It is true that once a creative work is released, the creator has no control over it :) (exception being if someone miquotes the actual work or uses it for profit without permission)
It is true that once a creative work is released, the creator has no control over it :) (exception being if someone miquotes the actual work or uses it for profit without permission)
There is the finer points of copyright law but when a work is based on mythology it opens the question of ownership. There has always been the special category of oral tradition stories in indigenous cultures that come with the understanding that those stories belong to the people who are part of the living tradition and should not be copied or reused unless one has the permission of the group or group representative.
This does not apply to the stories of тАЬclassicalтАЭ Geek and Roman mythology. However if an artist or author bases a work on Roman mythology such as the story that was the inspiration of Pygmalion and gets published, that exact iteration does have a copyright for the stipulated number of years. But taking the tale from print to a musical and changing the ending, it could be argued, makes it a different entity than the print version, with the implication that using the original story from mythology does not infringe on copyright. Who gets to play the lead role when the work goes from musical to film is up to producers and directors. Every armchair critic has a right to their own opinion on who that should have been.
It is true that once a creative work is released, the creator has no control over it :) (exception being if someone miquotes the actual work or uses it for profit without permission)
There is the finer points of copyright law but when a work is based on mythology it opens the question of ownership. There has always been the special category of oral tradition stories in indigenous cultures that come with the understanding that those stories belong to the people who are part of the living tradition and should not be copied or reused unless one has the permission of the group or group representative.
This does not apply to the stories of тАЬclassicalтАЭ Geek and Roman mythology. However if an artist or author bases a work on Roman mythology such as the story that was the inspiration of Pygmalion and gets published, that exact iteration does have a copyright for the stipulated number of years. But taking the tale from print to a musical and changing the ending, it could be argued, makes it a different entity than the print version, with the implication that using the original story from mythology does not infringe on copyright. Who gets to play the lead role when the work goes from musical to film is up to producers and directors. Every armchair critic has a right to their own opinion on who that should have been.
Interesting stuff here :)