Parody in Publishing: When My Perspective Isn’t Yours
There’s so much drama in publishing lately; lots and lots of turmoil, finger pointing and “I’m right,” “No, I’m right and I’ll sue….” Tut. Tut. Tut. One would think that the drama would be limited to the stories in the books, but no, apparently not. Now it’s in the courtrooms thanks to those dear, old copyright laws that we still only somewhat understand. That’s right, they’re back and no writer is immune. Ask J.K. Rowling, or J.D. Salinger for that matter, how much fun it is to have to defend one’s work from a predator trying to ride her coattails for a quick buck. Deary, deary me, how can this be allowed to happen? Simple, it’s the law and like all laws, copyright is subject to interpretation. That’s right: interpretation.
Last year J.K. Rowling entered into a lawsuit against RDR Books to stop publication of a compendium of all things Harry Potter, claiming that she had planned to write one herself and that a flooded marketplace of such books would benefit no one. But here’s the thing: the content in question came from a fan’s website, something that J.K. Rowling had sanctioned and praised. It seems that when the material was confined to a localized web space all was well, but the prospect of that same information being compiled into book form created tension. Why is that? Again, it’s simple. J.K. Rowling and Warner Brothers were afraid of losing control (i.e. money). Their argument is that the owner of a copyright should be given control over what gets published as a secondary work, as well as the sole right to publish in book form information that is, or has been, available for public viewing (in this case, via the internet). Does anyone see a flaw in this logic? Yeah, well you’re not alone.
The answer to be determined in this case is whether or not the book is legal because the author (i.e. raging fan) interjected his own creativity, interpretation and analysis (we’ll get back to this a little later).
Fast forwarding to the present we now see J.D. Salinger embattled in his own private Idaho. His nemesis is a sequel called 60 YEARS LATER: COMING THROUGH THE RYE. In this version, Holden Caulfield is a senile old man in a nursing home who breaks out for more fun-filled adventures in New York City. Yes, that premise alone is a crime against literature, but bad taste isn’t the issue. Salinger is claiming that his copyrights for both the novel and its key character, Holden Caulfield, are being violated. However, the sequel’s publisher and distributor are defending their position on the basis that the book isn’t an act of plagiarism because literature is full of instances where a famous character has time-travelled or been dumped into new surroundings. Oh boy!
Speaking of time travel, let’s go back again to another lawsuit in 2002 between GONE WITH THE WIND and its best-selling derivative THE WIND DONE GONE (do you see where this is going?). Margaret Mitchell’s estate claimed that Alice Randall stole characters, scenes, settings and even direct passages from GONE WITH THE WIND and they wanted damages (i.e. money). Alice Randall countered that because her version was told from the perspective of Scarlett O’Hara’s slaves, her novel was different and therefore legal. The Court agreed that the book was a parody of a well-known work and thus protected by law.
Now we’re getting somewhere: what exactly is a parody and how much license comes with it? Basically, authors can claim parody status as long as they comment on what is taken from another author. To break it down even further, the motivation for “comments” often include criticism (satire), teaching, reporting or research, and can include the generation of photocopies. Also, according to the United States legal system, the determination of a parody is made on a case by case basis. See, even the Supreme Court knows it’s got its work cut out for itself. Copyright law isn’t black or white; it’s all about the gray.
I’ve discussed the psychology of copyright infringement and piracy in previous blog entries, Got My Mind on My Money and DRM on My Mind and Pirates & Authors: Working It Out, Together, so there’s no need to re-hash here it. A more fitting question is what to do if this happens to you? The easiest response is to do nothing and reap the benefits. Hear me out. Too many authors focus on what other people are trying to take away from them, rather than striving to improve upon what they have to give. This is not hippy crap; it’s actually a sound business practice. Take J.K. Rowling’s problem of having too many Harry Potter encyclopedias in the market: what would happen if she didn’t sue her fan? First, she wouldn’t damage her reputation or risk alienating loyal readers. Second, Harry Potter would be in the news again, potentially driving more sales of her books. Third, having more books could actually benefit J.K. Rowling because when she finally does write her own encyclopedia, with author insights and extra tidbits, the quality of what she has to offer the market will likely outshine the competition and bring even more sales back to her. Lawsuits are for the uncreative. Instead of using her megastar status for good, J.K. Rowling caved into the fear of lost earnings and created unnecessary problems for herself. Let this be a lesson everyone: focus on creating the best product you can with your customers needs in mind and the competition will take care of itself. But if you’re convinced that a lawsuit is your only recourse, you’d better get a damn fine lawyer who knows what she’s doing because the burden of proof will be on you. Happy litigating.
