# Do you think it's bad to discuss our ideas on here without registering for copyright?



## ironpony (Dec 19, 2018)

I've done it quite a few times, but I didn't really worry before, cause I thought ideas where a dime a dozen, and it's okay as long as I don't map out the entire plot and execution.  But my friends tell me I should do it, and that the very idea of a story possibly being taken is bad and you don't want that.

But what do you think?


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 19, 2018)

ironpony said:


> I've done it quite a few times, but I didn't really worry before, cause I thought ideas where a dime a dozen, and it's okay as long as I don't map out the entire plot and execution.  But my friends tell me I should do it, and that the very idea of a story possibly being taken is bad and you don't want that.
> 
> But what do you think?



To the extent they exist on an internet forum, ideas are basically worthless.

It's like the parent who constantly worries their child is at risk from predators by using the internet. There's a risk, sure, but 99.9% of people aren't going to find your kids that alluring.


----------



## epimetheus (Dec 20, 2018)

Yeah, ideas are cheap. Unless it's a genuinely novel idea. Execution is what matters.


----------



## Bayview (Dec 20, 2018)

You can't register copyright on ideas anyway, so...?


----------



## Terry D (Dec 20, 2018)

What Bayview said.


----------



## ppsage (Dec 20, 2018)

You can't be too careful.


----------



## NathanielleC (Dec 20, 2018)

Bayview said:


> You can't register copyright on ideas anyway, so...?



That's what _they _want you to think.


----------



## Kyle R (Dec 20, 2018)

Don't worry; most writers are too enthralled by their own ideas to give a crap about anyone else's.


----------



## Darkkin (Dec 20, 2018)

Ideas are a dime a dozen, worth absolutely jack shit without follow through.  Some author snabbles up a great idea and writes a bestseller from it, kudos to that author for their dedication to the idea.  Guy still obsessing on the theory of the idea, never bothered to follow through their unfulfilled potential is entirely their own doing.  Try copyrighting, crime novel, spy thriller, paranormal romance, or historical fiction...See how it goes.


----------



## Sir-KP (Dec 20, 2018)

You want to share, but you're afraid of idea theft. I feel you.

But then again, I guess it's like what everyone said: nobody cares about your idea, especially when they are just snips of it. 

Worst case scenario, someone takes inspiration from it and applies it in their story.

In addition to that, I remember what my lecturer said regarding to this matter. 

"Noobs are afraid of thief. Pros see it as a sign that their work is good and they know they can produce more."

I somewhat disagree, but it makes sense at the same time.


----------



## luckyscars (Dec 21, 2018)

It's not just an issue of not being able to copyright an idea, it's that an idea isn't something ownership even exists for.

 It's like when five year old children argue "I saw it first". Seeing something first does not grant entitlement and neither does merely thinking of it. 

Otherwise you have a situation where every probably child over the last one hundred years can claim Elon Musk or whoever "stole the idea" of flying cars. See how stupid that sounds?


----------



## Dluuni (Dec 21, 2018)

Also, as I have pointed out - raw ideas are almost completely without value. It's finished, drafted, edited, proofed, structured, formatted work that has value.


----------



## ironpony (Dec 31, 2018)

Okay thanks.  What about titles though?

People ask me the titles of my work before I am finished or before they have been released.  So if someone takes one of my titles and then uses it first, can I still use the same title, without it hurting the work?


----------



## Darkkin (Dec 31, 2018)

Titles, like ideas are another thing that cannot be copyrighted...


----------



## Megan Pearson (Dec 31, 2018)

ironpony said:


> Okay thanks. What about titles though?
> 
> People ask me the titles of my work before I am finished or before they have been released. So if someone takes one of my titles and then uses it first, can I still use the same title, without it hurting the work?




If you're looking at publishing, whatever you title your work really won't make a difference. The publisher will choose a title for you. If you must keep your title and the publisher goes along with it--great! But more likely they will choose something with more eye-appeal to your audience than what you cose for your work, even if your title is a better fit.


----------



## Megan Pearson (Dec 31, 2018)

ironpony said:


> I've done it quite a few times, but I didn't really worry before, cause I thought ideas where a dime a dozen, and it's okay as long as I don't map out the entire plot and execution. But my friends tell me I should do it, and that the very idea of a story possibly being taken is bad and you don't want that.
> 
> But what do you think?



Did you ever see _Throw Mama From the Train_? The English professor (the character's name escapes me) gets roped into this absurd adventure with Owen, one of his students, to kill Owen's mother. By the end of the movie, we find out that both he and Owen have written about the same idea - their time with Owen's mother. The professor thinks Owen has stolen idea. However, whereas he has written a horror novel, Owen has recounted their adventures in a sweet children's book. 

So, it just goes to show that even if two people have the same ideas, they most likely will not produce the same story because of it.


----------



## ironpony (Jan 1, 2019)

Yeah that's true, makes sense.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 1, 2019)

Dead right, the ideas don't make the story. You can take the idea and put it a hundred years into the past, a hundred years into the future, on to another continent, onto another planet even. You can make the protagonists different sexes, the permutations from an idea are endless, and they will all be different stories.

Then, if I want to steal an idea, or adapt it, or whatever the process of making it mine is, why choose a story from some relatively unknown contemporary with a penchant for copyright discussion? I would read things by O'Henry, Saki, Dickens, H G Wells, and people like that. People who changed and developed the concept of the story, and wrote good and popular short stories. Popular at the time of writing that is; I wouldn't pick the 'known' ones, like 'War of the worlds', they wrote plenty of stuff that is not much read today, but still full of brilliant story ideas, and out of copyright. Why bother with your ideas when I can get good ones with Known provenance, no hassle and actually a lot of fun too.


----------



## elissasmart (Jan 18, 2019)

A bad writer will never transform even the best idea into the best writing. A good writer will never steal the whole idea. You shouldn't worry so much.


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 18, 2019)

elissasmart said:


> A bad writer will never transform even the best idea into the best writing. A good writer will never steal the whole idea.



Sorry, but this statement is patently false.  Not all writers start out as decent writers, there is a huge gap between draft and saleable product, e.g. a novice poet and say a career script writer.  Given the genres and abilities of the two are things like education, personal drive, and inherent ability taken into account.  Novice is just starting out, what level of education has individual A gotten?  What are the credentials of individual B? 

Be aware of blanket statements, as they can be and often are inaccurate.

 Bad writer is an inaccurate term.  The writing itself is in need of attention, a skill that can be honed with practice and time.  A writer can take their poor drafts and refashion it into a workable concept.  As a writer, I'm guilty of bad drafts, but does make all my work bad?  Some writers might accel at nonfiction, others couldn't write a simple essay, but are excellent with short fiction.  There is no best idea, there is no best writing as no quantifiable parameters can be established to measure creativity, which is unique to the individual. (Ever wonder why the is no _Great American Novel_, and why there are so many types of elective classes on a sundry of literary topics?)  There is work that compells the readers to read, to think, to dream or inspire...and these stories are all variations on established archetypes.  Campell's work _Hero with a Thousand Faces _does well with illustrating this.  It is also part of the reason ideas like titles cannot be copyrighted.

As to the second part, what is the whole idea?  Creative projects are a sum of their author's collective parts.  e.g. Observations, insights, opinions, interests, abilities, and personal experiences.  Ideas have no worth until developed; it is the creativity and work of the individual that gives a project its identity and value.  A decent writer can take a concept and make it their own, through voice, characters, style, etc...Good writers, bad writers...how to decided which is which...and who will decide?


----------



## ironpony (Jan 18, 2019)

Okay thanks.  And when you say creativity and work of the individual, you pretty much mean the written execution of the idea?


----------



## luckyscars (Jan 18, 2019)

Darkkin said:


> Sorry, but this statement is patently false.  Not all writers start out as decent writers, there is a huge gap between draft and saleable product, e.g. a novice poet and say a career script writer.  Given the genres and abilities of the two are things like education, personal drive, and inherent ability taken into account.  Novice is just starting out, what level of education has individual A gotten?  What are the credentials of individual B?
> 
> Be aware of blanket statements, as they can be and often are inaccurate.
> 
> ...



I think what *elissasmart* is saying is simply that a bad writer (defined as somebody who lacks the skills to execute) cannot write a good novel on the strength of an idea. 

Plenty of times I read stuff on this very forum and think "there's the genesis of a good idea in there but the writing is so bad I am turned off"). Plenty of times that is the message of the ensuing critique - "I like the idea but..." It goes along with the notion that ideas really are fairly easy to come up with and nine tenths of everything is in approach and competency.

Similarly a good writer (defined as somebody who has an ability to communicate clearly and in an interesting way) will likely be predisposed to writing an idea that is well trodden - for example, a haunted house story - seem original. Again, we see that (though not nearly as frequently). A quick-and-easy example is in the excellent writing (IMO) _Haunting Of Hill House _screenplay, an idea that builds loosely on the themes of the original novel as well as one zillion other tropes and creates something that while not strictly original is certainly captivating. We see it all the time in stories inspired by Lovecraftian lore or whatever. A 'good writer' can write even a pastiche of another writer's style and themes and still make it feel somewhat new.


*As a writer, I'm guilty of bad drafts, but does make all my work bad?

*^No, it makes it a bad draft. However you might redraft it a hundred times and it can still be bad - at which point...yeah your work is probably pretty bad. A monkey with a typewriter is never going to churn out Shakespeare on any timeline that makes sense no matter how many times it 'redrafts', hence the monkey is a bad writer and suggesting he can improve with practice and time to achieve that level is both irrational and potentially cruel.

Some human beings lack that capacity. They just do. I know 'writers' who have been at it for twenty, thirty years and still produce poorly received work. They are trying their damnedest but to anybody it is obvious it is just not something that fits them...yet they are constantly told if they just work hard, do this and that, read a lot - all things they then appear to do, then they can become good writers. I don't agree that's right. If they are enjoying themselves and their mental health does not suffer then who cares, but if they are constantly made to feel like they have a pathway to becoming a professional writer if only they do x and y...I think that's wrong, sorry. 

It feels like you are drawing a rather pedantic distinction between "good writer" and "good work" and then proceeding to nitpick on phrasing like "best idea', 'whole idea' for being imprecise or simplistic. I don't see an important difference between a good writer and good writing. A writer is what they produce. I am comfortable with identifying an artist by the strengths or failures of their work, understanding while it is subjective if a super-majority of people say it doesn't work then it has failed its 'parameters'. I am comfortable with being identified that way myself.

 Some people may not be comfortable with it, but it doesn't make it 'inaccurate' to say Stephanie Meyer is a bad writer because most of her work is considered poor by most people. Sure she might improve, I guess. Pigs might someday fly. It does not invalidate the views of the minority who think she is talented to say she isn't, but it is nonetheless a defensible judgement based on empirical evidence. Some people lack the personality traits others have which makes some writing better than others and improvement if not impossible than extremely unlikely.

While I agree there is no such thing as a singular concept of best idea (and I don't think that was what was meant) there are certainly ideas that are better or worse than others. 'Best' in common parlance can certainly be used as a relative, non-absolutist term - 'you're the best friend ever'.


----------



## Darkkin (Jan 18, 2019)

Literal translator, the words included in all encompassing statements are taken at their face value, not what X explains what M meant...    Sorry, but I don't speak implied meaning, never have...physical defect of an autistic brain.  Is it pedantic, to most no doubt, but as a reader, it is (unfortunately) how my brain works.  Authors needs to establish their boundaries with a little bit of context.  Can poor writing quash interest, definitely, but I have seen pieces scorched by critique come about, authors who took the time to heed input and make changes to a butchered draft.  The results have been surprising.

Admittedly, there are people who have no skill with words (Sean Penn's recent novel is one example, but that is only one book, James Fry is another), who struggle for various reasons, just as there are writers who have evolved, improving almost beyond recognition over the course of their careers, e.g. (Don't hate me, but Nora Roberts and Rowling spring to mind)...while some actually devolve.  Mary Higgins Clark has not aged well with her writing style, her older novels are much better than her more recent work.  Just my opinion of course, but it is the context colouring the term bad writer.  If a writer, even after consistent critique and revision is still plodding with their concepts amd technical merit, then yes, the term can be applied, but without the context the term is grossly inaccurate.  Writer need to be conscious of their word choice, even in something as mundane as an internet post.

Some of our favourite authors are comfort food writers (well established recipes that we go back and reread because we know the story, the idea, the pattern), any idea that sparks the imagination of a decent writer has a chance of developing into an author's own variation on an established theme.  What can impact a writer's idea is over discussion of said idea...Hash every minute detail to dust and what effort is going to be left for writing the actual piece?

One of the best (yes, actual best, most apt) analogies I've heard applied to a new idea:  Look at a new project like freshly wound spring, the more one discusses the idea the more tension uncoils from the spring, as the tension depletes so too does enthuasim for the new project.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 18, 2019)

> Some of our favourite authors are comfort food writers (well established recipes that we go back and reread because we know the story, the idea, the pattern)



Once these things were original, often in 'classic' works. Read them now and sometimes they seem hackneyed, they have been copied so much. It is a bit like clichés, they only become clichés because they work so well.


----------



## ironpony (Mar 20, 2019)

Okay thanks.  So it seems that ideas are not copyrighted, but only executions are, is that right then?  What about when asking people for what title is the best?  Are titles copyrighted, if someone were to take your title?


----------



## moderan (Mar 20, 2019)

Titles are not subject to copyright. This is all amateur preoccupation. But it's to be expected, considering the source. This is all available on Google, by the way. I think it's bad to have such abysmal google-fu that one has to ask strangers to do it for oneself.


----------



## MichelD (Mar 20, 2019)

"I know 'writers' who have been at it for twenty, thirty years and still  produce poorly received work. They are trying their damnedest but to  anybody it is obvious it is just not something that fits them...yet they  are constantly told if they just work hard, do this and that, read a  lot - all things they then appear to do, then they can become good  writers. I don't agree that's right. If they are enjoying themselves and  their mental health does not suffer then who cares, but if they are  constantly made to feel like they have a pathway to becoming a  professional writer if only they do x and y...I think that's wrong,  sorry."


Hmmm. Talking about me?  I'm 65 and have never had a piece of fiction published. Well, maybe once when I was working for a trade newspaper. We published a short story of mine in the Christmas edition which was actually a slightly altered true story a buddy told about another friend.

Work hard? Yes.

Read a lot?  I have been an avid reader since 1960. My teachers from Grades one and Two on were astounded at my reading ability and desire to read.

I was a successful journalist for 28 years. I  had hundreds of articles published between 1990 and 2018. Maybe well  over a thousand. I never counted. But I also write fiction.  I wrote three novels before 1990 then got distracted and the fiction mojo sucked out of me for 28 years. Now I'm back at it, with one manuscript completed that I'm trying to pitch and another WIP reaching 75,000 words.


But I have only shown tiny fragments to friends and haven't really got any encouragement and in fact one friend who is a retired schoolteacher never dared to tell me a word about what she saw and  I sent her 80 pages.  I have never sought a beta reader here or anywhere else.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Mar 20, 2019)

We have at one point or another been at that stage micheld. That is we feel as if no one wants to read our work. Maybe it's your writing habits and the inner critic that censors what you write. You definitely need feedback to know if you are improving and so I would show it to as many people possible. Don't think you have tried eveything. There must be something that you have not tried or need to do different than in the past. Maybe if it isn't feedback,lack of feedback or not getting the right feedback, it could be that you need to try different things other writers try and that they do on a constant basis. ( 2 cents worth of advice). Definitely read other people's work to get feedback here.


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 20, 2019)

Also, there are only about 12 basic plots, as far as it goes, and I've read that in truth, there are far less than that. Trust me, there is nothing new. There is only re-telling in your own voice. Once you put an idea into form though, copyright is automatic and falls under intellectual rights, as far as I know. I'm not a lawyer. (I'm not a doctor, but I play one when you're passed out.)


----------



## ironpony (Mar 25, 2019)

Oh okay.  As far as titles go, I thought about asking opinions on what title would be best out of a few I have come up with, but if titles are subject to copyright, should I register all my titles for copyright, before getting opinions, just the title I go with in the end, is not used on another story which can lead to confusion?


----------



## Ultraroel (Mar 25, 2019)

I would suggest not to worry about such things till the moment your story is done. Knowing you, that'll never happen.. so don't worry..


----------



## Bayview (Mar 26, 2019)

ironpony said:


> Oh okay.  As far as titles go, I thought about asking opinions on what title would be best out of a few I have come up with, but if titles are subject to copyright, should I register all my titles for copyright, before getting opinions, just the title I go with in the end, is not used on another story which can lead to confusion?



Dude.

You've been told MULTIPLE times that titles can't be copyrighted.

I don't get it. Why are you asking the questions when you clearly don't listen to the answers?


----------



## moderan (Mar 26, 2019)

I don't know why anyone even gives this one clicks. I can see newbies stopping by and taking this rot seriously for a minute or so, but there's clearly a mental issue of some kind, as with kunox, and I don't think either one can help themselves. Pitiful really...but it isn't our job to provide therapy.


----------



## Sir-KP (Mar 27, 2019)

Okay maybe offer different answer. lol.

You can copyright your brand. So if you created a unique logo that creates identity and separates your product from others, you can have it copyrighted. Or if you created a very unique title, you also can.


----------



## moderan (Mar 27, 2019)

Um, no. You can trademark a symbol. You cannot copyright a title. Not under the publishing laws of any country that I'm familiar with. There's no provision for copyrighting your brand. You can trademark a brand name, like Kleenex.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 28, 2019)

Sir-KP said:


> . Or if you created a very unique title, you also can.



I don't believe it, I am with Bayview and Moderan, you can not copyright a title, even something like 'The hundred year old man who stepped out of the window and disappeared.' despite being almost a story.


----------



## Terry D (Mar 28, 2019)

Trademark and copyright are two very different ideas. As has been said, you can trademark a logo, or a brand-name, or even a unique phrase (like_ Final Four_, or _Superbowl_ which have been trademarked by the NCAA and NFL respectively). Copyright protects the presentation of an idea, not the idea itself.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 29, 2019)

There are plenty of examples, but these two books published in the same year with the same title, Life After Life, by Jill McCorkle and Life After Life, by Kate Atkinson. I don't suppose it is something the publishers aim for, but titles are not copyrightable.


----------



## Chris Stevenson (Mar 30, 2019)

I'm with Olly and the others. Can't copyright a title. My Blackmailed Bride swarms on the Internet. I'm lost, but that's my fault.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 30, 2019)

Chris Stevenson said:


> I'm with Olly and the others. Can't copyright a title. My Blackmailed Bride swarms on the Internet. I'm lost, but that's my fault.



Gosh yes, there is everyone from Russian gangsters to Arab princes doing the blackmailing and/or marrying.  May I suggest that tempting as the alliteration is you might do well to retitle?


----------



## Chris Stevenson (Mar 30, 2019)

Thanks, Olly. It's too late. My publisher actually changed the title to that. My original title was Bribes for Brides, which I thought had a neat ring to it. I lost out. Oh well....


----------



## Megan Pearson (Mar 30, 2019)

moderan said:


> You can trademark a symbol.



I want to copywrite my left toe. 

It's a symbol.



 Somehow.



:cookie:


----------



## Megan Pearson (Mar 30, 2019)

Terry D said:


> Trademark and copyright are two very different ideas. As has been said, you can trademark a logo, or a brand-name, or even a unique phrase (like_ Final Four_, or _Superbowl_ which have been trademarked by the NCAA and NFL respectively). Copyright protects the presentation of an idea, not the idea itself.



And that's probably why no one will using _Gilligan's Island_ as a title anytime soon...


----------



## Olly Buckle (Mar 30, 2019)

Megan Pearson said:


> I want to copywrite my left toe.
> 
> It's a symbol.
> 
> ...



Here we go again, not copyright, trademark. Bring it round, I'll stamp the trademark symbol on the toenail


----------

