/lit/ - Literature

Define "steal".

>>842763
Taking a few characters

'inspiration' is the sincerest form of theft, bro

If you get the idea from the book or said source, you can be sued.

all depends on the author

>>842773
What if the original author is dead?

That depends on your publisher's legal team and what book you steal from.

>>842766

Characters often reflect certain reoccurring archetypes.
Every book has a mysterious stranger and a wise old man.

Or do you mean something a lot more specific?

>>842757
According to Bollywood, everything.

>>842789
I mean straight up stealing a character. Pooh to be exact.
But I'm thinking I have a better idea going with an implied Christopher Robin..

Dude, John Fogerty got sued for taking inspiration from HIMSELF (or at least from his songs that he'd sold to a different record label) so I would suggest not stealing anything at all and learning some fucking creativity.

>>842797

A loveable fat fuck who has an eating problem recurs in novels more than you might think, dude.

Hell, I know Pooh in real life. Shit, I used to be Pooh. Then I stopped being fat and started going to the gym.

>>842797
Pooh is enough of an iconic character that you could probably get away with calling it a parody or an homage.

>>842815
I don't mean a fat lovable fuck.
I mean Pooh. The Winnie.

>>842822

But that is what Pooh is. He is a fat dumb loser who everyone loves anyway, and he compulsively eats honey.

He is basically kinda like Socrates, but in stuffed animal form. That might be a bad example, but my point is that...fuck, I forgot what my point was.

Isn't Pooh public domain?

>>842841
It was
>>842838
Your point was making archetypes are easy and theres no need to steal

Read this: http://harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387

>tl;dr: The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors but “to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.” To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work. This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate.

It isn't stealing if you happen to take someone else's work and turn it into something new. At what point exactly something old becomes something new is up to debate, but if push comes to shove you can always blame the person accusing you of plagiarism of plagiarizing.

>>842809
His fault. He SOLD the rights to everything he made.

>>842754
sｔｏｐ_ＤDosIｎＧ WWＷ.ＡｎｏXＮｔｘａlＫ.Ｓe_ｒＥＭＯｖＥ aｌｌ Ｘ Ｉn_ｔhＡt_Ｕｒｌ
rj qsiebvcj ynlg lnakfan g treamp uhbiznfu

Just change the names.

>>842885
Well I guess that makes since. I /am/ turning it into something new.

>>842789

Bullshit. Joseph Campbell isn't your buddy. Read some good books. Throw your Star Wars boxset in the trash.

>>842922

I wasn't parroting Campbell.
I actually quite dislike him to be honest.

Nor am I a fan of Jung.

>>842925

Great! There's nothing preventing you from breaking free of the 'archetype' con then. Godspeed, Broham.

>>842931

Why are archetypes cons?

>>842936
Because they are a cop out.
"Dude your character is exactly like Obi Wan.."
"Nah, it's ok. He's an archetype, see?"

>>842940

Im going to put Pooh in my own short story. But he's going to have a brown shirt and I'm gonna call him Winnie the Shit. And it will be an allegorical discussion on the nature of hierarchical society. And according to >>842885 its all good.

>>842945
>But he's going to have a brown shirt and I'm gonna call him Winnie the Shit.

I think that counts as parody, and parodies are perfectly legal. It's why Mad magazine hasn't been sued out of existence yet.

>>842945
Satire bro

>>842940

I was going to answer archetype guy myself, but this poster puts it perfectly, so I'm just going to applaud.

>>842945
You're not a Post-Philosopher Minimalist Existentialist, are you?

>>842961
because George Lucas invented "the wise old man" right?

>>842964

I pity you.

With good lawyers: How much you want.

>>842964
What?

If you're plot element is cliche' just call it "archetype"

>>842969
if you automatically associate every wise old man with Obi Wan, then you're the one who needs pitying. It just goes to show that you're woefully ignorant about literature.

>>842983
I'm sick of people doing that. It needs to end.

>>842987

I know, that's what I was saying to >>842964!

>>842983

Exactly.

>>842994
I was responding to you, who were responding to:

>"Dude your character is exactly like Obi Wan.."
>"Nah, it's ok. He's an archetype, see?"

So every "wise old man" is just a rip off of Obi Wan according to this guy, and you applauded what he said.

>>843001

Quite apart from the fact that you misinterpreted what that guy was saying, I wasn't replying to that, I was replying to >>842964:

> because George Lucas invented "the wise old man" right?

I forgot fantasy fans, ie. people living with Aspergers, are incapable of detecting sarcasm.

>>843011

Some of us are :(

>>843043

Oh, good!

>>843053

Thanks, it gets annoying when people are always saying we...

Oh, you're good, you. Almost had me.

>>843001
The hell are you on about? It was a hypothetical conversation between two dumb asses.
I know it's /lit/ and all but try not to be TOO literal.

>>843063

He can't help it d00d...