Her least favorite mistake
Last year I wrote a spec episode of Grey’s Anatomy entitled “My Favorite Mistake” wherein platonic best friends, Izzie and George, hook up. I registered my script with the WGA and sent it in to be considered for the ABC writing fellowship. I never heard back from the fellowship (their loss, no biggie) but I was surprised to see that last Thursday’s episode shared a title (exactly the same) and a subplot as my spec.
I do not believe that Shonda and team copied my idea… but i do think it is possible that they could have inadvertently copied my title. They had the means, etc. So my question is a two parter: 1) should I do anything about this? and 2) where is the line drawn? Would my script have to be identical to the one broadcast to possibly be plagiarized?
– Jackie Honikman
I don’t watch Grey’s Anatomy, so I looked up an episode guide online. One of the first things I noticed was that every episode is named after a song — that’s their thing, just like the title of every episode of Friends begins “The One With…”.
Being a good spec script writer, you followed their style and picked a song title. You chose a Sheryl Crow song. So did they. What are the odds?
Huge. So absurdly huge that you’re going to feel foolish in about three paragraphs.
I know you didn’t write in expecting to be ridiculed, so I want to give you a few sentences to prepare yourself. It’s not that I dislike you, Jackie, or disbelieve you. I’m sure when you first saw the episode title, you were surprised, hurt, disappointed and angry. These are natural emotions. But then the dark engines of your brain kicked in. You convinced yourself that through some byzantine process, your idea had been appropriated. But it hadn’t. It wasn’t.
You wrote your email at the end of March.1 So I’m hoping you’ve moved on, written other scripts, and laughed about how prescient you were. But in case you haven’t, I’m going to rip off the band-aid.
Let me restate your question:
I recently wrote a spec episode of Grey’s Anatomy. I worked very hard on making it exactly like the show, right down to the title. I was subsequently shocked — shocked! — to see that the writers of the show had the audacity to write an episode exactly like their own show. Who can I sue?
Put this way, your fallacy is clear — you’re confusing cause and effect. You think their “Favorite Mistake” is similar to yours because they somehow read and stole your idea, when in fact it’s similar because it’s frickin’ Grey’s Anatomy. You followed their conventions. You included their characters. You emulated their show as closely as you could.
You copied them, not vice-versa. Got it?
In terms of the title, given the show’s adult-contemporary demographics, it was pretty likely they were going to have a Sheryl Crow track sooner or later.2 As far as I can tell from the promos (and parodies) I’ve seen, the show is about young doctors hooking up and breaking up. “My Favorite Mistake” sounds like a good fit. They didn’t need your script to come up with that idea.3
In addition to the cause and effect problem, I think there’s also a fallacy of limited sampling. You’re looking at your script and the episode you saw. But if an independent reader had your script and 10 other spec scripts of the show to compare to the produced episode, would they really think yours was all that similar? I doubt it.4
Or as another test, a reader could compare your script to 10 produced episodes of the show. Would he be able to tell which one your script “influenced?” Again, doubtful.
Unfortunately, this misguided conflation of “similarity” and “plagiarism” is not confined to spec episodes of TV shows. This woman claims that both The Matrix and The Terminator franchises were stolen from her work. She managed to attract a fair amount of media attention before her case was finally thrown out.
By targeting both The Terminator and The Matrix, this case helps point out what really underlies a lot of similarities between literary works: genre conventions. It’s one thing to put a killer robot in your script, but don’t claim you invented robots.5 Having a divorced cop who likes doughnuts is not original — and neither is having him hate doughnuts, or having him be psychic, or dead. Having two doctors hook up on a show about doctors hooking up doesn’t strike me as particularly original.
Again, Jackie, I’m not trying to belittle your feelings. It’s frustrating to spend weeks working on something, only to find a similar project already out there.
In my early days, I outlined a series that would chart the last years of Earth — a meteor was coming, and everyone knew it. So I was understandably disappointed when not one, but two movies with essentially the same plot hit theaters. It forced me to look back and remember where the idea really came from: a bunch of popular-science articles at the time which mapped out what had likely killed off the dinosaurs, and what would happen if another such asteroid hit Earth.
I soon realized that my having the same idea as giant blockbusters was actually a good thing. It meant I had commercial taste. A writer isn’t one script. A writer is someone who can write. Forty scripts later, my meteor idea isn’t even a footnote in my career. Don’t let your Grey’s Anatomy spec be anything more than something you wrote.
- People ask how long it takes me to answer a reader-submitted question. Generally, I read them all within the week they’re sent in, and flag the ones I think will be interesting and applicable to the readership. But it’s not a first-in-first-out process. Sometimes, a question will land in my inbox that I’ll answer within the hour. There’s a big element of serendipity. But that’s not an invitation to submit the same question multiple times. That will almost guarantee that I won’t answer, since I’ll think, “Didn’t someone else just ask that?” ↩
- In fact, the second episode was titled “The First Cut is the Deepest.” Sheryl Crow’s cover had topped the charts the year before. ↩
- A while back, a screenwriting colleague was dealing with a guy who was claiming on messageboards that a certain blockbuster was stolen from his script. The “proof?” One of the characters had the same name. Basically, the guy was arguing that the screenwriter had changed the plot, the setting, the character’s motivations — pretty much everything but this one character’s name. It’s hard to claim that a conspiracy is both thorough and lazy. ↩
- I’m sure this “fallacy of limited sampling” has a more official name, but I couldn’t find it. (It’s not the fallacy of generalization, which infers about a large population based on a too-small sample.) If anyone can link to the proper term, I’ll be much obliged. ↩
- The same goes for any variation of robot: friendly robot, suicidal robot, kleptomaniac robot, fatherly robot, existentially-angst-ridden robot. We can all think of other examples. ↩
Filed under: Film Industry, Genres, QandA, Rights and Copyright, Television
Articles
June 20th, 2007 at 8:03 am
Also, it had been pretty obvious for a long time that those two characters were going to hook up. So it’s a good idea to make your spec about something that you would never expect to happen, but still makes sense in the context of the show.
The more useful question in this case might be: “Can Jackie still use her spec as a writing sample, or is it landfill now?”
xJ
June 20th, 2007 at 8:34 am
Nicely put, John. And a good reminder that when all is said and done, we all live in the same world, are influenced by the same things, and ultimately write about similar characters and situations…. except me of course… I have something original… :)
June 20th, 2007 at 8:35 am
John’s explanation is borne out by my experience at USC. Last semester, two different television spec classes elected to write for the shows “Dexter” and “Friday Night Lights,” each without realizing the other class was doing so. Then, in my class, three different people independently thought of a “Dexter” episode wherein Dexter meets a female serial killer. My idea involved a poser taking credit for one of Dexter’s kills. I thought it was so original! But a guy in another class was doing the same idea.
At first, I was really stressed by my inability to be more original. I was comforted by the notion of having commerical taste. But there’s another important point to be made: It isn’t the idea anyway; it’s the execution. Ideas are like the proverbial asshole. Everybody has one. I mean EVERYONE. Since I started film school, I’ve heard ideas from the UPS guy, my high school English teacher, my cousin, my kids’ principal. Having read a LOT of scripts (both specs and produced scripts), I can say that a well executed script is like an eleventh finger: pretty rare.
June 20th, 2007 at 8:56 am
Maybe the bigger question here is why the ABC/Disney fellowship never got back to her. If the episode really was so good, I’d think she’d at least be considered for a finalist interview – especially since they try to diversify with women.
ZAK
June 20th, 2007 at 9:06 am
Also, if she read her ABC/Disney application, she’d she that even if she could prove theft, the most she could get is $1,000. Why bother?
June 20th, 2007 at 9:10 am
I think the fallacy you’re looking for John might be some variation of the Fallacy of the Biased Sample — http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html.
June 20th, 2007 at 9:18 am
Rick linked to a good website, obviously one near the top of the list on Google. The spec writer also made the fallacy, as John says, of confusing cause and effect. Many common logical fallacies are listed on this website:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
June 20th, 2007 at 9:25 am
Hey there, John. Bit off topic. I was interested to read that you never watch Grey’s Anatomy and, because you had to look up the episode guide, I assume you have never watched it. Grey’s Anatomy is wildly popular all over the world (I’m in the UK). I’ve never watched it either but then I didn’t go to school the exec producer. I seem to remember you saying that Shonda Rhimes is an old classmate of yours. Were you not in the slightest bit curious to watch even one episode of the series created by your successful old classmate?
June 20th, 2007 at 9:27 am
If she’s worried no one would read her Grey’s spec now, she can give it new life by just changing the cover page to “Scrubs” and cutting out 30 pages :)
(John, are you sure it wasn’t Scrubs creator Bill Lawrence writing that letter to you?)
June 20th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Damn, and I thought I was so clever using google until I saw that Rick beat me to it. It is the Fallacy of the Biased Sample. In this case an incredibly biased sample (Jackie’s one – mentioned – Grey’s anatomy spec).
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/biased-sample.html
June 20th, 2007 at 9:59 am
Wow, here’s the irony of all ironies: I ALSO had an idea for a TV series about a meteor coming to hit earth and everyone knew it! The only difference with my series was that nobody could do anything about the meteor and the show was more of a exploration on how people dealt with the inevitable destruction of everything and everyone they had ever known… It sometimes blows having a commercial taste — damn you, John August! :)
I often wonder how Hollywood releases two films of strikingly similar subject matter within months of each other (Robin Hood and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Deep Impact and Armageddon, Antz and A Bug’s Life). Rather than paint Hollywood as a dishonest pride of Johnny Come Lately’s, I’d like to think that two equally influential development execs just happen to be watching the same late night documentary on the History Channel about Robin Hood, or see the Discovery Channel’s documentary on how to stop an meteor impact, etc. Then, because the studios might have already spent many months in production before becoming aware of a competing studio’s project, they decide not to jettison their project onto a backburner for a few years, but instead to race to the finish line to recoup any monies already spent. And in any event, Burger Kings sell more burgers when they’re planted directly opposite a McDonald’s.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:02 am
I completely agree with your assessment, but one has to agree that plagerism does happen . . . there was a case in the lit world just a year or so go, a young writer lifted another writer’s stories . . . and I believe COMING TO AMERICA was the first big movie case I remember.
Plagerism is a terrible crime, and it does happen . . . it pays to protect oneself by copyrighting your work . . .
I think the key, which you hit on, isn’t the idea (doctors hooking up) but the expression of that idea, right?
June 20th, 2007 at 10:18 am
“sue me, sue you, sue everybody” – The Jerky Boys … just wanted to get the rest of you off the hook for stupidest comment … lighten up, august
June 20th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Jane (#1) writes:
That sounds like a question for Jane Espenson. Somebody get a stamp.
Zak (#4) writes:
I assume that all of my readers are absurdly talented. But are they? No, they’re not. Her script simply may not have been very good. We don’t know.
Andrea Gayle (#8) write:
I’m not a hospital dramedy person. At all. So I can be very happy for Shonda’s success without pretending to love something I probably wouldn’t. I don’t know if she’s seen my seven movies, or liked them, but no judgment if she hasn’t.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Rick and Michael (#6 and #10):
I’d found “biased sample” when Googling, and while it’s certainly the closest on this list, it’s not an exact fit. It feels like trying to use a metric socket wrench when you need a 1/2 inch. It gets the job done, but it rounds off the edges.
This may be as close as you get in rhetoric. (I used “begging the question” incorrectly, so I’m no expert.)
Deep in the description, it points out the problem of looking at only examples that are easily accessible, which is true for what I’m describing.
Whenever you have a very small sample of things to compare, you tend to exaggerate their similarities and differences. It’s not that there was particular bias in picking these two or three items. They could have been random. But without a larger sample, it’s impossible to know whether the perceived similarities and differences are meaningful.
Isn’t there a term for that?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:12 am
I don’t think Jackie deserved such a condescending reply. As frustrated as she might be with her situation, you sound even more frustrated with having to deal with people like her. You seem like a nice guy in your other posts, so this one was a little surprising.
June 20th, 2007 at 11:23 am
I agree with Ben. Maybe I’m not thinking technical enough, but couldn’t it simply be an association fallacy?
June 20th, 2007 at 11:39 am
My screenwriting teacher last semester mentioned a semi-similar thing– she had pitched a drama about students at a medical school to some station, been turned down, and now it’s on their fall lineup! It’s not worth it to sue, however– it just makes you look like your difficult to work with. In one case (I can’t remember for what) two college kids successfully won both money and consulting rights on a film they claimed had been stolen. They did the one film and now no one will work with them.
I imagine it’s frustrating. And maybe your script did trigger the episode– but that should be a compliment to your skills. Keep going, you’ll win out someday!
June 20th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
John (#15) – “It’s not that there was particular bias in picking these two or three items. They could have been random. But without a larger sample, it’s impossible to know whether the perceived similarities and differences are meaningful.”
Sounds like a question of Statistical Significance to me. Not as buzzword-y as rhetorical fallacies, but it’s accurate to what you’re trying to get across. Though it seems to me that the alrger issue is the Causality fallacy – she simply justified it with some implicit statistically insignificant conclusions.
June 20th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
When does similarity become plagarism slightly rewritten?
June 20th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
LadyUranus (#18): Wow, that was your screenwriting teacher who came up with the idea of students at a medical school? Please don’t point out Grey’s Anatomy, or Going to Extremes, or any of the half-dozen other medical school pilots to her. She’s apt to be disappointed. (Ben: This is me being condescending.)
I agree: Jackie needs to keep writing. However, she also needs to actively disown herself of the notion that her spec script led to the episode she saw. It didn’t. She’s a writer. If she continues to harbor the notion that Hollywood is full of dishonest writers who can’t be trusted, how is she going to succeed in the industry? Television in particular relies on tremendous cooperation among a staff of writers to do the impossible every week.
June 20th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
In other words… DON’T sue Disney ! Oh, and Dr. August, The Teminator is not a “robot” but a cyborg, a cybernetic organism… part man, part machine, or, to be specific, a hyperalloy combat chassis, mircoprocessor-controlled, fully armored and covered with living human tissue. Sheesh.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
About ten years ago, my writing partner and me worked on a script, in which someone called “Manni” loses the money from a bankrobbery while riding on the subway. We were about to finish the script (but hadn’t sent it out yet, so no chance of plagiarism) when a movie came out in Germany that also made its way to America eventually: Run, Lola, Run. In which someone called Manni loses money from a robbery (a supermarket in this case) while riding on the subway. The most striking thing were the identical names, because Manni isn’t a very common name in Germany for people of the character’s age.
Lesson learned: sometimes your idea just pops into someone else’s head (or his pops up in yours), and sometimes his film comes out earlier (or, in our case, your film is never made).
And the two films were of course completely different. I bet same thing goes for Jackie’s script and the actual episode.
June 20th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Several years ago when I was in college I took a TV writing class. Everyone chose a show to write a spec for blah blah blah. I chose C.S.I. and decided to be crazy and do the opposite of the normal format of the show–90% of the episode would just involve Grissom, it wouldn’t take place in Las Vegas or even the desert for that matter, Grissom would have no fancy tools(he’d go old school by using items from a general store), and it involved Grissom solving a crime in a small town devoid of any kind of C.S.I. unit…the closest thing being a volunteer who was the local veternarian. Basically a big city cop in a small town where the sheriff was pissed that Grissom was sticking his nose in things.
My teacher told me I was an idiot and that you couldn’t write a spec for a show that doesn’t even follow the general construct of the given show.
I wrote it anyways…and he gave me a D for the class. A year later the exact same episode came out on C.S.I., they even had the pissed off sheriff/the veternarian/and Grissom going all McGuyver with make shift CSI tools. Several classmates were convinced that somehow/someway the writers had gotten a hold of my script.
It crossed my mind for a split second, but despite the fact that some things were very similar the idea that well paid and well established writers couldn’t come up with a similar idea on their own (and thus had to steal some crappy writer’s idea instead) seemed silly to me. So I just chalked it up to a good sign that I might have a chance at a career in this town afterall.
But I did feel the urge to go tell that teacher who gave me the D to kiss my ass.
June 20th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
If Hollywood sees talent it swallows it up whole. I agree with John, keep writing and don’t harp on all the crap that comes your way. If you’re talented Hollywood will smile on you… and then it will rape you and make you feel like you’re not being raped because you have a Porsche in the driveway, a pool in the backyard, and coke up your nose (or if you’re Aaron Sorkin: crack in your pipe). There’s a reason why Raymond Chandler drank himself to death and it had little to do with literary success and almost everything to do with Hollywood.
Gin Gimlet anyone?
June 20th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
“One of the first things I noticed was that every episode is named after a song — that’s their thing”
Back in the 80’s the show ALF named all their episodes after songs. Plagiarisomo di plagiarisimo!
June 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Bryan (#24):
Awesome story. Love it!
Even so, I can’t help thinking that the most effective rebels are the ones inside the system, the ones already following all the rules and making waves with the people who can make a difference.
The C.S.I. producers can break the rules of their show—because it’s their show. But who’s going to look at your outlandish spec and get a sense that you—an unproven talent—understand their show?
It seems like your TV writing class teacher’s objective was to guage how well his students could emulate a show’s format and still be original enough to be compelling. That ability—to be daring while still following the rules—is your calling card. You could be the best sharpshooter in the world, but if you can’t follow orders, no police agency in the world would ever hire you.
Plus, once you’re inside the gate, you can do whatever the hell you want. In fact, the most entertaining shows are when the showrunners dare to think waaaaaaaaay outside the box. :P
June 20th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Mr. August, This is off topic but it looks as though your feed is down. Really enjoy the site, thank you.
June 20th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
RE: John
No, it wasn’t a medical student show– it was a show about medical students BEFORE their residency, which is why she thought it was innovative.
I don’t think anyone can claim they came up with the medical student genre…
June 20th, 2007 at 6:49 pm
to Bryan — you’re teacher was wrong to give you a D, but he/she was right about one thing: if a spec deviates too much from the norm, it probably won’t be received well.
The writers of CSI can get away with breaking their own formula, and Shonda Rhimes can have half an episode of Grey’s take place in the afterlife if she so desires, but if the point of a spec is to show that you CAN capture the weekly feel for a series, then it’s probably better if you don’t do either of those things.
With one exception of course: you intentionally pick a bad or dated show and do something crazy JUST to show how out there you can be. For example, a few years back, some guys wrote a spec for one of the Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen shows had one of the twins “maturing” faster than the other and it was hilarious… and raunchy and completely unlike the show. And it got those writers representation and I think work, too.
June 20th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
That’s probably one of the posts that shows why you (John) are at the top of your game. I know how Jackie feels but somewhere along the road there comes the point where every writer realizes: “Hey, I write so much better than all the other guys (and girls) … and as a plus I’m also good at lying to myself.”
Everybody thinks that he or she would write better than everybody else but basically where all just comforing ourselfes. Pretty much everybody who wants to become a writer has at least some common denominators. Nobody cares how many girls or boys brushed you off in highschool. Nobody cares if you’re a borderline alcoholic or insert psychological proplem of your choice. All that matters is how good your your writing is. Over time you’re going to improve but if your really good noone is going to steal your idea. They will hire you. I know it sounds strange, but the suits are looking for good writers and at least 50% of them (after some consideration make that 10%) will recognise good writing when they see it.
Being protective of your writing is probably the dumbest thing you can do. Get your work out, attach your name and if it’s good it will help you if its not … bad luck. What’s the worst thing that can happen? No studio would release a movie based on a stolen idea. There’s too much risk in that. A trial is long and expensive..
Long story short: Who cares if you wrote that exact same episode. Keep on writing and someday they will hire you. ;-)
Greg
June 20th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
LadyUranus’s teacher didn’t invent medical dramas, Harlan Ellison did. Right after he invented cyborgs, Hershey Bars and the Wankel rotary engine. Don’t fucking piss him off or he’ll throw his typewriter at you (which he invented as well).
June 20th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Well, at least you sat her down, let her get a sip of water and calm down…before you verbally smacked her in the head!
I have argued this point with my father who is a teacher/writer, stating that common threads in moves are exactly that: common. He always brings up the “Coming To America” case, and I can’t speculate how many stories have been stolen from writers in the past, but I think it comes down to one generally devastating point:
We are, none of us, as unique as we think we are.
June 20th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Excellent, helpful post but I would have really liked it if JA had treaded middle ground here. Trust her just as much as you don’t trust her and maybe DO give her some pointers on how she should proceed if the script in fact WAS stolen. That would have been helpful too.
That said, your final word is the most useful one: If she is a writer, she will go past that and do something more consequential and successful than win one case against the show.
June 20th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
John,
I think it was extremely unfortunate that you included the full name of the aspiring writer that wrote in. Especially as you proceeded to completely rip her a new one. Your comments were valid and constructive, I’m not saying this wasn’t an educational post- it was. That being said, I point out that your blog is one of the most popular industry blogs, or at the very least, one of the most popular “established screenwriter deigns to advise aspiring writers” blog. Your blog is read by a lot of people. Some people that might someday directly or indirectly have an impact on this young writer’s career. And you made her look foolish in front of them. For a professional that is supposed to be about helping new writers, this doesn’t seem to have been a very helpful post at all. You ridiculed her and did not even have the kindness to give her anonymity. I respect your work and the time and care you put into this blog, but on this one, Mr. August, you might have done irrevocable damage. I’m sorry, but I think you should be ashamed of yourself.
June 21st, 2007 at 12:18 am
I like snarky John August.
I would have a beer with snarky John August.
I would have two beers with him.
June 21st, 2007 at 12:37 am
Hey again John (#14),
I’m pretty sure no one would ask or expect you to ‘pretend’ about anything. Rather than saying ‘my old alumnus created this very successful show but I watched one ep and didn’t like it’, you seem to be saying ‘my old alumnus created this very successful show but I avoid it because I don’t like the premise and therefore probably wouldn’t like it’.
I just thought there might be a little interest to see what your old classmate had done, even if you didn’t like it, that’s all.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:52 am
Last year I submitted a comedy spec to a producer who responded with the usual “this is not for us but you’re a talented writer so keep writing and let us know what you’re doing in the future.” I had a minor subplot in that spec about professional bass fishing. Within the next few months, I saw in the trades that a few bass fishing specs had sold, including a comedy to that same production company.
My first thought wasn’t “those bastards ripped off my idea.� I haven’t read the spec so I don’t know how similar the idea was to my subplot. Certainly, if I’d written an entire spec based on that subplot it would be vastly different than whatever is in that other script. The reason I included the subplot was because I kept turning on the TV and seeing bass fishing on ESPN and the idea of people actually watching televised fishing struck me as absurd. I have to imagine that there’ve been many writers who’ve seen bass fishing on TV and had the same thoughts about how silly it is that people are entertained by watching other people reel in fish.
Now, if this movie turns out to have an asteroid full of robot medical students crashing into the fishing boat, I’m definitely hiring a lawyer. ‘Cos that idea is mine!
June 21st, 2007 at 5:02 am
john,
bad hair day?
you’re just wildly off the mark here trying to make jackie feel silly for wondering if maybe it’s not a coincidence that her spec title and a subplot ended up being used in the show. ideas get stolen in hollywood. plagiarism is real. it happens more than anyone wants to talk about.
did it happen in jackie’s particular case? probably not. but who knows. you don’t. interesting that you didn’t even bother to ask how closely the subplot from the show mirrored jackie’s spec.
but let me ask you. why do you think the WGA has a script registration service? are they just preying on the paranoid delusions of wannabe screenwriters? i mean really, why register if this notion of theft is as absurd as you make it sound? scripts are registered every day by professionals like you because there is a need to protect them. something tells me this was a lesson learned the hard way by writer types in this town.
nice move bringing up that crackpot who said she wrote matrix and terminator. you have a bright future as a studio attorney. maybe do some reading about real, documented claims of plagiarism in hollywood and present both sides of the story next time instead of branding people like jackie fools. here’s a website listing notable cases, some of which resulted in massive financial settlements. thank god none of these writers came to you for advice.
http://www.weirdwildrealm.com/hollywoodplagiarism.html
June 21st, 2007 at 5:22 am
Huey Lewis has an interesting story regarding the song “Ghostbusters” and his song “I want a new drug” – one which involved a court case and a massive settlement.
I don’t discount John’s account of this particular story, but I don’t think we can forget that plagarism is real and it happens . . . I’ve had whole plays of mine staged with someone else’s name on it, and I’ve also seen playwrights lift, word for word, tv show stories, put them on stage and called their own . . .
The thing is, if people can do it, they will do it, like with anything . . . I do believe in a collected unconscious that brings us to several people having the same idea at the same time, because I’ve witnessed and been a part of that (lots o’ Iraq veteran stories goin’ on right now) but I’ve also witnessed plagerism, and been victim to it.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:57 am
I started two spec scripts within the last month. I was excited about the concepts because they were so original. I soon discovered very similar projects were already in production. Are there really any “original” ideas?
June 21st, 2007 at 6:16 am
Joshua James, you’re right that plagiarism does happen. But there’s a reason you can’t copyright an idea. People have similar ideas all the time. Yet people constantly accuse others of stealing their ideas. I don’t discount your experience, especially in the theater, which may be even more difficult to monitor for plagiarism. Stealing a play word for word is a much different situation.
There’s also a side issue here; every time someone accuses a studio of plagiarism, it makes it more difficult for anyone outside of “the system� to get their work read. If I’d been inclined to write an entire spec about my aforementioned bass fishing subplot, that producer probably wouldn’t have read it. He’d have thought, “uh-oh, I’ve already got a bass fishing comedy spec on my desk and I don’t want this guy accusing me of stealing his idea.� I was only interested in bass fishing for a few jokes in a subplot and had no intention of writing an entire spec about the subject, but you see my point. If you’re doing good original work (which I’m sure you are) then even with similar ideas, your work is going to be significantly different than anyone else’s version of that same idea. Those are my thoughts, anyway. I may be wrong.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:43 am
Josh Boelter I take my hat off to you. Last year I remember chatting on the phone to my friend while channel surfing at the same time. This was around 1am. As I surfed I came across ‘Championship Fishing’ or whatever on one of the sports channels. For about an hour or more my friend and I laughed so hard at the absurdity of this concept that at one point I felt I might need oxygen. What made it even more ridiculous is that it wasn’t a quiet, gentle sort of show, it was a show made with all the flash, brash, statistics and drama of an NBA playoff telecast. We tore the thing to shreds in a really uneccessarily vindictive manner!
Our first thought was ‘Are they trying to get ridiculed?’ and the next ‘it would make a great comedy film’. I thought about it for a few days but never really expanded on it. Then I saw Dodgeball which had much the same premise as the one I had tiptoed around.
It’s only a matter of time before the glamorous world of Championship Fishing hits the big screen. Probably starring Will Ferrell. Long time coming I say….
June 21st, 2007 at 7:03 am
Why can’t people think that maybe, just maybe, their spec got rejected because the studio had already bought a spec that contained the same idea.
June 21st, 2007 at 7:08 am
Andre:
I can’t think of another film about competitive fishing, so if you can write a good script, I’d say go for it (Vinnie Jones is an angler – send the script to him).
Trouble is with “Dodgeball”, “(National Lampoon’s) Blackball”, “Blades of Glory”, and that one about ping-pong coming out, you’d better have a good “angle” on it (boom-boom).
June 21st, 2007 at 7:33 am
When I was 13, I started drawing one-panel gag strips. I think I did maybe four or five, two of them featuring the Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers.
One of them was a drawing of Jason (from Friday the 13th) about to stap Tom Hanks in a space shuttle, and of course Tom’s word balloon says “Houston we have a problem!” and in big letters over the top it said Apollo the 13th!!
A couple months later, Mad TV came on the air and their earliest commercials (before the show even debuted) featuring an entire sketch around this horrible joke.
Plagiarism? Doubtful, as I don’t think I showed the cartoons to anyone.
Lesson learned: Mad TV is written by 13-year-olds.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:20 am
Josh Boelter, if you read my earlier comment, you will note that I stated an idea cannot be copyrighted, only the specific expression of one . . . so I know not what you are chiding me for . . .
I merely noted that plagarism does indeed happen, and it’s a terrible crime that we should all do our utmost to prevent . . .
Recently Carlos Mencia was found to have swiped a bit from a comedian who opened for him the year before (h/t to Joe Rogan for that) and Jay Mohr confessed to plagarism as a writer on SNL in his book GASPING FOR AIRTIME.
My point was, it happens, it’s not just Eddie Murphy, and generally if people can get away with something, they will.
And plagarism is terrible and shouldn’t be tolerated when it happens.
In terms of making producers leery of reading scripts, every producer I have known has asked me to sign a waiver which states I will not sue if they pass on my property and produce something similar.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:43 am
I wasn’t chiding you, Joshua James. Sorry if that’s you perceived my comment. Cheers.
Scott, does Vinnie Jones headbutt the fish when he reels them in?
June 21st, 2007 at 6:42 pm
Joshua James (#48)’s comment about “In terms of making producers leery of reading scripts, every producer I have known has asked me to sign a waiver which states I will not sue if they pass on my property and produce something similar”
That sounds pretty scary for writer’s. That sounds like less of a producer protecting themselves, and more of an intent to plagiarise!
June 21st, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Again, it guards against frivolous lawsuits . . . it doesn’t mean that you don’t have a case if someone stole your story . . . it means it goes to arbitration, rather than to court.
And any contract is worth only as much as the lawyer you hired says it does . . . the more per hour your lawyer charges, the less the paper can stand in your way. . . or so I’m told. By my lawyer. One of ‘em, anyway.
The waivers usually say, protect the company if they develope a different project similar to the one you have pitched . . . it is not a license to plagarize . . . if your work is truly plagarized, you can still make a case . . . and sue.
June 21st, 2007 at 9:43 pm
manny (#39):
Respectfully, I must disagree. Although the WGA’s registration service exists for a good reason, the term “plagiarism” is often used in a diluted context to mean almost anything; based on the link you listed, plagiarism appears to mean, “At a cocktail party 15 years ago, I mentioned an idea to Andrew Stanton and he exploited it years later to make Finding Nemo.”
It always sticks in my craw whenever someone brings up the Finding Nemo lawsuit, as they did in the link you posted. One need only look more closely to see that the French author lost his lawsuit because the judge did not see the same similarities that the author was maintaining:
Gene Roddenberry pitched Star Trek to the studios and they turned him down… only to produce Lost in Space later that year. It was pretty clear that the studio had lifted Roddenberry’s ideas, but not the execution of his ideas. No matter how unethical, every judge would agree that the studios did not plagiarize Star Trek. Nevertheless, there’s cosmic justice at work… as we all know, Lost in Space faded into obscurity while the world of Star Trek blossomed into a multi-million dollar business. This is what John is talking about—keep working and eventually, even if your work does get plagiarized, your work will win you recognition in the end.
And remember, Shakespeare “borrowed” almost all of his stories.
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:56 am
Horsecrap. Yes, that’s from the script, and yes that’s what James Cameron reckons, but he’s wrong, from a SF terminology point of view. The Terminator’s a robot, and could perhaps be considered an android. A cyborg is a human with mechanical parts, like the 6 million dollar man. The terminator’s 100% created, hence robot. And screw Cameron.
Geekery over.
June 22nd, 2007 at 9:23 am
While Grey’s Anatomy suffers from unoriginal ideas (the TCM plot summary for the 1962 movie The Interns reads: Five interns clash with the head of surgery while trying to balance medical studies and romance.), this does not appear to be a case of script stealing.
It’s one idea (that many a Grey’s fan has conceived) and one song title (which many a Grey’s spec writer has conceived).
The entire episode would have to show much more resemblance to the spec, and it doesn’t sound like it does.
Unfortunately, duplicate ideas occur regularly in the entertainment industry. Over a year ago, I was developing a concept about a guy who lives at home – the family based largely on mixed qualities I find in my own family. Then I saw a commercial for “Failure to Launch.” Oh well, too bad. It was a coincidence, that’s all.
The good news is, I had a bunch of other ideas, and I keep coming up with new ones. That’s the great thing about being a writer.
So pick your battles. Lose this one and win the war.
June 22nd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
I personally find it hard to believe that the people judging the scripts for the fellowship would even share those scripts with the various showrunners… or her former assistant who has risen through the ranks to become a member of the writing staff.
Or maybe August is just defending the episode because it was written by a USC alum. :)
June 22nd, 2007 at 2:14 pm
I’ve been reading through these comments and I’ve found a common trend (besides the fact that everyone is bothered by John August not advocating peace and love). That trend looks something like this: “I was writing a script about this and this theme and with this and this plot and then I read in the trades that this and this writer with this and this same idea just sold his script so I stopped writing my script and that’s okay because I’m a good writer and I’ll get it right one day.”
This is troubling for two reasons:
First off, if you came up with a wholly original script and it could not be traced back in some fashion to some famous movie or story, no matter how brilliant or how innovative, that script will be of no interest in the Hollywood world. They will tell you it is too literary and it should be a book.
Second, you should keep writing the script with the same/similar idea to the one that was announced. Why? Because you never know what will happen to that script. You’ll never know if it will be made, if the guy who bought it was the writer’s uncle, that it might make 300 billion at the box office and the studios are starving for like-minded scripts.
When DISTURBIA exploded I had a zillion different execs call me up and say, “Do you have anything like DISTURBIA?” Hollywood wants it the same with a twist. Hence the hundred gazillion DIE HARDS on a “vehicle/building/buxom blonde-type movies.”
So always keep writing because a finished script is better than no script at all.
June 22nd, 2007 at 5:52 pm
I pray every day that I never make an idiot of myself in this fashion. Virtually everyone in my family — and everyone they talk to about their daughter the writer — believes that my work will be stolen and I’ll be forced to return in disgrace to the backwater metropolis of my birth.
I, on the other hand, believe that if I keep doing good work, someone who needs good work (like a showrunner) will give me a shot at a freelance episode or the like, on the grounds that it is still easier to rewrite an iffy episode than write it him/herself.
That’s pretty much my Our Father, writing-wise. Even in a parallel universe where Shonda had seen the fellowship submission, I believe that, if it had been any good, Shonda would have brought the writer in to discuss a freelance episode. As it is, she’s got two shows (44 episodes) to produce next year — why wouldn’t she want to recruit someone who could lighten her load?
Then, of course, there’s the infamous sitcom-about-grunge-rock email debate between Judd Apatow and … that guy from The 70s Show. The accuser looks like a total asshat.
June 23rd, 2007 at 1:44 pm
To Bryan–
No matter what anybody says especially your teacher, your idea was fantastic because it was a “fish out of water” story– taking Grissom out of his comfort zone and leaving him alone with his brain. It was a puzzle to him, which he loves to do…something any regular viewer would know which leads to my point…
Aren’t we all susceptible to plagiarism? If we are all taught to believe as beginning screenwrtiers to read as many scripts and watch movies(tv shows) as we can, then plots, dialogue etc. will inevitably will find its’ way into our scripts. In Jackie’s case, she probably is a die hard fan of the show. Her idea probably evolved by how she much understands not only the characters and interaction but the overall plot. I am a fan of “Lost”. I had this great idea and voila, two months later my idea(an outsider in an aircraft parachutes onto the island) it was shown! I was not angry but instead happy, that I thought as how the writers of the show would continue to develop the characters and the story line. The sad reality is that as Joshua James has pointed out, I find more and more producers having wrtiers sign release contracts or not even reading query letters at all, to understandably protect themselves from frivilous lawsuits.
June 23rd, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Oh boy, where to start.
Thanks to John and everyone else for taking the time to think about my question. I do appreciate it. However, I don’t feel like my actual question was ever answered. As I state in my original email, I DON’T think that the Grey’s staff stole my spec. I really don’t. The issue of the similarities between my script and the aired episode are really beside the point and I shouldn’t have mentioned it. My question is really about where the plagerism line is drawn. If the script had shared no similiaries with the episode with exception of one scene that matched exactly… could that be plagerism? If the A, B, and C story lines were all the same as mine but didn’t share actual phrasing… could that be plagerism? If someone at ABC read my spec, and liked the title (which – yes – was actually written by Sheryl Crow) and told Shonda Rimes “‘My Favorite Mistake’ would be a good episode title…” and Shonda agreed, would that be plagerism? Can Sheryl Crow be mad that they (and I) took her title? These are hypotheticals. Again – I am not arguing that any of this happened – but is it only plagerism if every word was copied? I just wanted to know.
And lastly:1. My script was decent, but rushed so I’m not surprised I didn’t hear from the fellowship people. But if you want to really know if it is good, you can download it on my website and read it and other samples for youself! I am currently in the market for a new agent anyway… :) “irrevocable damage?” Please. If life gives you lemmons, make lemonade, right?
2. Regarding Jane’s first comment about how obvious it was that Izzie and George were going to get together… My script was written 2 years ago now, it was the last thing that seemed possible (which is exactly why I wrote it.) 3. Despite this defensive rant, I have indeed moved on. Thanks John.
jh
June 23rd, 2007 at 10:19 pm
Plagiarism. Well I never said i could spell.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Maybe I don’t understand the culture of screenwriters — and by “don’t understand,” I think what I mean is that you are mostly a bunch of semi-retarded, uneducated hacks — but I’m a little surprised that John’s rude, smug and self-important didn’t receive any negative comment for those reasons. Then again, I stopped reading and skipped to the bottom shortly after I read a sentence that started, “Ten years ago, me and my writing partner were….” A writer. Indeed.
Jackie, it’s okay to feel defensive when a whole bunch of people pile onto you (without, indeed, reading your question) because they think you are getting uppity and derive pleasure from taking other people down a peg. They are all probably right that your script idea was not stolen, etc., but that doesn’t mean their related opinions are worth your time. I guess this guy John is some BSD, and so you forgive him his penny-ante sadism. But please don’t think that it’s okay for someone to talk down to you like that. I hope that, as you smile and take it, you are harboring ill thoughts towards him and his brainless legion of butt-lickers.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:22 am
echem, self-important comment I meant to say.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:23 am
and bring it, John-boy
June 24th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Always an interesting subject – the ideas that idea can be stolen. Of course they can and they are, but I think your idea is stolen and your script isn’t bought, maybe it’s your writing that needs work. Clearly, your ideas are gold.
One more interested story on this front. This was told to my class at USC by someone directly invovled with a very successful talking baby movie. Now, if you’ve ever been around new parents, this is not a new, fresh idea. They add dialogue to their baby ad nauseum, either in baby talk or non-baby talk.
However, when the company was in pre-production for this talking baby movie, an assistant/intern cluelessly accpeted a script on her company’s behalf which involved a talking baby. Even if her company never got around to reading it, there was now proof that a talking baby script was sent to her office before production started, and so the inevitable lawsuit, although far-fetched, actually had teeth. When said talking baby movie became a surprise $100M hit (back when that was impressive), the studio agreed to shoulder the cost of the lawsuit (which ended up being huge) if said the writer-director would do two sequels, which involved more talking babies and talking animals. The studio later settled for an undisclosed sum.
So that is why those producers make you sign those “you promise not to sue me” forms. To prevent more talking baby and talking dog pictures.
An interesting but old article on plagiarism – how to know it when upi see it: http://www.slate.com/id/1785/
June 24th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
John, you wrote “Let me restate your question:”
Why did you think it needed restating? Do you know the questioner’s mind better than she does?
If a reader’s question ever needs to be restated (that’s probably never) try to (a) get it right, and (b) do it without adding that triple measure of cattiness.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Jackie –
Thanks for writing back in. Smart to put up a link to the script, so people can read it for themselves. My hunch is that some agents and managers read this blog, so you’re definitely making lemonade.
In your follow-up to the question, you make it extra clear that you don’t think anything nefarious did happen, but wonder how much would have to be similar before something was Just Not Right.
That’s sort of a “when did you stop beating your wife” question. There’s no way to answer it without implying that intellectual theft is a huge concern for screenwriters, when in my experience it’s not. In fact, the greater danger for aspiring writers is thinking that ideas have great value independent of their execution. That’s the notion I was trying to disabuse you of. Which was apparently preaching the converted, but all I had to go on was your question.
And getting to that: Could Sheryl Crow get mad that they (and you) used her song title? I guess, but there’s a long tradition of being able to refer to things even if you can’t necessarily use the contents. And yet, some movies seem to buy song titles. I don’t know why. I don’t know everything. And I think I’m pretty forthright when something is a question is better suited to some other expert.
This blog is about my experience as a screenwriter. I answer questions, and tell people what I know. That’s why I included my frustrations encountering similar projects along the way. I think I’m generally helpful to most of the readers whose questions I answer. To those whose felt I was insensitive, please get your own blog, answer 500 questions, and leave comments open. I promise I’ll leave a comment on number 501.
Yes, that was a little catty. It’s midnight in Utah.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
It’s midnight in Utah. Sounds like a country song.
June 26th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
I think the answer to Jackie’s fundamental question was beautifully answered by Jonathan Lethem in Harpers a couple months ago.
“The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism”
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387
June 26th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
John, I think your fallacy is an offshoot of the generalization fallacy, because it can only occur under the bad circumstance of an insufficient sample size.
I think what you’re saying is that there’s a type of reasoning where, when faced with two and only two items for comparison, there’s an inability to make comparative judgments based on anything but the qualities of those two items, and so false conclusions about relative similarities and differences are made. In isolation, those similarities seem significant, but in the context of a larger comparison pool, they may appear insignificant.
I can’t find anything on that either, so let’s name it.
How about…The Fallacy Of Limited Comparison?
June 27th, 2007 at 5:20 am
Craig — exactly. Done. I expect residuals.
July 14th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Original ideas?
Every film noir story is basically the same. Same for action, etc., etc.
William Goldman once said what makes a great story? Great characters in great scenes.
And structure, conflict, structure, conflict, etc.
And every writer of any greatness, has either heavily borrowed from the Bible or the Greeks in one way or another.
As far as THE TERMINATOR GOES?
Cameron settled an out of court settlement with sci-fi writer, Harlan Ellison on one of his short stories…which Elliosn claimed THE TERMINATOR script resembled far, far too much.
So, this wacky lady going after Cameron, as well as THE MATRIX bros, is just wacky.
Go back to great characters in great scenes…and just do your own stuff.
MARK11
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:14 am
Plagiarism is a factual question. A college professor decides that you did not write your term paper. And the only people who care about this are college professors.
Copyright infringement is a legal question. It is based on (1) access and (2) substantial similarity. This is from memory of what I studied in law school and the occasional copyright infringement issues that I have addressed in my career (not many). This is not legal advice. But if you find this interesting, Jackie, go to law school and give up script writing. You will spend all day writing and your writing always has an audience.
(1) Jackie alleges access. The fellowship had her script and (I guess) Grey’s Anatomy is on ABC. (2) What we don’t know about is the similarity.
Similar conflicts in a story are unlikely to be enough “taking” (which is how the cases refer to it), but who knows? That French judge’s commentary on Finding Nemo sounds like stupidity to me, -one has teeth, the other doesn’t-. Put teeth in Mickey Mouse’s mouth, sell it and see what happens to you in court.
However, courts can reach wildly different results for unpredictable reasons. You could count on the courts in the District Court in LA to have some of the best copyright decisions in the world because they see more of those decisions, which have a greater impact on the economy in their location than anywhere else in the world. But don’t forget that if those courts were to recklessly find in favor of plaintiffs (wronged writers who employ only themselves) and against defendants (studios that employ millions of people in LA, either directly or indirectly) the effect on local economy could be catastrophic. Studios could unhappily relocate their entire operations to Sao Paulo if the Brazilian judges could be counted-on to see things from a more studio-friendly perspective.
Not that the LA District court is corrupt or improperly influenced by the big players in the city. Those judges just must be very careful to get it exactly right. Which is why on a district court level if I had a strong case, I would want to be in front of an LA judge. If you are a writer with a lousy set of facts, seek a district court in Kansas, ask for a jury and then pretend it is a “David and Golliath” situation. Juries love that stuff.
If you wonder how your lawsuit would do, see a lawyer. You should be able to get a free consultation for about a half an hour, after which s/he would tell you how much it will cost you. If the lawyer offers to take the case on a contingent fee (meaning they only get paid if you win), you have a winner. If you want to know where the lines are drawn between lawful copying(see footnote) and unlawful copying, study the written decisions. They can be found in any law library and law librarians tend to be very eager to help the uninitiated figure out how to do research.
(footnote) If you can show (1) access, but not (2) substantial similarity, they may have “taken” part of your idea, but not enough to be copyright infringment. Consider the quote in the comments about “The Terminator.” That quote is copied directly from the script of the film. Is it plagiarism? I guess so. Is it copyright infringement? I don’t think so.
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Just for the sake of the record, the known-beforehand-destruction-of-earth-by-heavenly-bodies plot goes back at least to 1932, in the novel “When Worlds Collide” by Edwin Balmer and Philip Wylie. As far as screenplays, there was the George Pal film adaptation of this novel from 1951, which won that year’s Academy Award for special effects.
September 6th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
There is only one way to truly know for sure; just ask the writer. Can’t hurt. The scripts that go through the ABC Disney process are read by studio execs and staffers. Could the contest reader have turned around and pitched her story to Grey’s? If the reader was desperate enough, sure.
But John is right; most likely it’s a coinkidink. Imagine all the times you thought of a great story idea, then your favorite show wrote that very same idea. Unless you are wearing your tinfoil hat with the magic antennas chances it’s more likely that many people are coming up with the same idea. Trek is famous for that; they had that board full of hackneyed ideas they were getting over and over in pitches and would tick off how many times each idea was pitched by a baby writer.
Grey’s breaks it’s stories sometimes a year in advance so it’s more likely that they had their idea in place months before she even applied to the contest. But if she’s that certain, heck, sue and find out for sure.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
It seems to me that what you’re calling the “fallacy of limited comparison” is more commonly known simply as “hasty generalization.” A very good reference for rhetorical fallacies is the Nizkor Project’s guide, which is here:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Nizkor’s description:
This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:
-Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P. -Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.
The person committing the fallacy is misusing the following type of reasoning, which is known variously as Inductive Generalization, Generalization, and Statistical Generalization:
-X% of all observed A’s are B’’s. -Therefore X% of all A’s are Bs.
The fallacy is committed when not enough A’s are observed to warrant the conclusion. If enough A’s are observed then the reasoning is not fallacious.
Assuming 100% of A’s are (or have property) B based on a sample size of 1 is the hastiest of such generalizations.
Nizkor, for those who don’t know, is an organization which argues against (not attempts to censor) Holocaust Deniers, so the folks at Nizkor are absolute experts in the study of rhetorical fallacies, and informal rhetorical logic generally.
February 3rd, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I believe the fallacy you are thinking of is the fallacy of inductive logic, as most famously posited by Hume. I think his example was the English believing that swans were all white but only because all English swans were white, while some swans in Australia were (and are) black. Not that the situation is the same. But inductive logic none the less.