2 ms·
Except that book didn't have "a similar high-level of comparison to Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire". To quote the judge: "The contrast between the total c
by slg 6y ago
Except that book didn't have "a similar high-level of comparison to Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire". To quote the judge: "The contrast between the total concept and feel of the works is so stark that any serious comparison of the two strains credulity"[1]. There is a sort of "know it when I see it" nature that is hard to define, but copyright certainly protects works that are substantially similar even if not straight copies, at least in the US.
[1] - https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-12134288 https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-12134288
- learnstats2 6y agoWhat I mean is: "Both Willy [a wizard] and Harry are required to work out the exact nature of the main task of the contest which they both achieve in a bathroom assisted by clues from helpers, in order to discover how to rescue human hostages imprisoned by a community of half-human, half-animal fantasy creatures." is very comparable to your completely hypothetical example above. So, if a paragraph of cherry-picked, high-level description are the only identified similarities, there is no case in copyright law.
- slg 6y agoThe only real similarity between those two stories that isn't easily attributed to a trope of the genre is the fact that scene took place in a bathroom. Everything else is unspecific and common. Also there is a difference when one scene shows similarity rather than the overall arc of the story.