Quote:
Originally Posted by crich70
While a book may be made into a movie, or a cartoon, or even a radio dramatization it can't be changed much without it becoming a totally different story. People who have read the book of say Treasure Island know how it ends and who the characters are. On the other hand radio's went from using crystals to tubes to transistors to computer chips. The idea stayed the same but the means of using the technology changed. Just because someone had a patent on a particular tube radio design that doesn't mean they automatically have one on a transistor radio. The idea of radio was patented but just because one receiver was patented didn't mean all receivers automatically were. But with a book things are more set in stone. The media by which the book is conveyed to the reader/listener changes but the book itself doesn't.
|
Books aren't anymore "set in stone". If someone comes up with the idea of a boy wizard who is the arch enemy of a dark wizard without a nose, and then I do the same plot , but set on a space station, the plot is the same but I've changed one component, similar to going from tube to transistor. The specific expression of a story is what the creator has a monopoly on, not all derivative works.
In any event, I'm really not following where we're even going with this argument, if it is an argument.