I’m working on a parody of Stephen R. Donaldson’s “Chronicles of Thomas Covenant,” and I have a couple of questions relating to parody.
What’s the difference between satire and parody? My dictionary lists parody as a type of “satirical work.” So is parody a type of satire, or are the two terms referring to different types of literature?
I know that parody can be legal in some cases; however, I need to know when it’s legal and when it’s infringement of copyright law. What kinds of rules do I need to follow to avoid violating “fair use” laws regarding Mr. Donaldson’s work? I don’t want him suing me or anything.
Just a little writer’s shorthand here, not a formal definition.
Parody is making something as close to the original as possible to make fun of it.
Satire is trying to make a point. See Johanthan Swift. Parody can be, and often is, a part of satire.
I am not an intellectual property lawyer, but if you are taking the form, but not the content, of a literary work, you’re safe, unless the content is so wrapped up in the form that they can’t really be separated.
In the US, generally you can parody something and have it be considered fair use. This isn’t a free exemption, however. It’s a legitimate defense, if the copyright holder sues you for infringement.
There’s a case currently being argued on the West Coast about the use of a parody version of the Starbuck logo. The judge ruled the work was a legitimate parody (but she also ruled that it was an infringement of Starbuck’s trademark, which means the creator isn’t in the clear).
The rough rules are that the parody must ridicule the existing work. Thus, “Bored of the Rings” is a legitimate parody of “Lord of the Rings” and is in the clear. But if you use a familiar work for the purposes of satire (a recent case was tried where someone published “The Cat NOT in the Hat” about the O.J. Simpson case, and lost to the Seuss estate because they weren’t parodying Seuss himself).
From what I can find, the law considers a parody to be a work that satirizes a particular literary work by exaggerating its flaws and weaknesses. A satire is a broader term that points out the flaws in something other than a literary work.
Basically, if you follow the plot and characters of Donaldson closely, you’re probably in fine shape. Find a copy of “Bored of the Rings” and see how this can be done.
So you’re saying that even if the parody is in compliance with fair use laws, I could get sued for writing it? And have to attend court and get a defense attorney? Youch! Maybe this is not such a good idea.
So if I, for instance ;), had Atiaran driving Thomas Covenant (both with parodied names assigned them) to the river in a pink Edsel, this would be considered a departure from the original plot, and thus not a true parody? How much artistic license can one take?
I think as long as you copy the original in order to mock it, you’re in the clear. You can depart from it as far as you want - artistic license is a good thing, legally speaking. It’s just that, if you were to copy a bunch of the Thomas Covenant characters or place-names or whatever, and then sell it as its own piece of fiction, then you could get in trouble. (Or if, as RealityChuck mentioned, you were doing a parody of something else, then you could also get in trouble.)
Another way you could get in trouble, even in a parody, would be to quote huge sections of text. The fair use laws say limited amounts of text can be copied for comment (including satire) and teaching - I think if you were to, say, copy a whole chapter out of a Thomas Covenant book and then follow it up with a chapter saying, “Dang, wasn’t that goofy! I mean, har har!” then you’d be nailed. Not for plagiarism, which would be if you claimed the work as your own, but for some other intellectual theft which I don’t know the name of.
So basically, the law recognizes the difference between a spoof and a rip-off, even if you and I sometimes don’t know the difference. If the intent is to make the reader laugh at the original, you have a ton of latitude; if the intent were to make the reader laugh with the original (say, by re-wording a bunch jokes from Steve Martin’s Cruel Shoes), then you could get in trouble.
Oh, okay. I would definitely sell it as “A Parody of Stephen R. Donaldson’s…” (if it sold), not as my own complete creation. And I wouldn’t be quoting large portions of text, so I don’t have to worry about that. I’m kind of hedging on the idea simply because attending court would be hell for me.
Thanks, though, for the information. It lays my mind at ease a bit.
You can get sued for anything anyone wants to sue you for. If your work is a parody, you have a strong defense, but that doesn’t stop people from suing. And if the judge isn’t up on the basics, you could lose and have to appeal.
The bright side is that your publisher would be the one hiring the lawyers. Just make sure your contract doesn’t stick you with the legal fees.*
I haven’t read the books, so I can’t comment on the specifics. And, if sued, it’s up to the court to decide. However, if you follow the general line of the plot, you’re probably in good shape. Slight variations won’t matter.
*All publishing contracts have language that states the author warrants the work is his own and that he will indemnify the publisher for any judgments. It’s essential that you make sure the language read “any judgments finally sustained,” which means you only have to pay if the case is appealled. This will prevent the publisher from settling out of court without your permission and then asking your to foot the bill.
Let’s just say that Atiaran’s use of a pink Edsel is completely out-of-touch with the original series. There are no cars in “the Land” (an alternate reality in which Thomas Covenant finds himself), nor is there any modern technology. There is magic and lore, but no pink Edsels. It would be like having Frodo Baggins travel to Mordor by airplane and parachuting onto Mount Doom. It would be funny, but it might alter the plot quite a bit.
That shouldn’t matter. The use of elements not in the original is often a technique of parody. Thus having Galdalf lead the party, and having Frodo saying, “the heck with this; I’m taking a cab” is perfectly legitimate.
I just got Bored of the Rings and am enthusiastically reading it. It’s funny as heck! This is the sort of thing I would like to write. Thanks for the recommendation, RC. And I really do think that the addition of a pink Edsel will liven up the parody, so I will use it.
