Copycat or Tropes?

[PirateMorg]

There are so many wonderful fantasy things out there that I adore the thought of, but I'm concerned with some of it being copyrighted. Example: I love the show Grimm and find it inspiring with some of the creatures, and while I know Grimm's tales are not copyrighted to the show - I'm fairly certain wesen are. But digging further into that, they describe it as "the beasts inside of us". Would it be a copycat or a trope if I wanted to write something about "beasts inside of us" and didn't call it wesen?

Or...Tolkien made his elves tall and thin, and while he wasn't the only/first one to do that, he was one of the most influential people to give us modern day "elves", despite their appearances in folklore. But, as far as I understand it, the tall, thin beautiful elves that "speak to the trees" are now a trope - or seem to be.

A trope I can handle, as there are a multitude of ways to twist it around and make it a little different. Copyright is what worries me.

At what point does something leave the "intellectual property" category and fall into the "trope" category?

 

[Prince of Spires]

Well, wesen is just the German word for beings, so there's that.

You can't copyright a single word or an idea. That's not what copyright is for. Copyright is about an artistic work.

What you can do is trademark a term. For instance, you would have a hard time using a fictional character named Harry Potter, or using the term Hobbit. The thing with this is though that this generally applies to very specific things. The term Elves has always existed. So you can't trademark it or copyright it.

So you have protection for a finished artistic work (like a novel), and for very specific terms (so you can't use hobbits or Harry Potter). But once you move beyond that, everything is pretty much fair game. You can't protect an idea.

For instance, I can write a story in which a group of 9 characters has to walk to a volcano to toss a magical ring into it, while a dark lord is trying to stop them. I can have that world be populated by dwarves and halflings and elves and everything else. What I can't do is have them travel to Rivendell, or have the dark lord be named Sauron.

Now this becomes a bit of a grey area. At what point do names belong to a specific work and at what point are they fair game? For the Dwarves in the Hobbit for instance Tolkien used mythological names. So I probably can name my dwarf Thorin. However, if I use the exact same group of dwarves as in the hobbit I might get in trouble.

Last thing to consider, there is always a difference between being right and actually defending that right. Say I write a story where I have dwarves using the same name as Tolkien dwarves. I'm no legal professional, so I don't know exactly at what point I can or can't do this. However, I do know that if I get a letter from the Tolkien estate telling me to stop publishing this tale or else they'll sue me then I definitely will do so immediately. I don't have the funds or the know-how to take on such a large and rich group.

So if you want to stay safe, stay away from names that are very specific, but you're fine using ideas.

 

[PirateMorg]

Well, wesen is just the German word for beings, so there's that.

You can't copyright a single word or an idea. That's not what copyright is for. Copyright is about an artistic work.

Yes, which is why I'm asking if I made a story about beasts inside of us and didn't call them "wesen", would it be copyright or just copycat? Would it be copycat or fan fiction if I wrote about the beasts inside of us and did call them wesen?

What you can do is trademark a term. For instance, you would have a hard time using a fictional character named Harry Potter, or using the term Hobbit. The thing with this is though that this generally applies to very specific things. The term Elves has always existed. So you can't trademark it or copyright it.

I'm aware that general terms - like elves and names like Thorin, Thorfin, Thorson, etc have been around for thousands of years and are not copyrighted. I'm asking if using these ideas together would be copyright or copycat. A tall, thin elf good at archery named Legolas - is that copyright or copycat? That's what I'm trying to figure out, where the line is drawn.

So you have protection for a finished artistic work (like a novel), and for very specific terms (so you can't use hobbits or Harry Potter). But once you move beyond that, everything is pretty much fair game. You can't protect an idea.

I'm aware "hobbit" is a coined term, but is there a time limit on terms like them, that have become so common and accepted in the fantasy realm that a lot of people don't realize they're still relatively new terms?

And yes, obviously, if someone sends me a cease and desist letter regarding ideas/names or something similar, you don't just decide to ignore it. No, me asking these questions doesn't mean I'm planning on copying someone's work. I'm wondering where the line is drawn with certain world building ideas before it becomes copyright infringement or even fan fiction.

 

[CupofJoe]

I think what Prince of Spires is getting at is that it is a grey area and there is no fixed line.
Some right holders are famously vigilant and litigious [I'm looking at you House of Mouse] and you could find yourself at the end of a C&D very quickly.
Others take it as flattery.
Using the name and basic profile of a character or concept that someone else has created would be copying [or copycatting as you say].
I understand that there will always be commonalities between works of imagination. Try writing a modern vampire tale without touching on ideas from Interview with a Vampire. Twilight or Buffy [and even Dracula] etc.
For me it is what you do with the idea you have.

 

[Devor]

I'm aware "hobbit" is a coined term, but is there a time limit on terms like them, that have become so common and accepted in the fantasy realm that a lot of people don't realize they're still relatively new terms?

So Prince of Spires explained it pretty well I thought. There are two things at play here: Copyright and Trademark.

The term "Hobbit" is a registered trademark. You cannot use it at all. The Tolkein estate filed some paperwork, said the term is deeply ingrained as being representative of their work, and the government agreed. You can google a trademark database and literally look up a word like wesen to see if it's usable. If there's a trademark for something like a wesen teashop, you're fine, because it has to be close enough in use to plausibly create confusion with some customer.

A copyright, on the other hand, applies to your work as a whole. And on paper it's automatic (proving the work is yours to a judge, not automatic). It protects your work from theft. As Prince of Spires mentioned, it's not always clear "how close is too close." Usually there have to be a number of strong and clear similarities - names, weird plot points, scenes that play out exactly, and so on - so that the theft is unmistakable. A direct plagiarized passage, of course, would be dead in the water. If the copied version is a parody, or otherwise a commentary on the original work (say, I'm writing this specifically for people read the original), then there's extra slack.

But you can't copyright a single idea. And the idea behind hobbits, for example, has been used by D&D and Warhammer and a number of other properties without any issue, under the term halfling. Over the years they've mostly pulled away from being Tolkein copycats towards having their own distinct IPs, but so far as the law is concerned, halflings are fine.

I haven't seen much of Grimm. I don't know anything about wesen. If they only appeared in an episode or two, you're probably fine using the word. If they were a major antagonist, they may have trademarked it, so you can either check with a trademark database or just change the word. Even a 1-letter difference is enough. Obviously you can't lift your whole plot from the show, though.

 

[PirateMorg]

Devor thank you, that makes much more sense.