leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (06/12/85)
A few people have mentioned the legal bruhaha about the film THE TERMINATOR and the payment that Ellison received on copyright infringment grounds for similarities to the two Outer Limits episodes that Ellison wrote. I haven't seen much in the way of opinion about the situation. I want to express an opinion. I think it stinks. Science fiction is a literature that prides itself on freedom of ideas. For a long time science fiction in the magazines was really a dialog of ideas. One author would disagree with another by writing a story along similar lines, but would vary the idea showing how he thought things would work out differently. Writers built on the ideas of previous authors. They came to assume, in fact, that the reader was familiar with earlier works on the same subject. Wells had to explain the concept of time travel in TIME MACHINE, Ellison didn't in Soldier From the Future. Stories borrowed ideas from other stories all the time and nobody paid much attention because that is the way the science fiction game is played. And one reason it could be played that way is that large sums of money were not involved. Then TV and cinema got into the science fiction act and still there did not seem to be much of a problem since science fiction was still not a big moneymaker. Then Ellison and Bova wrote a story called "Brillo" about how a human is better than a robot to act as a policeman. In some ways it reused ideas from Asimov and others, but nobody cared because it was a different approach to some of Asimov's ideas. A TV network considered adapting "Brillo" into a series or a TV movie or something but the project never got off the ground. That same netword did do a series on the concept that a robot policeman would have to overcome initial prejudice, but would be a good thing. It is highly profitable to win a suit against a network and Ellison and Bova sued. They apparently demonstrated that "Brillo" inspired the concept of FUTURE COP and laid claim to ownership of the idea of a robot policeman. They must have had a darn good lawyer but they won that one. Science fiction fans everywhere applauded that a couple science fiction writers had won a suit against a big, bad corporation. After Fox made ALIEN, Van Vogt threatened to sue over similarities to his "Discord in Scarlet." Apparently egg-laying aliens is another owned idea. Now I admit when I saw TERMINATOR I did think of "Soldier from the Future." I thought a whole lot more about CYBORG 2087, a film in which a cyborg is sent back into our present to avert a totalitarian future. I can't tell you what concept Ellison must have claimed was stolen from him. "Soldier" was about a soldier, not a civilian or a robot. Is it the idea of time travellers coming from the future into the present to avert a bad future? Surely that is too broad for Ellison to claim all of it. My impression is that Ellison is just a parasite who claims to be disgusted at how the film industry does not meet his high science fiction standards, yet when they try to play by the same rules that we expect from science fiction writers, he is right in there with his lawyer trying to make a fast buck. Anyone else out there have thoughts on this. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (06/13/85)
[...]
Mark Leeper's attack on Harlan Ellison ("Ellison is a parasite")
stirs me to respond. There is a good deal of difference between
cross-fertilization of ideas (which is a long respected tradition
in SF, as we all know, Ellison included) and theft of your work.
As I understand the situation, Ellison had worked on a project to
develop the Robot Cop story "Brillo", but the project had fallen
through. Ellison then went on to other things. Later on, some
of the work from that project (and maybe some of the same people)
showed up in the Robot Cop series.
It is very clear to me that this situation suggests double-dealing.
It would scarcely be fair to hire someone to work on a project,
get a lot of ideas, and then dump that person saying that the project
was off...then use the ideas anyway. If there is some reason for
wanting someone off a project, fire him and pay severance pay, buy
him out, or whatever seems appropriate. But saying it's over and
we're all going to live with that, then picking up the project again
without paying the original creators, is obviously foul play.
It is of course conceivable that the Robot Cop series WAS independent
of Ellison's work and the similarities in background were just
coincidental. That's what the court was supposed to decide. In
the case of Robot Cop, it decided that the Robot Cop series had
significantly plundered the work that Ellison did on the aborted
project, and it awarded Ellison the money.
Now Terminator is another situation. I have heard nothing to suggest
that Ellison was involved in a development deal on related projects,
except for the Outer Limits scripts. Again, I think the validity of
this whole mess is up to the courts. I can't judge for myself because
I haven't seen the shows in question. I hope that the court is well
enough informed on the matter that they won't automatically say "They
both have time travel so Terminator must be stolen." Presumably,
the Terminator people can come up with any number of expert witnesses
who will state that time travel and certain related concepts are "public
domain" in SF. The court will then decide strictly on the merits of
the stories whether plagiarism has occurred or Ellison is just being
a litiginous swine. Since I respect Ellison, I hope it will be the
former, but time will tell.
Jim Gardner, University of Waterloojim@randvax.UUCP (Jim Gillogly) (06/14/85)
In article <826@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: > >After Fox made ALIEN, Van Vogt threatened to sue over similarities to >his "Discord in Scarlet." Apparently egg-laying aliens is another >owned idea. > I object, Mark! When I saw Alien I thought so much was taken that I expected to see Van Vogt in the credits. It's not just an egg-laying alien ... it's an alien picked up by an interstellar ship that lays eggs in people and lurks almost indetectibly in the ship picking off a crewman at a time in horrible ways. I don't disagree with your Ellison points -- he disowned his only work that I've ever liked, so he gets no sympathy from me -- but I think your sarcasm is uncalled for on this one. Besides, Van Vogt didn't sue, did he? ------ Plagiarize, plagiarize, that's why the good Lord made yer eyes ... only please to call it "research". -- from "Nicolai Ivanovich Lobatchevsky", by Tom Lehrer -- Jim Gillogly {decvax, vortex}!randvax!jim jim@rand-unix.arpa
throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop) (06/14/85)
> The court will then decide strictly on the merits of > the stories whether plagiarism has occurred or Ellison is just being > a litiginous swine. Since I respect Ellison, I hope it will be the > former, but time will tell. > Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo I basically agree with Jim, but would like to expand a little on his points and request some information. I think that regarding Ellison as a litiginous swine rests on the assumption that his basis for suit was in fact the Outer Limits episodes mentioned in earlier postings. Having seen these episodes, I'd have to say that *if* Ellison based an action on those episodes *then* he is a litiginous swine. Ellison's position in the Brillo afair is (it seems to me) more respectable. If, as in the Brillo case, Ellison was hired to work on The Terminator in some capacity, and was fired under somewhat unjust circumstances, I'd have more sympathy with his position. Therefore: Does anyone out there in netland have information on either of these two points: Was Harlan Ellison hired in any capacity during production of or planning for The Terminator? If not, does anyone know for (fairly) certain the grounds the Destroyer Lawyer (hmpf!) was planning to base his case? Since I lack information on these two points, I don't have an opinion on Ellison's litiginousness or swinehood. -- Wayne Throop at Data General, RTP, NC <the-known-world>!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (06/20/85)
>There is a good deal of difference between >cross-fertilization of ideas (which is a long respected >tradition in SF, as we all know, Ellison included) and theft >of your work. As I understand the situation, Ellison had >worked on a project to develop the Robot Cop story "Brillo", >but the project had fallen through. Ellison then went on to >other things. Later on, some of the work from that project >(and maybe some of the same people) showed up in the Robot >Cop series. My understanding at the time was that Ellison could not demonstrate any work of his had shown up in the FUTURE COP series. He made his claim solely on the claim of plagerized ideas. Othertimes I believe he has made what I consider an outrageous claim that science fiction writers are stupid not to make what money they can out of Hollywood. When he is writing for Hollywood he disparages the writers who are not and when he isn't he claims that everything Hollywood makes in science fiction is garbage. I have very little respect for that sort of attitude. >Now Terminator is another situation. I have heard nothing >to suggest that Ellison was involved in a development deal >on related projects, except for the Outer Limits scripts. That's right. >Again, I think the validity of this whole mess is up to the >courts. It has been settled out of court, I thought. It was safer that way for the producers of TERMINATOR. I just don't agree with the decision to settle out of court. >I can't judge for myself because I haven't seen the >shows in question. There are other works of science fiction far closer, but Ellison seems to have some sort of recognized territoriality on anything at all like his ideas that makes a good profit. >I hope that the court is well enough >informed on the matter that they won't automatically say >"They both have time travel so Terminator must be stolen." The producers did not want to take the risk, apparently. [Because I am talking about Ellison and the company I work for does make a profit, I will remind people that the opinions expressed here are my own.] Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
CARTER@RUTGERS.ARPA (06/21/85)
From: _Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA>
From: mtgzz!leeper at topaz.arpa (m.r.leeper)
Sorry, the idea of a creature that lays its eggs in other creatures
and uses them distructively to incubate them was used long ago by a
fellow named E. Coli. Mr. Coli has been using this idea for
millions of years now. Admittedly he is not an alien, but you don't
see him every day.
Mr. Coli? With a first name like Escherina? E. Coli is a not only a
public-spirited symbiote instead of a parasite, but is a plant of the
class schizomycetes, and couldn't lay an egg if life depended on it.
She is going to have a word with one of her Mexican cousins about the
next time you drink the water in Tijuana.
_Bleeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (06/24/85)
> >After Fox made ALIEN, Van Vogt threatened to sue over similarities to > >his "Discord in Scarlet." Apparently egg-laying aliens is another > >owned idea. > > > I object, Mark! When I saw Alien I thought so much was taken > that I expected to see Van Vogt in the credits. It's not just an > egg-laying alien ... it's an alien picked up by an interstellar > ship that lays eggs in people Sorry, the idea of a creature that lays its eggs in other creatures and uses them distructively to incubate them was used long ago by a fellow named E. Coli. Mr. Coli has been using this idea for millions of years now. Admittedly he is not an alien, but you don't see him every day. >and lurks almost indetectibly in > the ship picking off a crewman at a time in horrible ways. The alien creature was an amalgam of the least esthetic traits of several different Terrestrial creatures. For example, left on the the cutting room floor was the scene in which Capt. Dallas was found alive, trussed up in silk the way a spider would, to be feasted on a bit at a time. (An early review, based on the prerelease version especially mentioned this nightmarish scene--I bet it would have been a good one, too.) Apparently the scene was cut out just before release and I am told it is still in the novel. Other places it looks and grabs like a crab, etc. In any case, it is easy to see that they have it reproduce by pumping genetic material into a victim like a wasp or a virus, and letting it incubate, leaving the victim alive, until they hatch and eat their way out. I really think that the similarities to "Discord" are coincidental. And regrettable but accidental. >I > don't disagree with your Ellison points -- he disowned his only > work that I've ever liked, so he gets no sympathy from me -- but > I think your sarcasm is uncalled for on this one. Besides, Van > Vogt didn't sue, did he? He threatened to, I have heard, and got a payoff, much like the happened in the recent Ellison incident. Forry Ackerman talked at a convention about how he convinced Van Vogt to sue. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (06/25/85)
>A few people have mentioned the legal bruhaha about the film THE >TERMINATOR and the payment that Ellison received on copyright >infringment grounds for similarities to the two Outer Limits episodes >that Ellison wrote. I haven't seen much in the way of opinion about >the situation. I want to express an opinion. I think it stinks. >... >Then Ellison and Bova wrote a story called "Brillo" about how a human >is better than a robot to act as a policeman. In some ways it reused >ideas from Asimov and others, but nobody cared because it was a >different approach to some of Asimov's ideas. A TV network considered >adapting "Brillo" into a series or a TV movie or something but the >project never got off the ground. That same netword did do a series on >the concept that a robot policeman would have to overcome initial >prejudice, but would be a good thing. It is highly profitable to win a >suit against a network and Ellison and Bova sued. They apparently >demonstrated that "Brillo" inspired the concept of FUTURE COP and laid >claim to ownership of the idea of a robot policeman. They must have >had a darn good lawyer but they won that one. Science fiction fans >everywhere applauded that a couple science fiction writers had won a >suit against a big, bad corporation. >.... >My impression is that Ellison is just a parasite who claims to be >disgusted at how the film industry does not meet his high science >fiction standards, yet when they try to play by the same rules that we >expect from science fiction writers, he is right in there with his >lawyer trying to make a fast buck. Anyone else out there have thoughts >on this. Sure do. I'm unfamiliar with the TERMINATOR matter,and don't know if Ellison had good grounds for claiming plagiarism. But "Brillo" was open-and-shut. "Future Cop" was an outright steal of Ellison's and Bova's "Brillo" script. If you think a plagiarism suit is winnable in court just by having a "good lawyer", you ought to look into the "Brillo" case, and the laws on plagiarism generally, a bit more thoroughly. It's very tough to win a plagiarism case, but Ellison had them dead to rights. You might keep in mind that ABC and Paramount had some pretty good lawyers, too. It's easy to sue someone, and even winning such a suit proves nothing if it's settled out of court, since the defendant may have reasons to want to settle with you even if they're not guilty. But to win such a case *in court*, as Ellison and Bova did with "Brillo", against a team of lawyers from two large corporations, is pretty damn conclusive. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,nsc,hao,hplabs}!ames!barry
muffy@lll-crg.ARPA (Muffy Barkocy) (06/27/85)
In article <873@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: >On E. Coli: Sorry, it hmust have been longer since I took biology than >I thought. I remember it is true of some micro-organism and I falsely >remembered it as E. Coli. I do remember that there is some >microorganism that pumps its genetic material into a cell and the cell >breaks apart giving birth to many of the microorganism. Anyone >remember what it is? > > Mark Leeper > ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper As far as I know, this is true of any and all viruses. Muffy
gnome@olivee.UUCP (Gary Traveis) (06/27/85)
> On E. Coli: Sorry, it hmust have been longer since I took biology than > I thought. I remember it is true of some micro-organism and I falsely > remembered it as E. Coli. I do remember that there is some > microorganism that pumps its genetic material into a cell and the cell > breaks apart giving birth to many of the microorganism. Anyone > remember what it is? > > Mark Leeper > ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper How about any name-brand influenza? "Call any viruses, Call them by name..."
royt@gitpyr.UUCP (Roy M. Turner) (06/28/85)
In article <2337@topaz.ARPA> CARTER@RUTGERS.ARPA writes: >From: _Bob <Carter@RUTGERS.ARPA> > > > From: mtgzz!leeper at topaz.arpa (m.r.leeper) > Sorry, the idea of a creature that lays its eggs in other creatures > and uses them distructively to incubate them was used long ago by a > fellow named E. Coli. Mr. Coli has been using this idea for > millions of years now. Admittedly he is not an alien, but you don't > see him every day. > >Mr. Coli? With a first name like Escherina? E. Coli is a not only a >public-spirited symbiote instead of a parasite, but is a plant of the >class schizomycetes, and couldn't lay an egg if life depended on it. > >She is going to have a word with one of her Mexican cousins about the >next time you drink the water in Tijuana. > >_B Ahem. Perhaps it is time for the above folks to go out and purchase a nice text on microbiology. E. coli is the name of (I believe) three organisms. The one that tourists dread is a normal symbiote of our GI tract, certainly cannot lay eggs, and *isn't* a plant--it's a bacteria, and has been polishing its ways for many millions of years. There is another E. coli that is a yeast, I think--maybe that's the Schizomycete?--and it wouldn't be any more of an egg-layer than would S. cerivisiae, the one that is used for making breads and beer...hmmm, egg in your beer? :-) The only other E. coli that I know of is Entamoeba coli, an amoeba that also finds it damn difficult to lay eggs, as that is several million years up the evolutionary tree from where it sits...it may encyst, I don't remember. There may be more E. coli's, since at the time when I was studying micro the names of the organisms were mutating rapidly. Roy P.S.: Yes, the yeast and the bacteria *both* have the first name Escherichia; ain't taxonomy great? :-) -- The above opinions aren't necessarily those of etc, etc...but they should be!! Roy Turner (a transplanted Kentucky hillbilly) School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Insitute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!royt
royt@gitpyr.UUCP (Roy M. Turner) (06/28/85)
In article <873@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: >On E. Coli: Sorry, it hmust have been longer since I took biology than >I thought. I remember it is true of some micro-organism and I falsely >remembered it as E. Coli. I do remember that there is some >microorganism that pumps its genetic material into a cell and the cell >breaks apart giving birth to many of the microorganism. Anyone >remember what it is? > > Mark Leeper > ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper Yeah. Viruses (virii?? (-: ). Also Plasmodium spp., ie., Malaria, does something similar, I believe. Long time for me, too! Roy. -- The above opinions aren't necessarily those of etc, etc...but they should be!! Roy Turner (a transplanted Kentucky hillbilly) School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Insitute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!royt
richardt@orstcs.UUCP (richardt) (06/29/85)
Well, since we're on the subject of aliens which lay eggs in people, why don't we go nail Van Vogt for using one of the most common pulp fiction ideas? That kind of creature ran througj most of the galaxy in one story or another. And while we're at it, we can also shout nasty names at the author of "Bloodstone." That was the cover story in IASFM a few months back. I would suggest that the whole idea of copyrighted (copywritten?) ideas is preposterous at best. So do the lawbooks. The regs state that "these restrictions apply only to the expression of an idea, not the idea itself." I'm fairly certain that that is a direct qoute. And regarding the Ellison thing: has Harlan Ellison patented a time machine? If so, I want one. Otherwise, kwitcher' cryin'. on the Brillo thing, I can agree, *if his material was directly and provably used*, be it as a plot, storyline, or whatever. orstcs/richardt "If I'm human, what are *YOU*?"
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (06/29/85)
On E. Coli: Sorry, it hmust have been longer since I took biology than I thought. I remember it is true of some micro-organism and I falsely remembered it as E. Coli. I do remember that there is some microorganism that pumps its genetic material into a cell and the cell breaks apart giving birth to many of the microorganism. Anyone remember what it is? Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
JAFFE@RUTGERS.ARPA (07/08/85)
From: orstcs!richardt (richardt) Well, since we're on the subject of aliens which lay eggs in people, why don't we go nail Van Vogt for using one of the most common pulp fiction ideas? That kind of creature ran througj most of the galaxy in one story or another. And while we're at it, we can also shout nasty names at the author of "Bloodstone." That was the cover story in IASFM a few months back. I would suggest that the whole idea of copyrighted (copywritten?) ideas is preposterous at best. So do the lawbooks. The regs state that "these restrictions apply only to the expression of an idea, not the idea itself." I'm fairly certain that that is a direct qoute. And regarding the Ellison thing: has Harlan Ellison patented a time machine? If so, I want one. Otherwise, kwitcher' cryin'. on the Brillo thing, I can agree, *if his material was directly and provably used*, be it as a plot, storyline, or whatever. orstcs/richardt "If I'm human, what are *YOU*?"
JAFFE@RUTGERS.ARPA (07/08/85)
From: mtgzz!leeper (m.r.leeper) I admitted a while back that I flubbed it on my microbiology. E. Coli is apparently the victim of the egg layer, not the perpetrator. Any virus, someone said, creates its young this way (egg, may be the wrong term, of course). Some wasps really do it with eggs. I apologize to those of you who read my tirade against Ellison and uses the facts on a school exam. We probably should set this question to rest. Thank you for your help. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (07/10/85)
I admitted a while back that I flubbed it on my microbiology. E. Coli is apparently the victim of the egg layer, not the perpetrator. Any virus, someone said, creates its young this way (egg, may be the wrong term, of course). Some wasps really do it with eggs. I apologize to those of you who read my tirade against Ellison and uses the facts on a school exam. We probably should set this question to rest. Thank you for your help. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper