I guess we have another plagiarist in our group
and again I have to sit back and ponder exactly
what it is that is being plagiarized.  Can something
that is at it's core actually plagiarized material
be plagiarized itself.  To fully understand a
different point of view, I am going to put the issue
in another context.

Let's suppose that one day, another network decided
that, "Hey! that X-Files was one great idea," and struck
out to create their own show mirroring that premise.
Now, we all know that all the networks including FOX
have tried and failed to copy to some extent the concept
or feel of the X-Files (Dark Skies, The Visitor, etc.)
and just haven't been able to pull it off.  But what if
instead of just trying to develop their own sci-fi series
they  said, "Let's just make our own X-files.  We'll just
modify the title somewhat but actually use the characters
of Mulder and Scully and not only that, let's call those
characters Mulder and Scully."  Far-fetched?  Yes.  I
think Chris Carter, FOX, and most of the fans, us
included, would be screaming to high heaven.  If they
were your characters, wouldn't you feel the same way?

I love fanfiction, especially during hiatus and reruns,
but I see it for what it is.  Most of the stories here
are very good, some are actually better than any script
ever written for the show.  But as long as authors use
Mulder and Scully, use episode story lines, or just use
"ism's," it is not truly original.  We have all read
fanfic that is just a rehash of the latest episode, stories
that have changed an episode ending to better suit the
preferences of the author, or stories that read more into
an episode then what was on the screen.   I enjoy reading
a different perspective from time to time.  For myself,
I enjoy a fanfic more if it reads like the series,
introduces a new character, or has an unique storyline or
idea.

These are just my opinions and I have no desire to anger
anyone for I really do appreciate the work that goes into fanfic.
But I think that the word "copying" fits more into this situation
then "plagiarism."   If I know that an author has copied another's
work, I do not read that author.  I think it is justifiable to
let the community know if you think your work has been copied.
But to scream "plagiarism" is hard, especially considering the
nature of this newsgroup.

I feel the need to argue this.  <g>

I don't think of fanfic as plagiarized material at all.  It's *derivative*, but
the source of that derivation is not only acknowledged up front, but also
frequently bowed before.  The kinf of fanfic you mention that only slightly
changes an episode generally states itself to be as such.  I've never seen
anyone cry plagiarism because someone happened to write a similar story.
Working within the same millieu people are very likely to come up with
comparable ideas.  It's the execution that's different.

Well, that would probably be fine if they started each episode with a large
note stating that all the characters and situation were created by CC and
friends.  There's a big difference there between deriving from a source and
copying it and claiming the whole concept as your own.

This is not part of my arguement . . .  I actually prefer fics that are
completely different from the series.  If I want a typical X-File, I'll watch
the show.  I like fanfic for it's ability to explore alternate possibilities
that would not, and often should not, be part of the show.

In fanfic, I think the only kind of copying that isn't plagiarism is copying
with the author's consent.  Such as authors who obtain permission to use a
character or situation from another author's story.  

To pass one person's story or poem, word for word, off as your own is nothing
but plagiarism.  If someone were to type up the script of an episode and pass
it off as an original work, that would be plagiarism too.

Well, just my opinion.  I haven't published anything here, but I really respect
the work that goes into what I read.  I don't mean to be argumentative, but I
don't mind a debate!

Elizabeth
eli...@aol.com
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dimension/2774
Virginia Commonwealth University Library
http://www.library.vcu.edu

Yes, it's plagiarism, and here's why:

I took the episode "TFWID," figured that it was making a big brouhaha on the
boards, with shippers going nutso and others falling into rapturous stupors.  I
took "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" by Dr. Seuss, which seemed to me a pretty
good analogy for how I felt about the show (that no matter *what* CC said
Mulder and Scully would or wouldn't do, I still enjoyed watching the
relationship).  And I wrote a parody that touched on Dr. Seuss, Chris Carter,
XF, NoRomos, and Shippers alike.  It is called "How the Grinch Stole R'Hood."

Now, in the sense that it's a parody, well... yes, it borrows from numerous
sources, in the same way that "PMP" borrowed from Tim Burton, "The Fly," and
any number of outside influences. Parody doesn't work UNLESS the audience
that's reading it is aware of the items which are being imitated.  But the
heart of my little poem wasn't the Dr. Seuss stuff, or even TFWID.  It was  the
board interactions that go on here - our relationships with each other and the
silly, probably unrealistic  way fans imagine things to work over at 1013.  
Quite honestly, I'm still rather proud of the work I did on this piece.  Doing
a good parody is not easy.  I'm proud of MY ideas, MY hard-found rhymes, and MY
twisting of themes into one cohesive whole.

And then someone came along, copied the text of my little poem, and clicked her
"edit" menu to change "Mulder" to "Chris" and "Scully" to "Rita." That made it,
in her mind, a "Silk Stalkings" fanfic piece.   And thereupon she posted my
poem  under her OWN NAME so that she could receive credit for whatever
cleverness and creativity she felt she had found in the poem.  

And I can't tell you how angry that makes me.  And yes, it is plagiarism.  

--Kipler

-- NOTE : To reply to this email, please remove the XXX from in
-- front of my address, otherwise it will BOUNCE.

First off, I have to say that I disagree with your perception of
what plagarism is at a fundamental level. As others have said,
we (mostly) acknowledge who owns the copyright to the characters,
(Fox and 1013,) and who created the characters (CC,) and therefore,
fulfull the 'attribution' requirements of copyright law.

Second, as for another network airing a show with a similar
title but the same characters, backstory and plots, that
could not happen without Fox or 1013's explicit, written
consent, also known as "licensure." Why? Because the
second "show," unlike fan fiction, would cause damage
to the original copyright holders. This damage would be
described as 'impacting on Fox's (1013,s') ability to
capitalize [earn money] on their lawfully owned characters."

Additionally, the courts have held that fan fiction falls
squarely in the realm of "Fair Use" under US Copyright
law...AS LONG AS... no one profits from fanfic. And by
profit, we're talking cash. Moola. Bucks. We all profit
in the overall creative sense from this wonderful community.

Now, to narrow to the focus a bit, the question pops up:
Can a work be considered "original, creative" work (protected
under most commonly accepted international copyright laws,)
if you're using characters from a) another medium (television
versus written fiction,) or characters in that SAME medium
created by another person or entity? In other words, where
is the upper "limit" of "Fair Use?"

One might argue that if you create a new situation (overall
plot,) using already-exisiting characters, that you're
in the arena of "original, creative" work. But what
about the "post-episode" stories, the ones that purport
to explain "what really happened," or the ones that finish
episodes by providing scenes the author would have liked
to see? Since the author is extending a work, rather
than creating a new one, the infamous "gray area" has
been entered, IMHO.

What I think the people here on the ng and on the
lists mean by "plagarism" in the communal context
is basically common sense. A fanfic author can spend
a GREAT deal of time coming up with plots and extra
characters (trust me on this,) and to see someone take
all that hard work, make what amounts to either a)
cosmetic changes or b) just outright mangling of the
headers to change 'ownership,' and then reposting as
their original work is, if not legally then at least
morally PLAGARISM.

Again, here I disagree. True, you are borrowing the bedrock
of the story (main characters, backstory, certain self-
referential plot points [aka, spoilers]) and _extending_
them in a new direction. Towards that end, each author's
vision of What Could Be is, truly, original and in some
cases, unique. (Said with tongue firmly in cheek.)

And finally, an example from RL (Real Life.) Paramount
Pictures, which owns a pile of copyrights for Star Trek,
(and the subsequent series, as well as (what?) eight or
nine movies,) including the name "Kirk" and "USS Enterprise,"
[one wonders why Paramount hasn't sued the US Navy for
using a copyrighted trademark on a ship of the line,
but I digress...] has over 200 books in print using
characters from the Trek universe(s). Each one of those
books is protected under copyright law, and is legally
considered "original, creative" work. The argument that
since Paramount has extended the licensure of the characters
to the author(s) affords them this protection, to me,
is weak. It is just commonly understood that, yes,
someone ELSE (Gene Roddenberry, et. al.) created the
bedrock characters, but each author's vision of those
characters is unique, and by definition "original."

If the huge, overwhelming majority of the stories here were what
I call "Cookie-cutting," then I'd agree. I define "Cookie-cutting"
as taking an existing script or teleplay, transcribing it as
a short story/novella/novel, and then inserting what the transcriber
("author") thought was more appropriate or what they wanted to
see and THEN posted that as an 'Original work' I'd agree.

But...wow. Look at some of the stuff that we have here. My
own "Umbra" [to blow my own horn just a little] I think,
by any reasonable legal standard, could be considered
"original, creative" work, only because it takes the
entire mytharc and turns it on its ear. Likewise, the "Walls"
series (author's name totally forgotten...sorry,) with the
"Dancer" characters, again, falls squarely into that
same realm, IMHO.

We can get bogged down in terminology here, but I think
that everyone will agree that when you take a piece of
work that someone else has put a lot of time, effort
and yes, creativity into, and claim it as your own,
it's slightly different from "copying" [which brings
to mind images of someone moving from the laser printer
to the Xerox machine,] and much closer to "stealing"
which is the underlying concept of what plagarism is.

Just my $0.02.

Dawson

--
Dawson E. Rambo      | Author, LANAdmin, Programmer, Dreamer
dra...@azstarnet.com | http://www.azstarnet.com/~drambo/index.html
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy...
and taste good with ketchup." -- seen on a bumper sticker

To continue this discussion, I'm another writer who was plagiarised on this
site.  And as Kipler's work was plagiarised, my stories were copied verbatim,
and the names were changed to Chris and Rita.  This person even included a few
of my end notes, for example where I had said that one story wasn't that
original, but I had to get the idea out of my system.

As someone else has said, we write deriviative works.  We don't plagiarise.
After all, if you get an idea for a term paper from someone else's, that's
derivation.  If you copy the term paper word for word, that's plagiarism.  And
to be honest, I feel very hurt that someone took my work and claimed it as
their own.  It's really made me realize that people aren't always nice . . .
I'm just glad someone alerted me to this page so I could take action.  

Melissa
Melissa Rabey                    msrxfi...@aol.com, dett...@udel.edu
                     BRC, EMXC, EP, LGW, M&S, XA
"and all I feel is black and white, and I'm wound up small and tight
                          and I don't know who I am"

Pardon me, but your assumption that all XF fanfic is plagiarized cannot be
supported.

No context except the legal definitions applies.

The legal definitions of plagiarism, ownership of work, and copyright
apply. In this instance, the US copyright laws apply because the copyright
owners, Chris Carter, 1013 Productions, and Fox Networks, are all
domiciled in the US, a Berne convention subscriber.

To paraphrase, plagiarism involves the EXACT duplication of another's work
AND the representation of said work as one's own, i.e., using quotes from
the show and _representing that they are one's own, original work_.

This is an instance of a 'derivative work,' which is, again, different
from plagiarism.

No, legally it is an original work based upon characters and concepts
developed by Chris Carter. Disclaimers further acknowledge the rights of
the copyright owner in his original creations, which is why knowledgable
fanfic authors write sober disclaimers.

Copyright law makes no attempt to reserve rights in an idea, situation, or
title. Rather it protects the *expression* (the exact word, colors, lines,
forms) of the work.

Plagiarism is an accurate term for the acts committed by the person who
represented a work of XF fanfic as her original Silk Stalkings work.
Personally, I think it is "hard" to accuse, if only by inference, an
entire community of theft, which is what plagiarism is under US law.

See my post entitled LEGAL Copyright Definitions for further information.

Phetsy
=====================
Phetsy Calderon
phe...@earthlink.net
"I thrive, myself, on all kinds of trouble."
--Maeve of Cruachan, in the Toin bo Cuailnge

The definition of plagiarism is copying someone else's work and passing
it off as your own. Although our work uses someone else's characters,
the words and the situations (usually) are our own. And we all
acknowledge that CC is the creator of the characters. Therefore,
regardless of whether the work in question is a fanfic or not, it is
plagiarism for one author to copy another's work and says, "I wrote
this." Believe me, I know. I've been there.

--
Circe
The Titanium Magnolia
SPCDD, MDL
X-Phile--We're not obsessed; we're focused.--gizzie

Okay, first things first. Most importantly, the web site with the fic and
poetry is gone. It was taken down sometime yesterday, so if you have tried
to follow the link I provided, it won't work. That was really the most
important thing, at least to me.

I would also like to state at the outset that I did not make the public
statement I did to cause everyone to meditate the nature of copyright, or
plagiarism, or the sheer "rightness" or "wrongness" of someone passing off
someone else's work as their own. I had no intention of doing that. I
simply posted what I did as more of a warning to everyone who writes to be
aware that this is happening. I thought maybe other people could check that
site and see if their stuff was there as well. And yes, I probably could
have accomplished that with a much briefer and less vituperative statement
than what I did. I am perfectly aware of that. However, there is also the
possibility that whoever it was that did this reads this newsgroup, and
since I did not (and still do not) know the identity of this person, it
seemed to be the only method I had of expressing some of the bitterness and
frustration that I was feeling.

As for the legal issues, we could legitimately debate them for weeks, but
since that is not the point of this newsgroup, I most heartily concur with
Phetsy that everyone and anyone who is interested can go to the Copyright
Office page for themselves and read the excellent information that is
there.

However, I do have one small comment to make regarding the nature of the
works that were taken. Here, I speak only for myself and not on the behalf
of the other 2 to 3 people who were in the same situation. The work that I
was concerned about was an original poem which I wrote about 3 or so years
ago, in response to, basically, being dumped. It was written with no
knowledge of the Xfiles of any kind. If you read the poem, which please
feel free to do so, you will see that there is no mention of any kind of
Scully, Mulder, Skinner, the Xfiles, aliens, The Great Mutato, flukemen, or
anything else. I posted to the Xfiles lists because it seemed entirely
appropriate for the way I (and others) viewed the relationship between
Mulder and Scully. It is an entirely original work of authorship that owes
its genesis and/or existence in no way to the Xfiles. Therefore, yes,
plagiarism is a perfectly applicable and accurate word. It was not
"copying" of an already infringing work, not by any means.

In point of fact, plagiarism is defined as "to take and pass off as one's
own, the ideas, writings, etc. of another." I can't think of a more
accurate description of what happened. My poem was taken, in its entirety,
and copied verbatim onto someone's page, with a heading of "My Fanfic" or
"My Creative Works", something of that nature. I really don't know what
else to call it besides plagiarism, for that is the title it unfortunately
deserves. Its not even a case of someone taking a *idea* (which is still
plagiarism, but naturally harder to prove), like when we "take" from the
show to write our fanfic -- what I was facing was a word for word, verbatim
taking of my work.

I am perfectly aware that the legal nature of fanfic in and of itself is
somewhat nebulous. I acknowledge that. But since that is a slightly
separate topic from what I am saying here, I will restrict my comments to
the fact that, in essence, my poem was not "fanfic" per se, since it is not
technically or substantially related to the original work, the X-Files, in
any way, unless the reader *chooses* for it to be related.

I hesitated to respond to this previous query, simply because I didn't want
to create a big brouhaha here. If anyone wishes to continue this
discussion, by all means, email me privately and I would be more than
willing to continue it. I just did not wish to be left without the
opportunity to voice some semblance of factual support for the claims and
statements that I made in my previous posting. I am not in the habit of
shooting off and saying incorrect statements merely because I am upset. If
I did not explicitly state the factual and legal  support for the comments
that I made, then *this* is where I was wrong; however, the content of my
statements was in fact, correct.

Okay, I'm going to leave everyone alone now and go back to writing fanfic,
which is what I should be doing with my time. <G>

Thank you, all of you, for reading this far and allowing me to voice my
opinions.

Patricia S. Martinez
cer...@ix.netcom.com