Paul Gadzikowski

Tweets copied by twittinesis.com

Sometimes in defending fanfiction you come up against someone who doesn't distinguish between fanfiction and plagiarism. Fanfiction is not plagiarism; fanfiction is unauthorized derivative work. There is a difference and I mean legally: Plagiarism and derivative work have different definitions under the law.

• Plagiarism is putting your name on original work created by someone else.
• Derivative work is you creating an original work that is derived from some other original work. If that sourcework falls under copyright, the derivative work may be authorized or unauthorized by the copyright holder. If it's unauthorized, it's fanfiction.*

If you need an example to demonstrate the difference between plagiarism and derivative work, use William Shakespeare.

Shakespeare never invented a plot in his life. His histories were based on sources. His tragedies were based on sources, sometimes historical (e.g., Hamlet). Shakespeare's works were derivative, literally and under the modern legal definition. Allowing for the differences between now and then in intellectual property law, it can be said Shakespeare wrote fanfiction. Shakespeare wrote crossovers! - A Midsummer Night's Dream is a crossover between Greek myth and English fairy lore.

Now, there is or once was a movement in academia that believed Shakespeare's plays were actually written by Francis Bacon. If that were true, then Shakespeare's works would be plagiarism, because he'd have put his name on works that were written by someone else.

Fanfiction isn't plagiarism. A fanfiction writer isn't someone who uploads to his website an MPEG of The Wrath of Khan or the text of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and then claims to have written it himself. A fanfiction author creates original works derived from the works he's saluting. For the record, though, taking someone else's fanfiction and globally replacing - for example - Forever Knight character names with Moonlight character names, and then reposting the work with your own byline, is plagiarism. The sort of thing happens.

* I believe fanfiction is, and of a right ought to be, fair use like parody. However that's beside the present point.
Edit Jan 2010 Also, fanfiction is increasingly being used in the vernacular to describe prose derivative work whether or not the sourcework falls under copyright. If that goes on, soon we'll need another word to mean what fanfiction used to mean...

About a month ago in the Websnark blog demiurgent posted an essay proposing a project whereby several collaborators would recreate a popular serial fiction franchise "with the serial numbers filed off" (character names changed, etc.), for the purpose of taking the story in a different direction than the widely criticized one in which the author has taken it. In the comments a lot of his readers said he was out of line, and even hypocritical, for proposing such a thing but he denied the charges and stood his ground. I fell on his side of the argument though my own remarks were made rather on the basis of my support of fanfiction generally because I'm not particularly a fan of that franchise. The argument trickled on for weeks ... and I kept expecting the other side to ask me how I'd feel if someone wrote fanfiction with my characters, but no one did. Here's what I would have answered.

I don't think you'd believe I'm qualified to answer that question, because I don't think you'd believe I create my own characters. I've observed several times on my own websites that I avoid creating characters as hard as I can. Amongst the reprints on my first fanfiction site of the journal comics I drew before there was an internet, there's a couple of original characters. But only a sprinkling of those comics were produced before I began Arthur, King of Time and Space and stopped producing anything but fanfiction for the fanfiction site. I don't think there's enough material to inspire another writer to develop it further, and if there's works out there proving me wrong I'd love to read them.

Now, I did once receive a request at the AKOTAS message board from a reader who wished to develop my fanfiction universe in a project of his/her own, including the reproduction of the "triangle" caricature style I use in the cartoons on that site (and use sometimes at AKOTAS).

I replied that I haven't any problem with the borrowing of my borrowed characters, with due credit for such ideas as are mine. But I wrote that part of the reason I use the triangles is so that such work can be immediately identified as my work, by such readers as might care, and that I'd prefer his/her project use, perhaps, a style identifiable as derived from mine but not mine itself.

The reader hasn't, to my knowledge, followed up with his/her project, which is disappointing to me since I'd like to have seen what was done with it. (Especially since s/he seemed eager to develop the idea that the Doctor Who Time Lords and the Stargate Atlantis Ancients were the same people, which idea my works suggest but I never could figure out where to go with it).

Now, you may say, "What a hypocrite! That person wanted nothing more than to do with your works what you do with the works yours claim to be saluting, and you quashed it!"

But my response is: Nope, that's not what I did. Having been asked, I expressed my preference, and that's all I did. If your argument is that I was asked for permission and withheld it by writing of "preference" rather than explicitly of permission, well maybe; but that wasn't my intention and I still gave explicit permission for use of my ideas if not of my art style. (If you'd like to see for yourself, the discussion thread is here.)

In any case, as I imagine is apparent at this point in this comment, whether I'd given perimission or 'd even been asked or not, I'd be as fascinated or more to see someone produce derivative works of my works as I am when new visions of Doctor Who or King Arthur come to my attention.

Meanwhile it turns out that the story direction taken by the author of the franchise that was the subject of the Websnark essay took that direction on the basis of advice given her by Charles M. Schulz. That being the case, I have to say if I were her I'd stick to my guns too.

Edit: I suppose I ought to add that I believe, even if I disliked the direction in which an author of derivative work took my characters, I would still be fascinated; and, while I wouldn't hesitate to express my opinion in such forums as I deemed appropriate, none of them would be an argument with said author's right to do as was done.

Edit: more here.