Subject:
|
Re: Harry Potter?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 Mar 2001 21:19:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
904 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.castle, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
>
> > > I haven't read any of these cultishly popular books, so I'm in no position
> > > to judge or make other comment...
>
> > I wouldn't call #1 best-sellers as cultish - fadish, perhaps.
>
> I didn't mean it as insultingly as it probably came across. Think of it
> merely as an outsider's perception of an endlessly popular phenomenon. It's
> not a cult, obviously; I mean, it's not Pokemon, for pity's sake! 8^)
I rather enjoyed the Harry Potter books, but then I'm a Tolkien cultist. :-)
>
> > The web site of the author of Larry Potter is extremely self-serving to say
> > the least (www.realmuggles.com), but she may have a trademark (not
> > copyright) case. The lawyers will have a field day, in any case.
>
> I know that none of us is a copyright lawyer, but, if she wins, might
> Larry's author be entitled to royalties on all things Potter? That could
> spell zillions and zillions of dollars!
Trademark infringement would most likely get her a piece of the action.
>
> > But then, the ultimate in fantasy plaigarism is still around - Sword of
> > Shanara, so who knows.
>
> Similarly, Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant borrow quite
> liberally (as does much modern fantasy) from Tolkien (who himself was a
> borrower, after a fashion!)
>
> Dave!
Borrowing or being inspired by, and out-and-out character-for-character and
scene-for-scene stealing are two different things. But note Brooks filed
off the serial numbers, so to speak, and changed the names.
Bruce
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Harry Potter?
|
| (...) I've only read a little of his stuff (at a friend's urging), and after ninety years of reading I was still in the first chapter. Not, for me, the most engaging prose style. Regretably (or not), I can't really assess his plagiarism, but I (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Harry Potter?
|
| (...) I didn't mean it as insultingly as it probably came across. Think of it merely as an outsider's perception of an endlessly popular phenomenon. It's not a cult, obviously; I mean, it's not Pokemon, for pity's sake! 8^) (...) I know that none of (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.castle)
|
62 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
