Quoted from Niles_Crane You may find that having to work to someone else's idea and a set period will be just what you need. I don't know if this is true or not, but there is a story that Tolstoy had writer's block. So he took someone else's novel and began to rewrite it - as he went along, it ceased to bear any resemblance to the original book. It became "Anna Karenina". You never know, writing to someone else's suggestion might be just the thing to help you make the breakthrough.

I did this with someone else's screenplay once. Not going to say whose, but once upon a time, I read a script on here that was ok, but mostly sucked. Parts worked and other parts were either far out, bad, or I just didn't like them. I gave a review on it with a handful of suggestions to improve the original story, and then looked at it again. I started playing with it by tearing it apart and throwing out all the crap I hated. Then I reorganized the whole thing into the way I thought it should go (it's my exercise, who cares what the other guy's intent was?). Then I had to fill out some parts, combine some characters here and there, revise some key areas of the plot, and even surprise myself a few times. The final product is a script where the first review would be: "I opened this and saw how long it was, so I didn't read it. You need to make it shorter." It bears a passing resemblance to the source material, but since I rewrote it from the ground up, I would have to place both scripts in front of you and point out the similarities for you to see how they compare. It sits in my personal archive as a source of amusement, but I doubt anyone would ever pick it up because of its length. Good character piece though. Solid exercise in rewriting.

Oh, and I'm still intrigued by this (regarding the original OMC challenge thread this was split from), though I'm not sure I'll participate in it specifically. I'm kind of like "me" in that I would prefer to write something I can shoot at this point. Need a good premise though.

Interesting George. Brings up a question, do you consider the script yours? If a prod-co wanted to buy it would you put both names on it or just yours?  I'm sort of in a similar position regarding a script.

I've honestly given that a whole lot of thought. On the one hand, you can't copyright an idea, I used none of the original script (which is the main, copyrightable part), there are significant plot and character differences (the other copyrightable part), and there are enough other differences between the two that I could call the revision legally mine.

It boils down to a matter of conscience, really. We're all in the same boat just wanting some measure of a break, and honestly, I've been meaning to share my total rewrite with the original author for some time. Hence, after posting that above, I emailed it to him. In all fairness, if he had not posted his script for me to read, I would never have written the one I did.

So legally, I don't think I have to credit anything, but morally, I think I do. However, from a credit standpoint, since I wrote the final script and only based on his, it would be a "Based on" credit.

Quoted from George Willson So legally, I don't think I have to credit anything, but morally, I think I do. However, from a credit standpoint, since I wrote the final script and only based on his, it would be a "Based on" credit.

Based on or "Story By". It's a really tough call, but I agree that without the original script, you'd have had nothing, so it would be right to credit them in some form.

In this case, "Based on" would be more appropriate since there are significant story differences. A lot of what I didn't like had to do with the story. What survived were a handful of the basic situations and character traits. It was a springboard more than anything else.

Actually, this topic is becoming one that should probably stand on its own instead of derailing this thread with it. A split is in order...

EDIT: And split complete.

I remember reading in another thread about how George Clooney had rewritten a script (I can't remember the name) and even though he apparently had rewritten it completely, the Writers Guild still refused to give him a "written by" credit - he had to settle with "story by", if that at all - see I can't even remember that, maybe the original poster can remember.

So be careful, George.

I see no problem with it at all. You may, like Tolstoy, have started with somebody else's work, but the end result is yours, dialogue, characters, story.

"Anna Karenina" doesn't have a "based on" credit, nor does anyone think it any less a classic because it was inspired by someone else's book (now forgotten) - assuming this story is true, of course!

And I would point out that the greatest writer in history stole his plots left, right and centre - but no one says his plays are not his, or any less classics of literature, because he rewrote other people's work.

If you make it your own, it is your own.

Well, at the moment, the discussion is academic. We're talking about a script I wrote some three years ago that languishes on my hard drive as opposed to something I'm working to actively sell. I am curious about it though, since it came up. I mean, I would have to be more established before someone would pick up a 160 page drama from me, so it's not like I'm looking for an urgent answer here. I just figured it would be an interesting discussion.

And strictly speaking, most literature is based on something else. Shakespeare didn't write Romeo and Juliet either. This is the reason that you can't copyright an idea. The copyrightable parts of a screenplay are the finished script and the characters. I think the detailed plot is copyrightable as well, but that's about as far as it goes.

Like I said, legally, I don't believe I HAVE to do anything. But hey, we're all writers and we should help each other where we can.

Hey, I'd pick up a 160 page drama from you, George...but I'd drop it too. Hard.

Quoted from sniper Hey, I'd pick up a 160 page drama from you, George...but I'd drop it too. Hard.

I know.    That's another reason I never bothered posting it. Who the heck would read it? At 160 pages, it would make a mighty thump.

I read recently that you can't copyright characters either - I know that ideas, titles and character names are not copyrightable, but apparently characters themselves cannot be copyrighted either.

I understand there is a case in America right now that is all about a sequel to "Catcher in the Rye" based on this very fact.

It is only the physical work that is protected, not elements within it.

Not being a lawyer, I am not certain about this! (I shall have to look it up)

It's for another thread, but what Shakespeare (the greatest writer in history I mentioned) did and did not write is and will always be open to question - indeed, if he wrote any of them!

But Lear was adapted from someone else's play, as, I believe, was one of the Roman plays. Lear also has it's basis in Welsh myth (hence it is sometimes referred to as the great Welsh play).

Of course, in those days, there was no copyright, so he didn't have to worry!

I think the copyrightable aspects probably have to do with what's in the details. James Bond, for instance, is a character, and yet, I doubt any of us could write and present a James Bond piece without EON being all over us. He's just a character, and yet he is very copyrighted (although he could be trademarked instead, which is a whole other can of worms). I also know that Disney is working to keep their characters under their control since Walt Disney's death date is slipping away from them.

I'm sure there are some fine lines here that none of us understand. Me = not a lawyer either.

Quoted from Niles_Crane I read recently that you can't copyright characters either - I know that ideas, titles and character names are not copyrightable, but apparently characters themselves cannot be copyrighted either.

No, but they can be trademarked, can't they? If not, then George is writing the next James Bond movie.

Quoted from sniper No, but they can be trademarked, can't they? If not, then George is writing the next James Bond movie.

That's what I'm talking about!  

Found a very in-depth article online regarding this. Can't post the entire thing, but here is a snippet that may be of interest...

Quoted Text Other courts have adopted what is referred to as the "story being told" test. Some courts use this test by itself or sometimes in conjunction with the character delineation test when analyzing whether a fictional character deserves copyright protection. The story being told test was first used when a court determined that Dashiell Hammett's character, Sam Spade, in the novel The Maltese Falcon was not entitled to copyright protection. The court stated that the character Sam Spade was merely a vehicle for telling the story, rather than an essential part of the story itself, and therefore Sam Spade as a fictional character could not be protected under the copyright law.

The full article is at http://www.publaw.com/fiction.html