The Green Room - Based On, Adaptations, Inspired by, etc...

Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 11:28am

Nuff Sed Offline
Ensemble
They like me, they really
like me! Wait..... Nope!
WVC, UT

Gender:
Posts: 149

Putting this out to the theatre officinato and the cadre of enthusiasts.

Questions: What is the cleanest and easiest to adapt a work so the original [Book, Story, Movie, Poem] gets the credit and without crossing lines of plagiarism?

For example: A Short Story from 1930's is made into movie in 1950's. How to adapt it to a stage production and possibly a musical. Who get's to be involved form the previous projects? Can it be as simple as changing dialogue and a few plot points while keeping names and the spirit of the thing?

I've attended shows around the valley, adaptations of "Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe" "Hobbit" "Christmas Carol" "Little Mermaid" "Babes in Toyland." I've seen the scripts typed in MS-Word and copied. Are they paying royalties or licensing to someone? Any coaching on how to start a project when adapting for the stage? Has anyone really workshopped something several times prior to showing to smooth out the pointy corners and get honest feedback?

Is anyone working on something right now that they don't know where to go with it?

Somethings to ponder...

"Billy Elliot" Novel based on events around miners strike in England 1980's inspired 2000 Movie, adapted 2005 Musical

Spank you very much.... � � �Nuff' Sed!

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 11:59am

mr. spiker Offline
All Access
a nest of sandworms
Eagle Mountain, UT

Gender:
Posts: 1133

Yeah - actually, I have a project where the legalities are proving a roadblock. It is a project that would cull from 5 or 6 books.

Though I have another adaptation I'm working on where the problem is more ethical - when adapting, how far can/should you stray from the original both in specifics and intent?

To be helpful - regarding the issue you describe, I know that licensing is very specific as to what you are adapting. For example, there were separate companies that got the rights to the Lord Of The Rings books and movies. So Company A could only deal with events from the books, and must avoid any look/feel/characterization that was specific to Peter Jackon's films ... the other company could not reference anything not directly in the film. So you'd want to decide which one you're adapting, and ignore the other.

http://www.fiftytwoplays.com

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.

As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 7:14pm

Wc365 Offline
All Access
The Random Element
West Punkt

Posts: 11610

Tshep wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm:

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.

As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

I'm glad you mentioned that. I didn't want to be the one to call attention to a certain very popular... uh... adaptation of a movie version of A Christmas Carol. They did, of course, follow copyright laws to the letter, so to speak...

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Dec 24^th, 2008 at 11:01am

Tshep Offline
Ingenue
It made me feel sad, and
just a little bit dirty.
Beebe, Arkansas

Gender:
Posts: 723

Wc365 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 7:14pm:

Tshep wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm:

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

I'm glad you mentioned that. �I didn't want to be the one to call attention to a certain very popular... �uh... �adaptation of a movie version of A Christmas Carol. �They did, of course, follow copyright laws to the letter, so to speak...

To be fair, this practice isn't particular to Utah... It is, I'd wager, regional and cultural. I have noticed a greater prevalence of this sort of disregard/disrespect in the more myopically provincial parts of the country.

They say, best men are moulded out of faults; &&And, for the most, become much more the better &&For being a little bad.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Dec 24^th, 2008 at 11:34am

Just J Offline
Ensemble
I Love PA!

Gender:
Posts: 333

Tshep wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm:

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.

As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

Not sure about other ones mentioned, but to be clear, "Babes in Toyland" is public domain.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Dec 24^th, 2008 at 12:50pm

The Professor Offline
All Access
Caution: This Sign May
Be Ambiguous.
Yonder

Gender:
Posts: 6288

Just J wrote on Dec 24^th, 2008 at 11:34am:

Tshep wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm:

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.

As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

Not sure about other ones mentioned, but to be clear, "Babes in Toyland" is public domain.

And just to muddy things up again:

The original 1903 operetta of Babes in Toyland is probably public domain (I'll take your word that everyone involved in your production did their due diligence). The revised version written in the 1970s for the Light Opera of Manhattan by Alice Hammerstein-Matthias would be copyright protected, as would the films done in 1934, 1961, 1986, and 1997. The general rule of thumb (although there are exceptions) is that stuff published before 1923 is generally public domain. Things published after 1923 are generally copyright protected.

Here's a useful primer on the matter: http://homepages.law.asu.edu/~dkarjala/OpposingCopyrightExtension/publicdomain/S...

My skills are as varied as they are impractical.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Dec 24^th, 2008 at 1:17pm

Just J Offline
Ensemble
I Love PA!

Gender:
Posts: 333

The Professor wrote on Dec 24^th, 2008 at 12:50pm:

Just J wrote on Dec 24^th, 2008 at 11:34am:

Tshep wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2008 at 6:49pm:

Crunchy is on-target... though consulting a rights attorney may be a constructive step.

As to the other adaptations you've seen around the valley... people in the UV and Utah in general have often been cavalier about their artistic co-option and theft of intellectual property and copy-written work.

Not sure about other ones mentioned, but to be clear, "Babes in Toyland" is public domain.

And just to muddy things up again:

The original 1903 operetta of Babes in Toyland is probably public domain (I'll take your word that everyone involved in your production did their due diligence). �The revised version written in the 1970s for the Light Opera of Manhattan by Alice Hammerstein-Matthias would be copyright protected, as would the films done in 1934, 1961, 1986, and 1997. �The general rule of thumb (although there are exceptions) is that stuff published before 1923 is generally public domain. �Things published after 1923 are generally copyright protected.

Here's a useful primer on the matter: http://homepages.law.asu.edu/~dkarjala/OpposingCopyrightExtension/publicdomain/S...

Actually, several internet sources say that the 1934 film version is also public domain. �So pulling from the Operetta and Film version (as I believe the Empress did) for an adaptation would be perfectly legal. (And yes, they did do their due diligence before embarking on the project.)

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Dec 24^th, 2008 at 2:17pm

The Professor Offline
All Access
Caution: This Sign May
Be Ambiguous.
Yonder

Gender:
Posts: 6288

Undoubtedly they did. �I wasn't implying anything to the contrary, and I apologize if it came off that way (one of the hazards of message boards). �I was just saying that, based on my understanding of copyright law (incomplete as it is), it would be more likely that the 1934 film would be under copyright protection than the original 1903 operetta. �But copyright law is tricky, and it's not uncommon for some old films to slip into public domain. �And it can be a little tricky to track down, as well.

And the real key, of course, is if the U.S. Copyright Office says it's under copyright. http://www.copyright.gov/

My skills are as varied as they are impractical.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Dec 27^th, 2008 at 2:30pm

Nuff Sed Offline
Ensemble
They like me, they really
like me! Wait..... Nope!
WVC, UT

Gender:
Posts: 149

Thanks for the resource link for COPY-RIGHT info. The subject of PUBLIC DOMAIN materials. Is there a resource to check what falls into that category? Is there reference material stating a specific "PRIOR TO XXXX Year?"

Spank you very much.... � � �Nuff' Sed!

Back to top

IP Logged

BackStage Utah