wouldn’t be being ‘too inspired’ meaning plagiarised, because they would be original in and of themselves (see, derivative work at the bottom)

So.

Plagiarism = wow, I really like the-modern-typewriter's hero and villain stories. I'm going to take one of the passages she wrote and use it in my own story. Alternatively, wow, I really like this story of the-modern-typerwriter's, I'm going to change the character names and genders but use that plot. Etc.

I’m going to go with an example now. 

The one I see come up most often is this prompt of mine:

“Shh, it’s alright,” the villain said. “You’re doing beautifully and I’m so proud of you. But that’s enough now. It was cruel of them to make you fight me - you could never have won. It’s not your fault.”

There was a popular follow up by @hufflepuffkat which I have linked, which essentially stated that dialogue was from a villain furious at the gods/people continually sending kids and teenagers to fight their battles. 

This post exploded. I have seen it reposted, often uncredited, either with or without the hufflepuffkat addition across multiple platforms. 

Removing the credit that the dialogue was mine? That is against copyright law, regardless of if it was originally tagged as a prompt. This is because the dialogue is distinct (i.e., the lines aren’t generic, you can’t claim it’s something that anyone could have come up with really), it is original and tangible (I came up with the dialogue and I wrote it). I therefore legally have the write to be attributed for my work, even if no one explicitly claims that they wrote it themselves.

But it’s a prompt, you say? Writing prompts are there to be used! 

Yes, they are. With credit. 

This will typically cover you for any kind of fanfiction or non-profit stories you write using this dialogue, because my publishing as a prompt means I have already indicated a certain level of permission for it to be used. However, this does not mean I for example give permission for my work to be used commercially or without attribution. I say this explicitly on my blog which means there’s a certain level of agreement between me and the people engaging with my work. 

You can read more about the different creative commons licenses that you may come across on the web here. 

This means that if you include my dialogue in a novel you then go onto make money from? Again, copy-right problem.

However, take out the specific dialogue that is mine, and come up with your own plot and story for the novel, and you’re good to go. not too much.

This is because the hufflepuffkat idea of a villain being angry about kids and teenagers being sent to fight them is too broad to reasonably be copyrighted, even if hufflepuffkat posited the idea. There are a million different stories you can tell based on that premise. The dialogue, however, is incredibly specific, regardless of if you can infer different meanings or interpretations. Even if you take that dialogue to mean different things, the dialogue is still the same dialogue that was written by me. 

You can see this in other ways, too. For example, ‘kid goes to magic school’ as a premise is too broad for all stories about kids in magical schools to be plagiarism of say Harry Potter. Naomi Novik’s recent A Deadly Education also takes place in a magical school, but beyond that it is not comparable in plot, setting and character. Ergo, she may or may not have been inspired by the Harry Potter verse, but she certainly isn’t plagiarising the idea.

However, if Naomi Novik’s A Deadly Education took place in a place called Hogwarts, even if nothing else changed between her work and JK’s, there would likely be a copyright issue because - again, Hogwarts as a name for a magical school is specific and unique enough to clearly be JK’s. 

So. To answer your question. What does this suggest?

1 - Too much is definitely using someone else’s characters, or their writing, directly without either a) obtaining permission and providing proper credit that you can or b) that character or writing being out of copyright (ergo, it’s in now in public domain.)

2 - Broad ideas are archetypes are fine, specific unique parts of someone’s work is not. 

3 - As a gentle, tentative rule of thumb...if someone needs to have read the original to understand your writing, you may be cutting it too close unless you are writing fanfiction which comes with the expectation of having read the original.

But what about derivative work and adaptation?

In copyright law, a derivative work is something based on, adapted from or strongly inspired by something else. The reason derivative work often does not fall under copyright law, even if it includes major copyright elements of the original it is based on, is because it is still a distinctive, separate piece of work. 

It is transported, modified or adapted in a substantial way that makes it sufficiently different, and unique to the creator, as to be original in its own right. A common example of this is when something is adapted into a film from a book. They’re not the same piece of work. (You may still need to obtain rights/permission to adapt the book, depending on when it was published, but nonetheless.) 

Point 4. 

4 - It comes back to originality. Is there enough in the piece that is distinctly yours? 

This isn’t a matter of changing a few details. It needs to stand as it’s own thing. 

How to prevent 

Even accidental plagiarism is still plagiarism. However, after a certain point I feel there is a level of intention required. It may be possible to accidentally steal a line of two of distinct dialogue, but a whole plot lifted takes a certain amount of conscious decision making. It’s not something you can do by accident I don’t think. 

Writing a novel is hard. Coming up with plot ideas means thinking about your story, and trouble-shooting, and inevitably getting stuck at certain bits and working through it. If it all pops into your head magically formed...maybe take a second to think where it’s coming from. 

Don’t copy-paste other’s work and, when in doubt, provide proper credit/attribution. 

I hope this helps and didn’t just confuse you more! 

i accidentally said the phrase “penis friday” around my parents and i didn’t think much of it until today i wanted new underwear and i said “i’m tempted to get the cucumber-patterned ones” and my mom said “oh come on it’s not even penis friday”

HAKDHWKFHWKDHD ANON WHAT

I accidentally changed a setting on my keyboard and while trying to fix it (no luck) I discovered that my phone has obtained German Duolingo stickers out of nowhere, which is both whimsical and totally on brand with Duo's creepy stalker vibe. I'm scared.

Breaking down Tumblr’s latest Post+ Statement

In the wake of massive backlash against their new monitization/paywall program, Tumblr staff has given a statement in an attempt to combat one of the major arguments against it: that this would be a nightmare for fan writers and artists who are vulnerable to lawsuits for copyright infringement.

This post was meant to read as “haha, your friendly neighborhood Tumblr staff!” while actually being intentionally vague and misleading. I’ve seen people laughing it off as Tumblr having an idiot for a lawyer, but the post is actually written very cleverly. So let’s break it down:

First off, let’s make one thing clear: this information is coming to you from Tumblr’s lawyer, not yours. Tumblr’s lawyer’s job is to protect Tumblr from legal trouble and is under no obligation to give fair legal advice to Tumblr users or protect them in legal matters.

Notice that they are careful to say that they encourage sharing these works on “the platform” in general, not through the Post+ system. This gives them deniability - they never explicitly encouraged users to post this content on the monetized platform.

Yes, fanfiction and fanart are frequently considered fair use when they are not monetized. And notice in the second sentence, they switch to the much vaguer term “fan work” when claiming that something can be monetized and still fall under fair use. Fan work could refer to something as innocuous as beta reading and other fan work related services. This could also be referring to works in the public domain. Again, they have plausible deniability.

And make no mistake, there is a long, ugly history of fan writers and artists being sued for copyright infringement. It is absolutely not legal to sell, through any means, fanfiction or fan art of copyrighted content.

And here we get to the real heart of the matter. Their TOS has a clause which states that you may not infringe on another person’s copyright. They have now vaguely but deniably suggested that you can monetize your fanart and fanfiction, but whether or not you’re violating fair use “depends.” They won’t give you specifics. Because it does depend - on whether or not the work is copyrighted. But their statement implies that there are special circumstances where the nature of a fan work based on a copyrighted source makes it ‘fair use.’ This is not the case.

Most importantly, when the copyright holder comes to complain, Tumblr will not protect you. They will say that you have violated the TOS by infringing on intellectual property rights, and we never told you to. You’re on your own, kid. I wouldn’t be shocked if this is used as an excuse to withhold your Post+ revenue.

And the DMCA takedown process? That’s just the process for getting the content removed from Tumblr. It doesn’t mention that the copyright holder then has the right to go after you, personally, with a lawsuit to recoup any money you made off your Post+ subscriptions, plus damages to the brand. Tumblr, meanwhile, can keep its cut of your subscriptions because that money was paid to them for hosting the Post+ service, not for the works themselves. And, as an online platform, they are not responsible for the illegal actions of its users beyond complying with DMCA.

This post is malicious and intentionally misleading. They intend to scrape a profit off of fan writers and artists on their way to the courthouse.

For the mutual thing: Pretty blue

Ok, tell me where and I’ll come :D