Choose Your Own Hamlet Becomes The Largest Publishing Project On Kickstarter, Thanks To The Public Domain
from the you-can't-do-this-with-catcher-in-the-rye dept
A Kickstarter project by Ryan North, called To Be Or Not To Be: That Is The Adventure, has become the most funded publishing project on Kickstarter ever, as it recently surpassed $400,000 (he was originally seeking $20,000). While we always love to see interesting and successful crowdfunding projects, this one is interesting for a few additional reasons concerning topics we talk about here: copyright and trademarks. The actual book is, as North explains, "an illustrated, chooseable-path book version of William Shakespeare's Hamlet." So, how does that hit on copyright and trademark issues?- Copyright: Even if the head of the Author's Guild doesn't seem to know this, Shakespeare's works are in the public domain, meaning that anyone can use them however they want -- whether it's to make an exact copy (and, yes, there are plenty of those on the market) or to do a derivative work. There have been tons of remakes and updates on Shakespeare's work, and many of them are super creative, such as this one. Kinda demonstrates just how ridiculous it is for copyright maximalists to argue that without strong copyright protection, creativity gets killed off. Just the opposite, it seems. The ability to build on the works of the past quite frequently inspires amazing new creativity.
- Trademark: North refers to this as a "choosable path adventure" because:
"Chooseable-path" you may recognize as a trademark-skirting version of a phrase and book series you remember from childhood. Remember? Books in which... an adventure is chosen??
Yes, they're not using the widely known phrase "choose your own adventure," because it's trademarked, and the owner of the mark has sued before. Of course, the story of the mark is interesting in its own right. Apparently, Bantam Books who helped popularize the original choose your own adventure books let the trademark lapse, and it was bought up by Ray Montgomery, who had run the small press that published the original books, but had not held the original trademark on it.
Either way, the book looks absolutely awesome, and if you want in on the Kickstarter offering, there are just a few hours left.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: choose your own adventure, copyright, creativity, crowdfunding, hamlet, public domain, shakespeare, trademark
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
The author has to spend almost nothing on promoting the work, I think that's key: he's leveraging those 400 years of name recognition. Better tests of Kickstarter are in the unknown works of unknown authors. -- I keep tellin' ya, Mike, it's EASY once you've got a widely known name (here it's Shakespeare).
I just can't find much NEW and internetty here. Certainly not the work itself.
Heh, heh: this seems to be one of your characteristic internal contradictions: "if you want in on the Kickstarter offering," -- No, Mike, IF I ever want it, there's The Pirate Bay where all is free (unless it's physical).
Support Mike "Streisand Effect" Masnick's proprietary interest!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
He innovated the term all by himself! He alone! It's HIS!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
Also, talk about missing the point entirely of Kickstarter. The work DOES NOT EXIST yet. Therefore it is impossible to infringe on its copyright, whether through Piratebay or not. Even once the work is released, this project has FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND dollars in the bank already. If I were the author, I wouldn't care at all about people downloading the work for free: the author has already made close to a cool half a million.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thanks Mike
I decided to go ahead and pledge $25 for two different physical books, plus the E-Books and extras. Never doubt the power of physical goods in addition to the digital ones.
Just because something is not totally original does not make it worthless. As the kickstarter video explains this is one of a handfull of choose your own adventure books designed for adults. Sure it's Shakespeare, but consider that there are over a hundred different bad endings. Each of those had to be written and illustrated.
As Mike said, this is all about being able to create something both new and awesome without worrying about a company suing for a zillion dollars.
If you want to see exactly how unoriginal most things are just look at TV Tropes. Most stories re use the same ideas and patterns over and over again. Just because the form is the same doesn't make them bad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
But I'm well aware that this team is adding plenty to the Shakespeare and what are they doing with their work? They're COPYRIGHTING it and putting it behind a PAYWALL. If you don't cough up the cash, you won't be seeing it.
And let's see how the author is repaying the public domain for supplying Hamlet. If -- and only if-- the Kickstarter yields more than $425,000, the book will be released under one of the more restrictive Creative Commons licenses.
Here's how the author describes it: "As long as it's not for commercial purposes and keep the attribution, we are set. To look at this another way, what I'm doing is making all your future fan fiction 100% supercanon."
Another way of looking at it is that you can remix it, but you can't make money like this guy did. That's not very fair, is it?
Now I'm all for artists keeping their rights and releasing some things so this is okay with me. But I want to point out that you normally describe this as strip mining the public domain. Someone is taking material from the public domain and copyrighting for themselves. The CC license isn't exactly giving back. So be consistent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hey, bob...
How?
I just looked at the Kickstarter page...
NOWHERE is copyright or CC or anything like that mentioned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Idea...
My choice? Psshhhh, fucking dark, yo...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
Plus I love the fact you're criticising Ryan here for "strip mining the public domain". That is EXACTLY what Disney has been doing for decades: taking words from the public domain, making their own versions, then safeguarding their copyrighted versions with ever harsher laws. How come you're not after them?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
Anyway, whats wrong with agreeing with some of what the guy is doing even if you don't agree with every single aspect of the project.. can't you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
should be "taking works". My bad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
Copyright isn't necessary. If no one wants your creative output, then either:
a) get better or do something else creative that people WILL pay (attention or money) to you for.
or
b) you suck, get a job (the world needs ditch-diggers too) and stop trying to make EVERYONE ELSE pay for your lack of talent.
The world doesn't OWE you a living just because YOU chose to try doing something creative. You ELECTED to go into this line of work, we didn't ask or demand you to.
If you aren't able to give people a reason to want your stuff, TOO BAD, it's not the responsibility of the government or the public to support you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
Being totally sincere here: I missed this a lot. Thank you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hey, bob...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Idea...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
Yes, I've read Shakespeare, and I greatly enjoyed Macbeth when I read it at school, and watching it on stage was one of my better memories of school trips. I also found the ending of Romeo and Juliet to be greatly affecting on different levels. I've had lesser reactions to other works such as Hamlet and Henry V, but I'd consider Shakespeare to be good even when he's not great.
Beyond that, I *love* many of the adapted works based on his work - you know, the stuff morons like you want to keep charging millions to create even decades after an author's death? From Forbidden Planet (based on The Tempest) to Baz Lurhmann's version of Romeo & Juliet to the Hamlet episodes of Blackadder and The Simpsons, Shakespeare's influence is ever-present and important.
But yeah, you were too stupid to understand it in school I guess, so it doesn't count? What a surprise.
"I just can't find much NEW and internetty here. Certainly not the work itself."
Certainly not the idiocy you obsess over writing every single day.
"No, Mike, IF I ever want it, there's The Pirate Bay where all is free (unless it's physical)."
So you admit that not only will you not participate in the creation of new works, but you'll pirate them after the work is complete? The truth comes out!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
That's not at all what this is, it's about experience Will's "crap" as you not so eloquently put it in a new way. Chooseable path style. Since you obviously didn't RTFA.
"The author has to spend almost nothing on promoting the work, I think that's key: he's leveraging those 400 years of name recognition."
Actually, the author still has to promote the work, because as you pointed out there's 400 years of name recognition associated with said work, not too mention the fact that it is most definitely in the public domain. Meaning this author now has to put more effort into promoting said work in order to compete with all the other people promoting their copies of said work.
Not too mention the fact that people usually have a pre-determined and set amount of funds to spend on entertainment, much less Kickstarter projects. So this author has to promote their work in direct competition to other Kickstarter projects currently going on. Not an easy task and one where there is definitely a lot of fierce competition.
"Better tests of Kickstarter are in the unknown works of unknown authors. -- I keep tellin' ya, Mike, it's EASY once you've got a widely known name (here it's Shakespeare)."
And this person is an unknown author, so that "criteria" of yours is being met. That they are using a story and characters created by a known author is an addition, not detraction, to the project.
Your point is basically moot. What you want, or seem to want from Mike, is a guarantee to fame/profits. A specific business model/formula that literally anyone can use to make it big/hit the riches. There is none. There never will one. So stop asking for one/demanding one. You'll never get it. Ditto your "tell me how I can get a guarantee on my $100M movie" blah blah blah.
"I just can't find much NEW and internetty here. Certainly not the work itself."
Well, like bob, just because you fail to understand the significant of something DOES NOT mean it isn't there. Or to borrow a phrase from comedian Christopher Titus, "Just because you don't get it, doesn't mean it's not funny."
The "NEW and internetty" part regarding this project is that A. it's being done using Kickstarter and B. a work that is in the public domain (MEANING IT IS AVAILABLE FOR FREE ALREADY) generated enough interest to raise nearly half a million dollars already (and there's still time left). That latter point is important because people like YOU say that no one can make money without copyright, in addition to saying that if people can get something for free (like say a public domain work) they'll NEVER pay for it. This proves both those presumptions/falsehoods... well, false.
"Heh, heh: this seems to be one of your characteristic internal contradictions: "if you want in on the Kickstarter offering," -- No, Mike, IF I ever want it, there's The Pirate Bay where all is free (unless it's physical)."
Well, OotB, that bit wasn't for douchebags/copyright maximalists like you. That was for people interested in supporting projects on Kickstarter, like me.
Also, nice followup sentence you wrote there. So, despite your day in and day out tirade against pirates and rants and bitching against this site promoting piracy and supporting "grifters", you just said that you'll use something you deem illegal to avoid paying for products that you can't obtain physicially (non-scarce goods, like digital movies/songs/books/etc). Hmm. Nice to see your hypocrisy finally reveal itself. So I suppose you'll NEVER again piss and moan about pirates or grifters, right? Seeing as how you just all but admitted to being one yourself and supporting the latter through the use of said site (TPB). Well, perfect, so we should expect to NEVER see you comment here again, hypocrite. YAY!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
The same can be said of you, boy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
You read it here, kids!
Out of the Blue freely admits he's a self-loathing PIRATE!
(Since everybody else loathes him, it seems he's jumping on the bandwagon a bit late, as usual!)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Shakespeare is over-rated. -- Who here has actually read it?
Not a surprise. More often than not, when someone is is rabidly and single-mindedly fixated against a certain activity, they are engaging in that activity themselves and projecting their self-loathing onto everyone around them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
So, you object to Disney taking various PD stories and trademarking and copyrighting them for themselves?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
"Being totally sincere here: I missed this a lot. Thank you."
They're copyrighting their version of it.
The original is still PD, and can still be used by anybody for anything...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Uh, copyright DID help creativity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Which is it?
"C'mon, Will's crap has been around 400 years now, you've had endless opportunity, but just never got around to it? Hmm.
The author has to spend almost nothing on promoting the work, I think that's key: he's leveraging those 400 years of name recognition."
So, which is it? No one has read it or 400 years of recognition?
Make up my mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]