4 ms·

> Just like rephrasing A Song ot Ice and Fire a bit, and switching to a different language, doesn't remove its copyright. There is some precedent for this, e.g

> Just like rephrasing A Song ot Ice and Fire a bit, and switching to a different language, doesn't remove its copyright. There is some precedent for this, e.g. Alchemised is a recent best seller that had just enough changed from its Harry Potter fan fiction source in order to avoid copyright infringement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemised https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemised (I avoided the term “remove copyright” here because the new work is still under copyright, just not Harry Potter - related copyright.)

cubefox 7mo ago
That's apparently a different story with different plot, so that's not comparable.
- Marsymars 7mo ago
  Plots are broadly not copyrightable, “different plot” is less important than “different characters”.
  - cubefox 7mo ago
    I'm pretty sure the plot is copyrightable, otherwise you could just translate Harry Potter to a different language and change the names of the characters.
    - Marsymars 7mo ago
      Well the general guideline is that copyright covers the *expression of an idea*, not the idea itself. Translations are pretty much the textbook example of a derivative work in copyright. Your jurisdiction may vary, of course, but it's pretty well established in mine (Canada) that "plot" is an idea, and can't be copyrighted, only the expression of the idea (e.g. the written novel) falls under copyright.
      - cubefox 7mo ago
        If I translate Harry Potter to another language and change all the names, the resulting book clearly expresses the same ideas as the original.
        Marsymars 7mo ago
        Yes, I agree. But "expresses the same idea" isn't the benchmark, "ideas expressed in the same way" is the benchmark. A translated work is "ideas expressed in the same way", a translation doesn't change that. See e.g. this question/top answer on stackexchange, it details pretty well how plot can't be copyrighted using Harry Potter as an example: https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/3928/on-copyright-laws-and-plots https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/3928/on-copyrigh...

cubefox 7mo ago

That's apparently a different story with different plot, so that's not comparable.

Marsymars 7mo ago
Plots are broadly not copyrightable, “different plot” is less important than “different characters”.
- cubefox 7mo ago
  I'm pretty sure the plot is copyrightable, otherwise you could just translate Harry Potter to a different language and change the names of the characters.
  - Marsymars 7mo ago
    Well the general guideline is that copyright covers the *expression of an idea*, not the idea itself. Translations are pretty much the textbook example of a derivative work in copyright. Your jurisdiction may vary, of course, but it's pretty well established in mine (Canada) that "plot" is an idea, and can't be copyrighted, only the expression of the idea (e.g. the written novel) falls under copyright.
    - cubefox 7mo ago
      If I translate Harry Potter to another language and change all the names, the resulting book clearly expresses the same ideas as the original.
      - Marsymars 7mo ago
        Yes, I agree. But "expresses the same idea" isn't the benchmark, "ideas expressed in the same way" is the benchmark. A translated work is "ideas expressed in the same way", a translation doesn't change that. See e.g. this question/top answer on stackexchange, it details pretty well how plot can't be copyrighted using Harry Potter as an example: https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/3928/on-copyright-laws-and-plots https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/3928/on-copyrigh...