When does inspiration become copyright infringement?
While relaxing and letting my mind wander on various mobs, settings, and organizations, I kept coming back to images and descriptions that have stuck with me from all the books I’ve read, and movies / TV shows I’ve seen.
This got me thinking about the line between when your ideas are inspired and influenced by what we’ve seen and read, and when they cross over into copyright infringement.
Well, that’s no ordinary rabbit
A classic example is Scene 33 from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
TIM: There he is!
ARTHUR: Where?
TIM: There!
ARTHUR: What, behind the rabbit?
TIM: It is the rabbit!
ARTHUR: You silly sod! You got us all worked up!
TIM: Well, that’s no ordinary rabbit. That’s the most foul, cruel,
and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on.
ROBIN: You tit! I soiled my armor I was so scared!
TIM: Look, that rabbit’s got a vicious streak a mile wide, it’s a
killer!
KNIGHT: Get stuffed!
TIM: It’ll do you a trick, mate!
KNIGHT: Oh, yeah?
ROBIN: You mangy Scot git!
TIM: I’m warning you!
ROBIN: What’s he do, nibble your bum?
TIM: He’s got huge, sharp– he can leap about– look at the bones!
It’s always amusing when we run into a fluffy white bunny in a game and have it lop off a character’s head.
Inspired or Infringement
Sure, no one denies that it’s a homage to a scene that’s so ingrained in pop culture that even those rare individuals that *gasp* don’t find Monty Python humorous still know the reference.
But is the inclusion of the vorpal bunny inspired or infringement?
Gray and Murk
I’m not claiming to have an answer.
But I suspect that except for the most blatant cases … most instances would fall into a very gray and murky area.
What Comes Next
Part of what I think pushes the issue from one side of the line to the next is what you do with it.
If all you do with the idea is copy it, using it in the same manner and way that the original was used, then you’re on the infringement side.
But if you take the essence of the idea and expound on it, add to it, mold it, give it a unique tweak to fit it’s new environment. That’s when you make it your own with the original idea being the true inspiration.
What do you think?
No related posts.
Not logged in
Does this mean no giant-main-eating-fluffy-voracious-cute bunny in SoN?
IANAL, but I see a LOT of pop culture references in Kingdom of Loathing, and they don’t appear to be suffering an onslaught of lawsuits. I would imagine that if the fuzzy bunny with a vorpal sword is perfectly legal reference, though if the bunny were wearing hotpants with ‘Monty Python’ printed on the butt, that’d be a different story. Maybe that’s the trick…. include the sweet carbonated beverage containing caramel coloring and caffeine, just don’t call it Coke.
Yes, you could just rename things couldn’t you? I mean, in TV shows like the Simpsons, they almost make fun of everything but with different names. Is this legal or do they get sued over it?
It sounds to me like you are musing over the difference between creativity and imitation. Between inspiration and regurgitation. Taking someone else’s idea and modifying it it not very inspiring and seldom memorable. It’s the new and the interesting that will capture the imagination.
That said, though, something too novel can be unwelcoming – there’s a lot to be said for a little familiarity. So it seems to me that the creativity should not be in what you create/introduce, but how you introduce it.
Take the humble turnip for instance – everybody’s favourite vegetable, surely, but how many games can you think of that have incorporated it, hmmm?
If I have my way SoN will be discussed as “…you know…that awesome game with the turnips!”