I think there are a couple of distinctions that are important.
First is the aforementioned published vs. non-published. The first part of this is "self"-publishing--you can write all the fanfic or blatant rip-offs you want, and as long as you don't stick it up on the internet, or bind it into a book and try to sell it/give it away, etc, you're totally in the clear, legal-wise. And frankly, as long as you don't try to make any money from it, you're probably okay. The second part of this is publishing-house publishing--one of the biggest differences between Rosencrantz & Guildenstern or Wicked and Draco Sinister is the fact that a publishing company, with, y'know, lawyers and stuff, looked at the books and said "Yes, this is legal and publishable, or if it isn't we'll get the appropriate rights taken care of, and Tom, here's your cash." Unconsciously, it's part of why you or i looks at R&G as acceptable and anything published on the internet as sketchy--it doesn't take much to publish on the 'net. Besides, we've had it drilled into our heads now that published = legit, internet = wrong (unless it's on Wikipedia, right? ;).
Another difference i see between R&G--or, to take something you and i were discussing earlier, Eaters of the Dead--and fanfic is the fact that pretty much all of the books i've seen cited at this point (with the exception of Scarlett) were retellings of a story, not additional stories placed in the context (or world) of another story. Ultimately, Stoppard had a rather convoluted way of doing it, but he wasn't changing the story of Hamlet all that much--sure, you find out more of what R&G get up to, but it's not like Ophelia was suddenly carrying on with Fortinbras or anything. The same is true of Eaters of the Dead--it's a twist on the Beowulf story, with a bit of historical fiction tossed in for flavor.
I'd love to see someone take Harry Potter and the Something or Other and retell it--from what i've seen, fanfic (especially HP) seems to be more about what the authors wish was happening in the HP books rather than trying to look at an already told story from a different point of view. I'm fairly sure there's no hawt Snape/Sirius action just waiting for one of the kids to stumble on it in any of Rowling's books. It *would* be interesting, however, to see things from Ginny's point of view instead of Harry's, or to retell the whole series but with Vikings (and an Arab) instead of British kids. (;
Finally, i think it boils down to the fact that we have a bunch of people trying to come up with original ideas...by ripping off someone else's world and characters and ideas. Which, yeah, is plagiarism. And yeah, a lot of people (myself included, although i've never written it down, much less published) do it. And i think there's a distinction between using something else to tell new stories, or telling old stories in a new way (R&G, Wicked, EotD) instead of taking something you like and making changes that suit your preferences. I don't think anyone would accuse Stoppard of trying to *change* Hamlet or force interactions that Shakespeare never would have allowed (Hamlet/Laertes slash, for instance). Fanfic, on the other hand, seems to breed people who want nothing more than to change what another author wrote. Which is really a shame, because a lot of energy goes into fanfic instead of the next Great American Novel.
Anyway, it's still a pretty grey distinction--there are some people out there who write fanfic that is every bit as good as R&G or EotD. But there's also good reasons, to return to my first point, why very little of that novel-length fanfic out there has been optioned by Publishing House X to make millions of Beeg Amer'can Dollarz.
(As an aside, one of my biggest problems with the Highlander TV series is that too much of it ends up being fanfic instead of tv episodes. But that's neither here nor there.)
no subject
First is the aforementioned published vs. non-published. The first part of this is "self"-publishing--you can write all the fanfic or blatant rip-offs you want, and as long as you don't stick it up on the internet, or bind it into a book and try to sell it/give it away, etc, you're totally in the clear, legal-wise. And frankly, as long as you don't try to make any money from it, you're probably okay. The second part of this is publishing-house publishing--one of the biggest differences between Rosencrantz & Guildenstern or Wicked and Draco Sinister is the fact that a publishing company, with, y'know, lawyers and stuff, looked at the books and said "Yes, this is legal and publishable, or if it isn't we'll get the appropriate rights taken care of, and Tom, here's your cash." Unconsciously, it's part of why you or i looks at R&G as acceptable and anything published on the internet as sketchy--it doesn't take much to publish on the 'net. Besides, we've had it drilled into our heads now that published = legit, internet = wrong (unless it's on Wikipedia, right? ;).
Another difference i see between R&G--or, to take something you and i were discussing earlier, Eaters of the Dead--and fanfic is the fact that pretty much all of the books i've seen cited at this point (with the exception of Scarlett) were retellings of a story, not additional stories placed in the context (or world) of another story. Ultimately, Stoppard had a rather convoluted way of doing it, but he wasn't changing the story of Hamlet all that much--sure, you find out more of what R&G get up to, but it's not like Ophelia was suddenly carrying on with Fortinbras or anything. The same is true of Eaters of the Dead--it's a twist on the Beowulf story, with a bit of historical fiction tossed in for flavor.
I'd love to see someone take Harry Potter and the Something or Other and retell it--from what i've seen, fanfic (especially HP) seems to be more about what the authors wish was happening in the HP books rather than trying to look at an already told story from a different point of view. I'm fairly sure there's no hawt Snape/Sirius action just waiting for one of the kids to stumble on it in any of Rowling's books. It *would* be interesting, however, to see things from Ginny's point of view instead of Harry's, or to retell the whole series but with Vikings (and an Arab) instead of British kids. (;
Finally, i think it boils down to the fact that we have a bunch of people trying to come up with original ideas...by ripping off someone else's world and characters and ideas. Which, yeah, is plagiarism. And yeah, a lot of people (myself included, although i've never written it down, much less published) do it. And i think there's a distinction between using something else to tell new stories, or telling old stories in a new way (R&G, Wicked, EotD) instead of taking something you like and making changes that suit your preferences. I don't think anyone would accuse Stoppard of trying to *change* Hamlet or force interactions that Shakespeare never would have allowed (Hamlet/Laertes slash, for instance). Fanfic, on the other hand, seems to breed people who want nothing more than to change what another author wrote. Which is really a shame, because a lot of energy goes into fanfic instead of the next Great American Novel.
Anyway, it's still a pretty grey distinction--there are some people out there who write fanfic that is every bit as good as R&G or EotD. But there's also good reasons, to return to my first point, why very little of that novel-length fanfic out there has been optioned by Publishing House X to make millions of Beeg Amer'can Dollarz.
(As an aside, one of my biggest problems with the Highlander TV series is that too much of it ends up being fanfic instead of tv episodes. But that's neither here nor there.)