Jump to content

Plagarism in character applications


Anonymous
 Share

Recommended Posts

I dunno man, it's mindsets like these that actually make me question the concept of copyright/intellectual property. The fact that the better part of the 20th century has been marked by a lack of works being released into public domain (and that this trend looks set to continue well into the 21st century, or maybe even into the 22nd century) is in my opinon, a cause for concern rather than celebration. I think the fact that the media market is littered with countless corpses of long-dead franchises is a testament to that. Franchises that are long dead and forgotten (ergo, no longer profitable) by their creators, yet remain under the protection of IP laws that prevent anyone else from being able to do anything with them. Who knows what new life could be breathed into them had they been released sooner into the public domain?

 

Take the Streets of Rage/Bare Knuckle series by Sega for example. Since the release of its last installment, Bare Knuckle 3 in 1994, for the past 20+ years Sega hasn't done anything with them save for re-releasing "remastered" editions onto newer gaming platforms. So as a franchise, the series is effectively dead and forgotten - it's no longer profitable for Sega. They haven't done anything of note (i.e. no official sequels) with the series for the past 20+ years, and from that trend it's safe to predict they probably wouldn't some 20+ years from now. Yet, nostalgic fans of the series (folks like me who spent the 90's having fond memories of one of my favourite beat em' ups) would have to hold off any thoughts on ourselves creating say, Bare Knuckle 4 for (to put it lightly) quite some time, because the series isn't set for release into the public domain until 2086, at the earliest. And that's not even accounting for the possibilities of Sega extending the copyright.

 

It's ridiculous. I mean, would any fans of the series be still alive then? Which means by the time it's released into the public domain, its ideas and concepts are at risk of being lost forever because those who cared about it have long since passed on. And all the while it'd just be sitting there collecting dust in Sega's archives. Aren't ideas made to be propagated because y'know, that's how cultures grow and develop? In other word, if you ask me the way the concept of intellectual property is being handled right now isn't enriching our culture - it's destroying it. (As I mentioned above, the lack of works being released into public domain should be a cause for concern rather than celebration) But that would be another discussion for another thread, since I think I strayed a bit too far off-topic here.

 

Related to my point, this video above.

Edited by Lawman
  • I read this! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributions Mod

Actually, I’m quite fond of researching U.S. Copyright law and while that page you linked to, @jenneral_jennson, is right, your interpretation of it is likely wrong.

 

Ideas and concepts can be protected under copyright if they are very specific. Using the Wolverine analogy that @Lawman used, a character with claws and healing factor Marvel cannot claim copyright, but they could claim a character with claws, a healing factor, fought in WW2, is long lived, has a metal skeleton, etc. The devil is in the details. The more detailed the more likelihood it will be considered infringement.

 

Note that the page states “expression of the idea” not the idea itself. Again there’s wiggle room in how you go about that things. Lawman is actually correct; it is not ideas that are protected by copyright, but the expression of the idea.

 

Of course, copyright and plagiarism are two very different things. One is deliberate and willful stealing – passing ones work as your own, while the other is more general and in terms of rp would be a fandom rp for example.

 

Anyway, going back to the original subject, I would have to know the context of what was taken and how much. Original poster, you state this was taken from a fandom/fanon wiki. Was the character a fandom or fan created character? Was it basic biographical information from say Wookipedia on C3PO? A paragraph or two or just the whole thing lifted? Without context I wouldn’t know what to do.

 

I assume because it bothered you, it was a lot. If you think it would put your mind at ease and are comfortable with staff, go ahead and let them know. I had my own site for a brief spell, and I would have liked to have known, but also wouldn’t consider it a big deal with the violator and just tell them to change it to their own words. If you don’t think it will help ease your mind or you don’t know how staff will react, go ahead and keep quiet.

  • I read this! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh. Justifying theft of intellectual property is all of y'alls right, because frankly that's all I've heard as far as arguments or leniency for it. But yeah no, I don't condone it for any circumstance. Will not condone it for any circumstance. Have at it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the application is that they copied the text from several fandom wikis of characters from different fandoms, and what they have copied doesn't even fit into the fandom. They've not come back though, so I don't think it's worth it as after a while the apps are shelved and unused accounts get deleted.

 

However, it a question of trust - if someone like that was approved on a forum, I'd wonder if their ic posts were their's. (Especially starters  and solos.)

 

As for a canon character being rped in a fandom, the app still needs to be done in the rper's own words as applications are the first judge you have of the person's writing and how well they know a character - if it's copied, you don't have that knowledge. This was for an oc, though, so everything in it should have been original (apart from the settings and events that are needed to be refereed to.)

 

 

Anonymous poster hash: 808e4...f1d

  • I read this! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

I have a character that part of her history is from a wiki (it's stated very clearly at the top of the history when I post it) mostly because it's just for historical facts and has little to do with the history that I portray for the member.

 

As I said, I very clearly state that some of the history is from a Wiki however I can understand how it can make someone uncomfortable. I think that it's up to the staff how they deal with it.

 

I've personally got mixed results from it. Some admins have declined the app based on this (even though the disclaimer is there) and some admins have accepted it.

  • I read this! 1

0_mainsignature.jpg

image.png

Profile set made by myself and original Artwork by Fae Merriman, my daughter.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can argue until we're blue in the face about US copyright laws (and I very much think they're broken myself, but here is not the place to discuss that), but they're the law. Even those of you who live outside of the US are affected by them, because the US uses its trade power to strong arm other countries into adopting laws modeled on the US laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that is how things stand. If you don't like it, write your lawmakers about it.

 

RP in general dances a fine line anyways. We're often times playing in someone else's sandbox, using their toys, and just putting our words to it. And even when we're not, so many ideas are inspired by the things we read, the things we watch... some people argue there isn't really a new idea left out there anyways, it's all in how it's presented.

 

I think the biggest thing is... are we acknowledging this? Someone who copies and pastes a bio out of a wiki, another game, or some other source — doesn't credit the source and tries to pass it off as their own — is very clearly crossing a line. Someone who is openly acknowledging they're playing with a character established in canon, who in taking on that role has to take on the character's existing history, is generally accepted in most RP (as long as said character fits in the established setting of the game). Where between these two extremes does the line exist?

 

I feel the real divide lies in acknowledging the source: did you write it yourself, did you put it into your own words, or did you copy it wholesale from elsewhere? And most importantly: are you openly, willingly, without having to be prompted or questioned about it, acknowledging how much of your character comes from somewhere else? Being open about it does two things: gives credit where credit is due, and allows those running an RP to make an informed choice on what is or is not suitable for their RP.

  • I read this! 5
  • Cheers 1

Emperor468x60.png.b7bb87f952ee0dcc7a97150c6258c8f9.png

Captain Amelia Waterhouse, Commanding Officer

=/\= Join =/\= Roster & Openings =/\= Rules =/\= Chat =/\=

"It is human nature to yearn to be what we were never intended for. It is singular, but it is so." -Mark Twain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Copyright law is all well and good...

 

But again, I cycle back to the fact that this is about writing. The entire hobby is writing. There is no other aspect. We write. Literally, that's all it is.

 

And someone can't be assed to write the app? C'mon. Yeah, apps generally suck and it's rare that someone enjoys them. But for fuck's sake. It's the FIRST example ANYONE has of you on a board. The ENTIRE POINT of RP is to WRITE. Canon or not, if someone shows up with shit they copy/pasted from somewhere else I'm going to immediately assume that they aren't going to be a good fit because they're too goddamn lazy to write their own stuff or read the lore to at least try to make it fit.

 

If you loaded up a site and found your character copy/pasted there by someone else, my money would be on you being pissed about it and not going "Well, it happens."

  • I read this! 2
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

I understand what you're saying @Rune but sometimes it's not that. In the example I gave it was literally just facts. The base form of the character (as it is a historical figure) and then once it gets to the point in her history that I can take to the imagination I have her app (in fact if you all are interested I'll post the history on this site so you can see it). I think I can understand if the whole application is filled with the wiki but we are neglecting the fact that sometimes facts are facts and that the re-writing of that is frivolous BS. We are forcing people to re-write content that is already written.

 

I don't like apps, I think I make that a readily apparent thing. However, an application is meant to explain your character. If there are facts that are unreasonably factual why should you re-write them? They are there to provide information. The parts that should matter are what the person actually wrote.

 

I don't want you to think I'm taking personal offense to this. @Elena knows the character that I'm speaking of for this example that I keep using. I find all points valid but there is a point where re-writing redundant information is redundant and we should draw a line. If we are reinventing a character I think that this is valid but if I'm playing Batman I'm not going to re-write that his parents were killed in a mugging. That doesn't meant that I've plagiarized but it's a well known fact of the character. Why does it matter the specifics of who wrote that part of his history. You change that and Bruce Wayne ain't Batman.

  • I read this! 1
  • Agree 1

0_mainsignature.jpg

image.png

Profile set made by myself and original Artwork by Fae Merriman, my daughter.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to pop in with a quick reply to @Morrigan here and then be done. 

 

Your example is not what I would deem or consider plagiarism. Why? Because you give the credit where the credit is due. You say "this bit is from *insert place/author/whatever here*" You don't claim what is written as wholly your work, which is what plagiarism is. You are citing and referencing (university classes do pay off) the work you are taking it from. You are not stealing. You are referencing. This is the right way to do it. This is not theft. My issue is when someone takes an app/character concept from someone else (name, description, abilities, personality literally everything) and attempts to pass it off as their own. This is the wrong way to do it. This is theft.  

  • I read this! 4
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that as long as you state you took things from the wiki, and they aren't yours, but they belong to your character's history, it is OK.

 

I love bios, because they round up the character. They need to have all the details for further reference and consistency sake. But replacing "fought" from the wiki with "battled" in order to be in your own words doesn't do any service to the character. Rehashing in other words means merely raping the thesaurus, and it is not productive at all. Better put the good words there (credited, of course) then add yours where you pass to particularities... and start writing. 

 

Also, if it is an original character, but from an existing history (be it the historical times or the history of a fandom) the general history elements can be taken from a wiki, while writing in your own words the personality, the personal history and the way how historical events had actually affected the character. This makes sense. Of course, always crediting and not claiming as yours what isn;t.

 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What @jenneral_jennson said, @Morrigan. Putting facts down and going "These are from here." And then making the effort to show you made the character your own, is different than copying it directly from somewhere else and going "Kay, done." Which I've had people do. I've had a couple people attempt to rewrite lore characters with their own character's name and assume I wouldn't notice, like I've magically not been playing the same game as then for 10+ years.

 

There's a huge difference between going "His parents were killed in a mugging" and going to the Wikipedia page and copying and pasting that paragraph over and deciding that's a done deal. Playing canon characters makes this entire thing sketchy as is, and I generally avoid doing such if it isn't in a 1x1 RP in which the other person is also playing a canon character because of that. But that's mostly unrelated.

 

Going "Everyone knows his parents were killed and Bruce became Batman..." sums that up without rehashing. That doesn't mean the character is that flat. There's still how he reacted in the following years, how he views Alfred, how he feels about marzipan, etc.

 

TL;DR Giving credit where credit is due =/= theft. Copying and pasting an entire character that is not of your own creation or sections of text that are not of your own creation and claiming them as your own is.

 

And with that, I'm bowing out of this one. My dickboots are needed elsewhere.

  • I read this! 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Archaic Cyborg

I care about plagiarism, not for the chance that the rightful owner is losing profit/crdit/etc (published authors), but for the fact that it defines the person as untrustworthy. An application's sole purpose is to represent how well the player can write, and their understanding and knowledge of the character: be it canon or original.

 

Any one can copy/paste. Any one can copy and then swap words around, in an attempt to avoid getting caught b staff, who Google copied excerpts to find matches.

 

Most staff- and people in general- don't want to write with said person. It's lazy work, it's dishonest, and spells out a difficult player to work with. I've had applicants steal entire profiles, personality descriptions, history layouts, rp scenes. So a writer gets into an exciting game by faking their writing skills in the app: but then their fututre threads will be of different quality, and style. Will staff notice? Will the thief stay? Will someone be given a medal for bypassing security?

 

A plagiarist has no place in a group where everyone else has put genuine effort and time into their writing. It's the same in an art community: all artists attending class create their work, all inspired-by pieces are given due credit, aside from that one person who traced and signed something as their own and fights for it.

 

/2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.