Where exactly is the line between an inspired original and poorly disguised fanfiction?

[Justhetip...]

Technically speaking, there are no truly original ideas, and almost all, if not every fictional work only exists because of it's predecessor.

There are fanfictions so good that if they were created as original works, and pasted with the "inspired by xxxx" tag, they would have the same, or even greater success than when they were fanfics.

And then you have original works that claim to be inspired, but when you start reading, you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places.

Of course, not all inspired works are like that, and there's obviously a ton of successful works out there that were successful not just because of the fandom of the work it was inspired by, but the creativity of the author too. (E.g The Author's POV, Fifty Shades of Grey, and a lot of other works that originally started out as fanfics)

So as a reader and a fan of a work, maybe a game, anime, comic, or novel, etc. how much deviation from the original work can you allow in a fanfic before it gets unfamiliar?

And how much "inspiration" can you accept from an original that claims to be inspired? How long can you wait for it's "uniqueness" to finally shine through?

 

[StoneInky]

Technically speaking, there are no truly original ideas, and almost all, if not every fictional work only exists because of it's predecessor.

There are fanfictions so good that if they were created as original works, and pasted with the "inspired by xxxx" tag, they would have the same, or even greater success than when they were fanfics.

And then you have original works that claim to be inspired, but when you start reading, you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places.

Of course, not all inspired works are like that, and there's obviously a ton of successful works out there that were successful not just because of the fandom of the work it was inspired by, but the creativity of the author too. (E.g The Author's POV, Fifty Shades of Grey, and a lot of other works that originally started out as fanfics)

So as a reader and a fan of a work, maybe a game, anime, comic, or novel, etc. how much deviation from the original work can you allow in a fanfic before it gets unfamiliar?

And how much "inspiration" can you accept from an original that claims to be inspired? How long can you wait for it's "uniqueness" to finally shine through?

It might be just me, but I don't equate inspiration with fanfiction. And an 'inspired story' that feels too similar to the original work is not fanfiction, it is plagarism. But I'll answer your questions anyway.

How much deviation can I allow from the original work before the fanfic turns into an original? A lot. As long as the writer writes it while keeping in mind it's a fanfic, following the rules of the setting of the original work, I'll say it's a fanfic.

And you asked how much 'inspiration' can I accept in an original novel? That depends on the tone. The setting and plot of the novel can be near complete same, it doesn't matter, but if the tone, prose, characterization, and minor events are the same as well, that's no longer an original. For a more specific cutoff, when the story feels so similar to the inspired work to the point where it cannot be a coincidence, to the point that reading a chapter makes you immediately match it with a similar chapter from the inspired work, that's plagarism.

 

[ACertainPassingUser]

Technically speaking, there are no truly original ideas, and almost all, if not every fictional work only exists because of it's predecessor.

There are fanfictions so good that if they were created as original works, and pasted with the "inspired by xxxx" tag, they would have the same, or even greater success than when they were fanfics.

And then you have original works that claim to be inspired, but when you start reading, you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places.

Of course, not all inspired works are like that, and there's obviously a ton of successful works out there that were successful not just because of the fandom of the work it was inspired by, but the creativity of the author too. (E.g The Author's POV, Fifty Shades of Grey, and a lot of other works that originally started out as fanfics)

So as a reader and a fan of a work, maybe a game, anime, comic, or novel, etc. how much deviation from the original work can you allow in a fanfic before it gets unfamiliar?

And how much "inspiration" can you accept from an original that claims to be inspired? How long can you wait for it's "uniqueness" to finally shine through?

The line is how much of the imitation has been modified and twisted with new author's ideas, how hard it is to notice the pattern, and how much the audience could notice the pattern.

It's not just we judging author.

You must recognize that this is a battle between "The Author" trying creating similar and uwt disguising pattern vs "The masses of Average Audience" trying to noticing old pattern from something new.

If "The Author" manages to create a whole grand disguise to hide the old pattern, only the few audience could notice the inspired pattern.

 

[Hans.Trondheim]

Technically speaking, there are no truly original ideas, and almost all, if not every fictional work only exists because of it's predecessor.

There are fanfictions so good that if they were created as original works, and pasted with the "inspired by xxxx" tag, they would have the same, or even greater success than when they were fanfics.

And then you have original works that claim to be inspired, but when you start reading, you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places.

Of course, not all inspired works are like that, and there's obviously a ton of successful works out there that were successful not just because of the fandom of the work it was inspired by, but the creativity of the author too. (E.g The Author's POV, Fifty Shades of Grey, and a lot of other works that originally started out as fanfics)

So as a reader and a fan of a work, maybe a game, anime, comic, or novel, etc. how much deviation from the original work can you allow in a fanfic before it gets unfamiliar?

And how much "inspiration" can you accept from an original that claims to be inspired? How long can you wait for it's "uniqueness" to finally shine through?

There is no definitive line what constitutes an OG work from a copycat. Unless it was clearly stated in laws or a place's guidelines, one can always use the 'inspiration' defense to excuse plagiarism.

In the end, it all boils down to how many perceived the work as a pure photocopy of an original work.

 

[_oinkchan]

Technically speaking, there are no truly original ideas, and almost all, if not every fictional work only exists because of it's predecessor.

There are fanfictions so good that if they were created as original works, and pasted with the "inspired by xxxx" tag, they would have the same, or even greater success than when they were fanfics.

And then you have original works that claim to be inspired, but when you start reading, you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places.

Of course, not all inspired works are like that, and there's obviously a ton of successful works out there that were successful not just because of the fandom of the work it was inspired by, but the creativity of the author too. (E.g The Author's POV, Fifty Shades of Grey, and a lot of other works that originally started out as fanfics)

So as a reader and a fan of a work, maybe a game, anime, comic, or novel, etc. how much deviation from the original work can you allow in a fanfic before it gets unfamiliar?

And how much "inspiration" can you accept from an original that claims to be inspired? How long can you wait for it's "uniqueness" to finally shine through?

For example Tbate is a fan fiction of Mushoku

 

[Justhetip...]

It might be just me, but I don't equate inspiration with fanfiction. And an 'inspired story' that feels too similar to the original work is not fanfiction, it is plagarism. But I'll answer your questions anyway.

How much deviation can I allow from the original work before the fanfic turns into an original? A lot. As long as the writer writes it while keeping in mind it's a fanfic, following the rules of the setting of the original work, I'll say it's a fanfic.

True that. Though a lot of fanfiction writers do write to force their headcanon. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm condemning it.

And you asked how much 'inspiration' can I accept in an original novel? That depends on the tone. The setting and plot of the novel can be near complete same, it doesn't matter, but if the tone, prose, characterization, and minor events are the same as well, that's no longer an original. For a more specific cutoff, when the story feels so similar to the inspired work to the point where it cannot be a coincidence, to the point that reading a chapter makes you immediately match it with a similar chapter from the inspired work, that's plagarism.

There are some authors that tell the readers that the beginning is similar, but it branches off in later chapters.

The line is how much of the imitation has been modified and twisted with new author's ideas, how hard it is to notice the pattern, and how much the audience could notice the pattern.

It's not just we judging author.

You must recognize that this is a battle between "The Author" trying creating similar and uwt disguising pattern vs "The masses of Average Audience" trying to noticing old pattern from something new.

If "The Author" manages to create a whole grand disguise to hide the old pattern, only the few audience could notice the inspired pattern.

Yeah, it's something most authors do, putting new spins or personal twists in already pre-existing tropes/premises. I think the ones that come off as plagiarised are the poorly executed ones

There is no definitive line what constitutes an OG work from a copycat. Unless it was clearly stated in laws or a place's guidelines, one can always use the 'inspiration' defense to excuse plagiarism.

In the end, it all boils down to how many perceived the work as a pure photocopy of an original work.

Indeed, how the work is perceived is in th hands of the readers. They might like it enough to excuse the fact that it's mostly copied, but on the off-chance that it turns out to be unenjoyable too, that's where the problem comes in. Especially when expectatione have already been set.

For example Tbate is a fan fiction of Mushoku

While turtleme did say Mushoku was a key inspiration for TBATE, there are enough differences that make it an original.

 

[beast_regards]

The line between the original fiction and the fan-fiction is one lawyer wide.

See, infringing on someone's else intellectual property may be technically illegal, but it doesn't mean it doesn't have any original ideas in itself. In fact, if they were given permission, the fan-fiction would become adaptation, or sequel, or reboot, and no one would bat an eye at the writing.

A difference between the "your self-insert dates Legolas fan-fiction" and "Amazon's Ring of Power" is 450 million dollars' worth of licencing fees, not a skill, or "unique" ideas.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

The line is easy. What you've described "you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places." Is imitation. This is what fanfic writers claim they write, when in fact they don't.

A brief illustration to explain the difference. Let's say there is a house. You really like this house, and you decide to build your own, the same as the one you like. Even furnishing is the same, and furniture placement is the same. The only difference are the colors. That would be imitation.

What fanfics writers do, they barge into the house they like and start moving furniture, start painting walls in a different color, and so on. You get what I mean here?

Now, the closer imitation to the original, the closer it is to plagiarism, true. That's a different can of worms though.

As for inspired by, I think you understand it yourself what it means. You build a house that resembles the one you like. Resembles, not imitate, so it's not exactly the same. Can people still make the connection between the two houses? Depends.

 

[Justhetip...]

The line between the original fiction and the fan-fiction is one lawyer wide.

See, infringing on someone's else intellectual property may be technically illegal, but it doesn't mean it doesn't have any original ideas in itself. In fact, if they were given permission, the fan-fiction would become adaptation, or sequel, or reboot, and no one would bat an eye at the writing.

A difference between the "your self-insert dates Legolas fan-fiction" and "Amazon's Ring of Power" is 450 million dollars' worth of licencing fees, not a skill, or "unique" ideas.

Yup, and there he comes, bringing with him a painful dose of reality.

Jokes aside though, for an inspired work or fanfic to catch the attention of the original, that'll mean it has achieved a certain degree of success, and it's got to be good to an extent for it to be popular enough that it's on danger of being sued for copyright infringement.

Though I get that what you mean by the line is a lawyer wide, since a lot of the things that happen in court are basically wordplay, and it only takes something little for it to shift from being an inspired work to a plagiarised work.

The line is easy. What you've described "you realize it's a copy and paste, with A to Y being the same, and Z being then only semblance of originality the work could have, which could be just switching names or places." Is imitation. This is what fanfic writers claim they write, when in fact they don't.

A brief illustration to explain the difference. Let's say there is a house. You really like this house, and you decide to build your own, the same as the one you like. Even furnishing is the same, and furniture placement is the same. The only difference are the colors. That would be imitation.

What fanfics writers do, they barge into the house they like and start moving furniture, start painting walls in a different color, and so on. You get what I mean here?

Now, the closer imitation to the original, the closer it is to plagiarism, true. That's a different can of worms though.

As for inspired by, I think you understand it yourself what it means. You build a house that resembles the one you like. Resembles, not imitate, so it's not exactly the same. Can people still make the connection between the two houses? Depends.

This house metaphor is perfect. Thanks for the input.

The original reason for this thread in the first place was because I had an idea for a fanfic, but I fleshed it out so much that I felt I'd be doing myself a discredit if I didn't write it as an original work.

But since it's the SCP that's the inspiration, which is under Creative Commons Copyright, I don't think I'm in any danger of infringement when I say it's inspired.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Yup, and there he comes, bringing with him a painful dose of reality.

Jokes aside though, for an inspired work or fanfic to catch the attention of the original, that'll mean it has achieved a certain degree of success, and it's got to be good to an extent for it to be popular enough that it's on danger of being sued for copyright infringement.

Though I get that what you mean by the line is a lawyer wide, since a lot of the things that happen in court are basically wordplay, and it only takes something little for it to shift from being an inspired work to a plagiarised work.

Yep. And it works both ways. If I make a story about an MC who has the ability to constatnly revive, was it inspired by Re:Zero or not? You can argue both ways.

Ultimately, it's on the author. If the author says he or she was inspired by a work, you have to believe them. Or not, the choice is yours, but they might take inspiration in an 'unconvential' way. While you expect direct references and hommages to the original work, authors takes(not copies) structure of the story as inspiration. And story structure is something a lot harder to notice, especially considering the author took it as inspiration, and didn't blatantly copy it.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

A brief illustration to explain the difference. Let's say there is a house. You really like this house, and you decide to build your own, the same as the one you like. Even furnishing is the same, and furniture placement is the same. The only difference are the colors. That would be imitation.

That's more "based on" than "imitating" I think.
Imitating would include making adjustments to the floorplan, maybe adding a few rooms, knocking out a wall or two, but still keeping the basic lines of the place and the function, just making it your own. Or maybe I have that backwards.

What fanfics writers do, they barge into the house they like and start moving furniture, start painting walls in a different color, and so on. You get what I mean here?

THAT is Fanfiction in a nutshell IME.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

That's more "based on" than "imitating" I think.
Imitating would include making adjustments to the floorplan, maybe adding a few rooms, knocking out a wall or two, but still keeping the basic lines of the place and the function, just making it your own. Or maybe I have that backwards.

I think what you describe is "based on", or "inspired by". Anyway, I can be wrong on this particular part, it's more nuanced after all, and I oversimplified it. What isn't nuanced is that "based on," "inspired by," and "imitations" have nothing to do with fanfics. And I think I pointed this out well enough.

 

[TASTYLEADPAINT]

My main story is heavily inspired by the 40k tyranids and the zerg. It's a hive type story. But besides that the world and characters are original. Idk where mine fits in tbh.

 

[minacia]

In my opinion, the difference between the two is the crediting involved. Fanfiction, by definition, acknowledges and credits the original that it is derived from. An original work that has copied a core idea while pretending it is “original” — I agree with StoneInky here — is plagiarism without credit.

To some degree there is a lot of self determination involved. For example, there are a lot of works of fanfiction where everything is original — the characters, the setting, etc — but only the central idea is copied. Some people will call their own work “fanfiction” and others will call it “inspired by” — there is a lot of self-determination involved depending on how the author views their own work.

 

[Daitengu]

It's the difference between Cocaine Bear, and Maleficent.

One took the piss from a real news headline, while the other is constructed from an established story.

 

[Succubiome]

I think the framing of this question is interesting, though maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I think some people that feel like fanfiction is of lesser inherent value because it's derivative, but I don't agree with that.

I think a lot of fanfiction relies on the easy shorthand that everyone reading it likely knows the setting/characters/etc already, so it can go on to do what it's interested in developing without setting up everything as fully. This isn't a bad thing, as it means it doesn't have to rehash old ground, but fanfiction written like this does mean it's audience is generally limited by the size of a fanbase-- though conversely, it also means it's inherently more interesting to those inside the fanbase.

I don't think there's anything wrong with writing fanfiction, though it doesn't tend to interest me the most these days, because of that exact thing-- seldom is it that I want a one to one rehash of a story, so digging through fanfiction to find the stuff that goes off into wierder and more interesting directions usually isn't as of much interest to me, and usually someone overtly doing fanfiction is somewhat of a signal it might trend towards more exact replication. But some people are really enthused with a certain story, and want more of it and more variations of it! That's okay too.

I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a core idea or two you've seen elsewhere, mixing it with other things, and taking it in a different direction-- that's what most of fiction is, really. That's how genres are made. FPSes as they are now wouldn't exist without the "Doom clones" of the past, but to people whose only experience is with a single work like X, everything else can seem highly derivative... even in the cases where they've only read one book of a whole genre, regardless of if it was one of the originating works.

I think that our culture devalues things that can't create money tends to affect people's views of the artistic value of fanfiction.

TL;DR: The line is pretty fuzzy, and fanfiction does have some inherent advantages as a way to tell a story, although also some inherent downsides, and isn't inherently inferior, but that the line matters so much to people is in large part because of copyright law and capitalism.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I think what you describe is "based on", or "inspired by". Anyway, I can be wrong on this particular part, it's more nuanced after all, and I oversimplified it. What isn't nuanced is that "based on," "inspired by," and "imitations" have nothing to do with fanfics. And I think I pointed this out well enough.

Well, fanfics can be imitations (but aren't always), but imitations are rarely fanfics (but can be)... In a Venn diagram there would be overlap but only a small section, maybe 20-25%.

Almost everything I write is based on something else, as I took inspiration and, sometimes, even structure from another source and then painted my own (hopefully) canvas on what was left.