http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/07/01/no-more-rye-impostors Comments On: No More Rye Impostors by Paul Constant en-us Copyright 2009 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0800 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:45:00 -0800 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Algernon]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:23:35 -0700 The Stranger
And if Salinger wants to protect his copyright, why the hell not? Why should he have to have unauthorized sequels to his work if he doesn't want them?

He could have gone the other way, though. The Nabokov estate allowed publication of LOLITA'S DIARY, on the condition that half of the profits be paid to them.
Posted by Roscoe]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 05:40:53 -0700 The Stranger Posted by jw36]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:21:13 -0700 The Stranger Posted by I have always been... east coaster]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:00:23 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Simac]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:47:29 -0700 The Stranger Posted by ab]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:53:58 -0700 The Stranger
@6, Show me one "original" thing, and I'll show you how it is actually dependant on someone else's previous creative effort.

@4, I'm well aware of copyright laws, AND how anti-creative-cultural-evolution they actually are.

@7, Or perhaps change the name to D. J. Sackofshit... :D
Posted by treacle]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:57:16 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Greg]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:27:42 -0700 The Stranger Posted by demo kid]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:56:32 -0700 The Stranger Posted by jp]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:41:54 -0700 The Stranger
I agree with the analogy to remixes and sampling. This should be considered fair use, maybe just put a disclaimer that it was not authorized by the original creator of the character or something.
Posted by high and bi]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:26:47 -0700 The Stranger Posted by keshmeshi]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:26:21 -0700 The Stranger
1) The book sells and is good, in which case there is a renewed interest in Catcher that makes it more relevant than its current position in 20th C canon, or

2) The book sucks and it goes away and no more is heard from it.

I hope that our young Swede starts right in on the sequel to Moby Dick. There's plenty to steal from Ishmael, and it's in the public domain.
Posted by MonkeyNose]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:25:59 -0700 The Stranger
You would have to pay the person that owns the master recording rights to James Brown's beats to sample them and anonymous work can be ripped off without paying because it's anonymous and in your example part of the public domain due to it's date of publication as is "The Wizard of Oz."

There's creative freedom and then there is infringing on another artist's right to earn income off their characters and work. This seems to be a case of the later to me.

Sidebar: Doesn't Holden Caulfield kill himself at the end of the original book in question?
Posted by danindowntown]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:25:55 -0700 The Stranger does feel like, but I can certainly agree that it would feel very weird to celebrate something like that, yes.
Posted by jw36]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:19:07 -0700 The Stranger Posted by smade]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:12:33 -0700 The Stranger
Exactly how is writing a new book about a 76-year-old Holden Caufield dissimilar from sampling a James Brown beat AND an anonymous 17th C poem to record Sinéad O'Connor's "I Am Stretched On Your Grave"? Or borrowing a rhythm track from one song to make a brand new song in Reggae culture? Or even the many "toasting versions" of reggae songs out there? Or writing a new book called "Wicked" about a young Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West?

Mix, mix, remix... that's how culture evolves.
Posted by treacle]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:07:29 -0700 The Stranger