The Tearoom Debates I: Inspiration v. Infringement

6 min read

Deviation Actions

isthisthingstillon's avatar
By
isthisthingstillon
Published:
5.1K Views
Welcome to the first installment of CRLiterature's new article series, The Tearoom Debates! We've shamelessly ripped off Mrs-Durden and CRPhotography, who currently run a bi-weekly series of opportunities for group readers to debate both sides of questions like "film or digital?" and then, in the next article, spotlight the input of the previous week's commenters.


Our format will be a bit different though. We'll still be keeping the biweekly frequency, and each article will feature your comments from the previous week. We're adding a touch of our own - some CRLiterature admins and the occasional guest lecturer will offer our input in the body of the articles, to give you food for debate right out of the gate! (Oops, in-rhyme. This isn't a poem, I promise.) Easy enough concept, right?

So, with no more fanfare--



-- let me announce the first question:

At what point, for you, does a piece inspired by another work cross the line into plagiarism?


With all the recent lawsuits about music "inspired by" other pieces, and the trendiness of found poetry in the small presses, it seems like the perfect time to be debating this. There are no wrong answers. Speak your mind. One random commenter will get a one-month premium membership for participating, so grab your nearest keyboard and let us - and everyone else - have it!


Our Input:


The accessibility of the internet has meant boundless sources for anyone to pick up “inspiration” and use it how they must. Whether this is creating Pinterest boards or copying and pasting extracts that speak to you- there is no issue and actually something I’d encourage writers to do. However, it's what you do with your source material that determines where the line is. How much of what you are taking is too original, and how much of it is sparking your own creativity? If you are relying heavily on the former, then you are probably getting to a point where you are just copying and not creating something new.  You should always credit the sources you use and on dA make use of your artists comments as you can discuss the inspiration point- and don’t be offended if people say the likeness is too close, use it as a source of redraft improvement. - BeccaJS 


If you're using a quote, you have to cite it. If you're writing something derivative as a writing excerise, you need to say so, and let folks know what you're using as inspiration. If you're working on a piece for future publication, or are publishing a derivative piece, your work needs to be transformative. You can't just put in linebreaks and call it found poetry. You can't replace a few words and say that you've recreated the piece as yours. There has to be a sense of your voice and your story in the new work, or else you're pretty much stealing. - PinkyMcCoversong 
Personally, I think anyone who's saying they don't draw inspiration from other works is full of it, or full of themselves, or something - everything is derivative to some extent, even if it's just in passing. And even full derivation is a great learning exercise, respinning a piece into your voice or deconstructing it. The line, for me, is what the creator of the derivative work, any derivative work, intends to actually do with it. If you're keeping it private, or showing it on a personal blog like DeviantArt, as long as it isn't a verbatim copypaste it's fine in my books. If you're selling it for money without paying the original artist a licensing fee, or publishing it in a small nonprofit press without crediting the author? That's a dick move. We all want notoriety, we all want credit. Even if the original artist has more money and fame and houses in Malibu than you, they still want people knowing their work exists and is out there. Be considerate. God. - isthisthingstillon
The difference between inspiration and infringement is easy: It all depends on how litigious the owner of your inspiration is. In more detail, the difference between infringement and inspiration is still a very blurry, thin line. The legal standard is of course "substantial similarity" which is pretty much as ridiculously vague as possible. After that you get into specific case law, but there are no "original" ideas any more. Everything is an iteration off an older idea, to an extent. And come on, even if I'm inspired by a movie about robots and triple-boobs, and make a movie that is, in my mind, inspired by and substantially different to, Michael Bay is still going to sue me for my actress's triple-boob. - haldron 


Your turn! Leave your thoughts in the comment section. Where is the plagiarism/inspiration line for you?



Skin by SimplySilent
blurredlinescopyrightdebatedebatesinfringementinspirationliteratureplagiarismtearoomcrliterature
© 2015 - 2024 isthisthingstillon
Comments38
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
GladeFaun's avatar
GladeFaun
Personally I think tiganusi has it about right above: there is very little out there these days that does not draw from another source in some sense. It's how much of yourself you bring to the finished piece you create, and what you intend to do with it, that draws the moral line here.

Have you taken an idea (or ideas from disparate sources, which is a favourite exercise of mine) and created something genuinely new from them? That is clearly distinct? If so I've always felt that's okay. Such a piece can run the continuum anywhere from good fanfic (which by its very nature will plagiarise to an extent, but should also bring something new to the table) all the way up to 'new' work that gives a nod to an iconic idea or theme (how many different writers can you name who've riffed on the the idea of dragon riders? For example).

Each artist I think needs to look at their work and make a judgement call. It's then a matter of whether their public agrees with them or not, with a consensus in their favour being a sign of true talent.