Its about having respect for your fellow community members and content creators. I would find it incredibly rude if someone “fixed” my sadbox story because they didn’t like how certain things transpired and decided they knew better than I do with my own story. This can ruin world building, story themes, and even the whole purpose of what the original creator had in mind. Although I might not own the idea of ‘damaged veteran left in isolation and neglect, is failed by society’ I would be very upset if someone rewrote the character Chris Carter I spent a lot of time and effort on. I am sure Booperino here would be upset if someone started drawing Snakefood and Trinity, in straight up horrific abuse art because that was not Booperino’s intent. You don’t need to be a “Disney Shill” to just have common decency and respect for your fellow content creators. So yes, if you wish to make a derivative of someone else’s work, you should at least ask if the creator is reachable.
You over-rate the importance of the author; you probably believe that your version of your characters is definitive, because you invented them. But that isn’t how it works, because, ultimately, there are no new stories, just infinite permutations of a handful of basic storylines. And just as your stories are based on other people’s stories, so too will other people base their stories on yours–at least, if yours are any good. The ultimate sign of respect a creator can show another creator is to dedicate precious time and effort into working with other creator’s creation. It means they think your work is worth their time, and worth the time to expand, to explore.
And if that expansion goes in directions you, the original creator, doesn’t like? Well, you aren’t the original creator, for one thing. But just as importantly, the existence of other works doesn’t negate your works. If someone wrote a story where Booperino’s characters get abused, what if it? The originals are still there. No one is forced to read the abuse versions. Works stand or fall by their own merits, not by derivative works. In fact, Booperino should be flattered if someone drew abuse pics, because it means his characters were likeable enough for an abuser to spend time showing them get abused.
The story, not the teller. “The author is dead”–once you release a story into the world, it no longer belongs to you. You don’t get to decide how people interprete it or what they do with it.
To me, the purpose of copyright is two-fold. First, and most important, it enables creator’s to make a living off their work. Second, it prevents anyone from changing the creator’s work without acknowledging the changes-- no one can, say, add a fig leaf to a statue and then claim it was always there, or add a new ending to a book and claim it is the original.
Copyright should not be about suppressing ideas, about fencing off stories. But Disney et al want us to believe that, and they’ve successfully indoctrinated a lot of people into believing it. And our culture is lessened. The story, not the teller, is what matters.
When it comes to characters I create and craft, yes I do believe as the original author my version of that character is the definitive version. I would find it incredibly disrespectful if someone just fucked around with the stuff I spent my heart and soul making, just because they like the idea but think my way was ‘wrong’. The ultimate sign of respect one creator can to do another, is to recognize one another’s works. Directly stealing ideas is lazy, and a major sign of disrespect to other creators. It is a big, “Fuck you and all the time you spent on this, I know better”. It’s just a shitty thing to do, and it takes so little effort to have the decency to just ask.
You seem to also not understand this community when it comes to box factionalization, I can almost promise you if someone does an abuse edit to hugbox works, or someone does a hug edit to an abuse work, a massive shit storm will ensue. Although no one is forced to read one or another, the climate and culture in this community makes doing so an absolute no go. To be honest I don’t think you really can speak for Booperino or how he is supposed to feel, but I can tell you from personal experience it really sucks when someone decides the, “know better” and feel entitled to access to your stories to make ‘new derivative, but this is now canon stay mad’.
Of course people are free to interoperate a story how they want, because there is no correct way to feel about something. However, just because its now out in the wild, doesn’t entitle people to “Add on to it, because they hated that the work ended this way, so I think this is better”. Its incredibly arrogant and extremely disrespectful.
Honestly copyright law and its intricacies go beyond just making money off ideas or documenting changes, it delves deep into IP law which is critical to society beyond just the works of fiction. However regardless of all that, I think you’re giving Booperino some really bad advice. “Fuck the artist or writer, do what you want because you should feel entitled to it” that’s absolute insanity. Clearly, you do not respect other authors or artists and the work they do, if that is your attitude.
It literally costs 0.00$ to talk to the creator if they will permit you too use their work or characters and it builds a stronger community with better rapport.
Thank you all for remaining calm and rational in your discussion.
I can see valid points on both sides of this conversation.
I’m going to ruminate on this subject a while before I weigh in.
Perhaps you missed my post where I said there was nothing wrong with asking permission? It is the courteous thing to do.
My issue is with the idea that artists are required to check with other artists. That is nonsense, and 3000 years of human civilization shows it to be nonsense.
Certainly you are free to take offense if someone borrows your characters without permission; I do think that lacks vision, because someone borrowing your characters means they were interested enough to do so. The worst thing that can happen to a story is to be ignored and forgotten.
But that’s an issue for the two artists to resolve. What I objected to here was 1) that the scenario being riffed was so common a trope that even the most courteous person would not see a need to ask permission, and 2) the posts suggesting that permission was required under any circumstances. The first point is fairly obvious and, I think, non-controversial; the second is extremely controversial, but as an advocate of the freedom of ideas, I thought I’d at least make the attempt. Food for thought, you might say.
The idea that creator’s interpretation is not definitive is not truly controversial, but what exactly that means and why is not intuitive. All I will say on that is authorial prerogative assumes the author is aware of all the factors that guided the creation of their work, and that simply isn’t true.
But that’s far afield of fluffies, and I can’t type on this damn phone keyboard, so I’ll let it end there.
giant story sized comments on this post aside, this is great
Thank you!
Agreed
This is wholesome as fuck and I love it.