[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 104 KB, 665x598, wut.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3588767 No.3588767 [Reply] [Original]

I want to discuss authorship in wake of the Internet and online culture.

I ask as I have seen this picture to the left posted around a fair bit online. I did not make it but the character in the first frame is one I drew. That drawing came from another existing MS Paint drawing I found on 4chan. So this picture emerged from a template someone did, me adapting it and then someone else taking the idea further. I have also seen variations on this picture taking it further.

Similarly elsewhere you find this breakdown everywhere. Hark! A Vagrant's Kate Beaton recently posted about a t-shirt she found of Grumpy Cat with the words 'I had fun once, it was awful' on it. She said it was strange as that phrase originated in a comic of hers that was screencapped, then merged with another existing meme to form a new one. A lot of webcomic artists have seen that people have taken parts of their work and adapted them or taken them out of context, it is hard to see where authorship is.

You can also look at Slender Man which emerged entirely from the speculation of people on forums, posted Youtube videos etc. You get the show Community which took a phrase someone said in a email to them and turning it into a show catchphrase. Fanfiction and the original work merging.

What do you think of authorship in wake of all this? Will it influence literature? Who can be said to be the true author of memes and similar things?

>> No.3588781

>slenderman

gtfo back to /b/ nigger >>>/b/

>> No.3588783

Notice how all of these things were originally "published" on the internet.

Authorship remains unchanged, ultimately. If you don't want other people outright stealing your shit, don't put it on the internet for free.

>> No.3588799

>>3588783

Not all, as I said shows like Community are the original products, people then make fanart and fanfiction, phrases and catchphrases which then the show's creators incorporate.

>> No.3588813

>>3588799
Community is terrible though, and it's partially because of that approach.

>> No.3588816

>>3588813

I agree, I think most times when shows start doing fanservice they go to shit. Just saying regardless of the quality of the work produced it still is an interesting process.

>> No.3588828

>>3588799
well that's nothing new. It's called pandering.