Dragaera

Dumas v. Brust (was: Artificial release dates and online publishing)

Mon Dec 16 12:30:44 PST 2002

--- Matthew Hunter <matthew at infodancer.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 05:09:47AM -0800, Greg
> Rapawy <grapawy at yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
>> As an example of particular interest, the Paarfi
>> romances might well infringe Dumas' copyright if
>> Dumas' works were presently in copyright under
>> modern American copyright law.  
[...]
> Umm, no.  While the Paarfi works are pastiches, they
> are NOT even remotely similar enough to cause 
> copyright issues.  Or, in other words, copyright 
> doesn't cover style or plot.

There are very few areas of the law about which it is
appropriate to use such definite language.  Copyright
is not, in my opinion, one of them.  I am not a
specialist, but I have some intellectual interest in
the subject and have been involved in one or two
relevant cases.

You are probably right that copyright does not cover
"style."  I wasn't referring to style -- SKZB's style
in the Paarfi books is his own invention.  Even Tom
Stoppard probably couldn't complain, whatever the Dean
of Pamlar University may have to say about it.

Concerning plot, however, see Twentieth Century-Fox
Film Corp. v. MCA, Inc., 715 F.2d 1327 (1983) (holding
that the question whether Battlestar Galactica
infringed the copyright on Star Wars required a
trial), and Nimmer on Copyright sec. 13.03[A][1][b]
(stating that a plot, defined as "the sequence of
events by which the author expresses his theme or
idea," is protected).  MCA ultimately won the
Battlestar Galactica case, but that isn't my point --
my point is that it required a nice long expensive
trial that could have come out the other way.

And then there is the set of four main characters (and
many supporting characters) in the first two books,
who map fairly easily one to one; or the many
well-crafted homages built in to all of the books (one
that leaps to mind is the scene where the Teckla sees
Pel's ring, which I think refers to a scene in which
Aramis reveals himself as head of the Jesuits).  If
you can get a copy of the Twentieth Century Film case,
check out footnote five for the kinds of similarities
the court there found relevant.

Please let me clarify two points.  First, I'm not
saying SKZB would lose this hypothetical case.  I
think he'd probably win, on fair use if not on basic
similarity.  I just think it could be a hard fight. 
Second, I'm not accusing him of anything.  I'm saying
he's done really great work that I love reading and
that it's enormous fun to try to catch every sly
homage or reference -- *and* that *if* Dumas' work
were still in copyright, a prudent publisher probably
wouldn't have published the Paarfi books without
negotiating a license.

>> There might be a viable fair use defense, though. 
[...]
>> For example, a federal court of appeals ultimately
>> reversed the preliminary injunction against the 
>> publication of "The Wind Done Gone," a case which 
>> was widely covered in the press.
> The Wind Done Gone is a vastly different case, since
> it explicitly uses the same characters.

True.  That's why I referred to it when talking about
fair use (an affirmative defense) rather than when I
was talking about basic similarity of protected
elements (the prima facie case).

-- Greg

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com