NationStates Jolt Archive

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?

This becomes a serious problem when companies begin to ghost write studies done on their own products.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

It doesn't really bother me...

I know that O.J. Simpson didn't write his book, and I am aware that most celebrities are not writers and not capable of righting their own book, and as they are who primarily use the service I do not care...

And as long as the ghostwriter is fine with not taking any credit, whatever.

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?

This becomes a serious problem when companies begin to ghost write studies done on their own products.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

The novelization of Star Wars was actually written by Alan Dean Foster.
My cousin is a ghostwriter of, of all things, military histories.
Many autobiographies are actually ghosted.

Why does it matter who wrote 99% of stuff as long as the writer's paid?
In the case of product studies, unless something is dangerously wrong with the product, what's the problem so long as it's been thoroughly tested. If not, and someone gets sick or hurt, the company's going to be in a world of pain.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?
Does anyone on the internet truly care about anything?
truly?

My aunt is a fine writer in her own right and a ghostwriter. It pays pretty well, I guess.

Why does it matter who wrote 99% of stuff as long as the writer's paid?
Because it unfairly shows the credited author in a much better light than they deserve. It gives them the illusion of credibility and ability, duping the public into thinking better of them.

Does anyone on the internet truly care about anything?
truly?

Does anybody really know what time it is?
Does anybody really care?
If so I can't imagine why
We've all got time enough to cry.

Because it unfairly shows the credited author in a much better light than they deserve. It gives them the illusion of credibility and ability, duping the public into thinking better of them.

Because people are not willing to plunk down big gobs of cash because a Celebrity's Name is attached to things?

Next you'll be telling me that you actually believe that Britney Spears created the perfume with her name on it herself.

Because people are not willing to plunk down big gobs of cash because a Celebrity's Name is attached to things?

Next you'll be telling me that you actually believe that Britney Spears created the perfume with her name on it herself.

:eek:

But Paris Hilton designed those shoes, didn't she? And she stitches her purses by hand?

It doesn't really bother me...

I know that O.J. Simpson didn't write his book, and I am aware that most celebrities are not writers and not capable of righting their own book, and as they are who primarily use the service I do not care...

And as long as the ghostwriter is fine with not taking any credit, whatever.

It's a free country after all :). Most celebrities are definitely too dumb to write much...Ghostwriting is also a good way for perhaps young authors [young to the profession] to get their "in" and I wish I could find a job for it too.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

Maybe it's because when most people worry about things, they choose actual problems to worry about. Also, 'the Internet', not being a sentient being, but rather a concept, or at best, a collection of mechanical and electronic parts, is incapable of 'caring' about anything, really.

The novelization of Star Wars was actually written by Alan Dean Foster.
My cousin is a ghostwriter of, of all things, military histories.
Many autobiographies are actually ghosted.

Why does it matter who wrote 99% of stuff as long as the writer's paid?
In the case of product studies, unless something is dangerously wrong with the product, what's the problem so long as it's been thoroughly tested. If not, and someone gets sick or hurt, the company's going to be in a world of pain.

re Star Wars...

The Lando Calrisian (sp??) books were written by L Neil Smith...and the Han Solo books by Brian Daley...both expanded the Star Wars universe ...so you can have multiple writers using the same universe so to speak...

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?

This becomes a serious problem when companies begin to ghost write studies done on their own products.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

So politicians have plausible deniability when their racist newsletters come to the surface.

Because it unfairly shows the credited author in a much better light than they deserve. It gives them the illusion of credibility and ability, duping the public into thinking better of them.

Considering how easy it is to find out if something was ghostwritten, it's really the public's fault.

It's a free country after all :). .

And that is the key point. In the US, it is unconstitional to restrict in any way who may write what, where and when.

Even with issues like Libel and Fraud: you cannot ban a category of writing simply because you believe that category is too often abused for fraudulent purposes.

re Star Wars...

The Lando Calrisian (sp??) books were written by L Neil Smith...and the Han Solo books by Brian Daley...both expanded the Star Wars universe ...so you can have multiple writers using the same universe so to speak...

Mosaic and shared-world novels (such as the George R.R. Martin-edited Wild Cards series, one of my favorites) can be excellent. There are some that are ghastly.

Mosaic and shared-world novels (such as the George R.R. Martin-edited Wild Cards series, one of my favorites) can be excellent. There are some that are ghastly.

True...but nothing can be as bad as Gor....

I know...single author but even so....

If both the person who took credit and the person who really did it agree to it then it's usually none of anyone else's business but now that you bring it up I wonder how the details work in some situations...

Can the person who received credit say they wrote the book in resumes and such?

If a ghostwritten book wins the Nobel literature price who receives the price?

Whose death is the life plus 70 years copyright period counted form?

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?
Because if the ghostwriter says "aye, fair enough", anyone's name can be used.
This has always disturbed me
You must have a staggeringly cheery life or something, because this isn't particularly world-shattering.

True...but nothing can be as bad as Gor....

I know...single author but even so....

Ah, you've obviously never read the Eye of Argon.

The novelization of Star Wars was actually written by Alan Dean Foster.
My cousin is a ghostwriter of, of all things, military histories.
Many autobiographies are actually ghosted.

Why does it matter who wrote 99% of stuff as long as the writer's paid?
In the case of product studies, unless something is dangerously wrong with the product, what's the problem so long as it's been thoroughly tested. If not, and someone gets sick or hurt, the company's going to be in a world of pain.
and it's a good thing too. I took at look at the Star Wars story as written by George Lucas himself and it was one convoluted piece of sh*t.

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?

This becomes a serious problem when companies begin to ghost write studies done on their own products.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

im with you. if the real writer is never credited then its wrong. passing off someone else's work as your own (or someone else's) is wrong.

burying the fact that someone else wrote it in the fine print, no problem. as long as it is possible to find out giving credit to a more famous person is a form of advertisement not out and out fraud.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?
This is one of those rare aspects of commercialism I actually approve of. The Ghost writer gets paid well for writing, the public enjoy the book and the celebrity earns a bit more street cred. It's win-win-win.

As for commercial studies, well, if the company has to use their own people to gain external credibility then they haven't done so, right? People are smart enough to know when a study is done by a dodgy research group.

Film by credits should also be illegal. Just on a purely moral level.

Film by credits should also be illegal. Just on a purely moral level.

what are "film by credits"?

:eek:

But Paris Hilton designed those shoes, didn't she? And she stitches her purses by hand?

Paris Hilton hand-stitching her own purses. Now that would be video footage I'd pay to see!

:p

Does anyone on the internet truly care about anything?
truly?

meh

re Star Wars...

The Lando Calrisian (sp??) books were written by L Neil Smith...and the Han Solo books by Brian Daley...both expanded the Star Wars universe ...so you can have multiple writers using the same universe so to speak...

RE: re Star Wars...

It rocks my face off.

Why is it legal for someone other than the person who is credited as the author to write anything?

This becomes a serious problem when companies begin to ghost write studies done on their own products.

This has always disturbed me, but no one seems to care. Does the internet care?

So, pen names should also be banned? Robert Jordan wrote many books, but has never legally existed (the specific author, whose real name is James Oliver Rigney Jr.).

"Robert Jordan" is getting credit for writing books, yet he doesn't exist, why is this situation any different? It seems, in fact quite a bit worse, kind of like identity fraud.

Note: I'm ok with pen names/ghostwriting.

what are "film by credits"?

At the start of the movie, if there's a line saying "a film by A. Person" or something similar then that is an example of the film by credit and a jolly big slap in the face of all the people who worked on the film who aren't that guy.

At the start of the movie, if there's a line saying "a film by A. Person" or something similar then that is an example of the film by credit and a jolly big slap in the face of all the people who worked on the film who aren't that guy.

Never heard of him, what movies has he done? :p

At the start of the movie, if there's a line saying "a film by A. Person" or something similar then that is an example of the film by credit and a jolly big slap in the face of all the people who worked on the film who aren't that guy.

I also almost left the last movie I went to watch cause they spammed us with three minutes of credits in the beginning of the movie. That's a nuisance to the point where I go out, ask for my money back and go home.

Fortunately, I was tired and could do with a bit of rest before the actual movie.

I'd also like to point out that anyone who makes the subtle and witty joke "A film by A. Person" deserves praise. As in, you, and anyone who has the guts to put it into the movie they've directed :p

I don't see anything to be bothered by in it. If the actual author doesn't permit it to be stolen they can have a field day on the thief when they find out. Then again, that's not the topic itself. That just needs to be said for context.

With the author's permission, it really doesn't matter if it's ghostwritten or not. If you care as a reader you can likely find out. As for those actually involved first hand, it's a matter contracted work for an outside entity where you write off any personal ownership to the final product. I'm sure you can find numerous fields where this occurs on a regular basis.

As I hear no complaints about those circumstances as well, I fail to see how wanting a ban that does nothing but put people out of jobs is a good idea for anyone. Anyone who writes in such a manner does so knowing full well how it will play out and still chooses to do so for monetary compensation.

Would I write something and sell the right to take credit for it to someone else? No, not even if they paid me ridiculous sums. However, that is a matter of personal preference. It is generally a harmless practice and is how many people choose to make a living.

Also, it has been a long standing tradition for authors to publish written works under names not their own. Where's the flame over that?

It doesn't really bother me...

I know that O.J. Simpson didn't write his book, and I am aware that most celebrities are not writers and not capable of righting their own book, and as they are who primarily use the service I do not care...

And as long as the ghostwriter is fine with not taking any credit, whatever.


The ghostwriter DOES get credit. Look at any athlete or celebrity autobiography. The cover always says "By (Celebrity X), with (ghostwriter)." The only times that doesn't happen are in the instance of scholarly work where someone is not so much a ghostwiter, but a research assistant or contributing writer. Even in those instances, however, the main author is SUPPOSED to give credits in the ToC or notes. But you can look to Stephen Ambrose for a look at how often that happens.

At the start of the movie, if there's a line saying "a film by A. Person" or something similar then that is an example of the film by credit and a jolly big slap in the face of all the people who worked on the film who aren't that guy.

oh.

i never thought of it that way. it has always seemed to me to be a kind of affectation.

but now that you bring it to my attention i can see why its a bit of an insult to credit one person for making a film when it is in fact the creation of perhaps hundreds of people.

oh.

i never thought of it that way. it has always seemed to me to be a kind of affectation.

but now that you bring it to my attention i can see why its a bit of an insult to credit one person for making a film when it is in fact the creation of perhaps hundreds of people.

The "Film by" could be more reasonably though of as an indication of the style and content of the movie rather than a single person claiming responsibility for the entire thing. A film by Michel Gondry would be very different to a film by Micheal Bay, even if they both used the same crews.

The "Film by" could be more reasonably though of as an indication of the style and content of the movie rather than a single person claiming responsibility for the entire thing. A film by Michel Gondry would be very different to a film by Micheal Bay, even if they both used the same crews.

Yeah, and a film written by Charlie Kaufman is going to be very different to a film written by Neal Purvis even if both are directed by the same guy.

Yeah, and a film written by Charlie Kaufman is going to be very different to a film written by Neal Purvis even if both are directed by the same guy.

Which is what the little "written by" or "screenplay by" thing in the opening credits is for.

Yeah, and a film written by Charlie Kaufman is going to be very different to a film written by Neal Purvis even if both are directed by the same guy.

That's also not exactly true. A film written by Charlie Kauffman will have a much different cadence and lexicon than a film written by Neal Purvis, this is true. But if you hand both of those scripts to the same director, you're going to get two very similar looking movies. Every film is ultimately the completed vision of the Director. Which is why the director gets the "Film by" credit. He assembles the crew, has final say in cast and, if he's renowned enough, he's in charge of final cut. The film is the result of many people working under the director's vision.

This is the same reason why there aren't any "Cinematographer's Cut" edition of DVDs.

The novelization of Star Wars was actually written by Alan Dean Foster.
My cousin is a ghostwriter of, of all things, military histories.
Many autobiographies are actually ghosted.

Why does it matter who wrote 99% of stuff as long as the writer's paid?
In the case of product studies, unless something is dangerously wrong with the product, what's the problem so long as it's been thoroughly tested. If not, and someone gets sick or hurt, the company's going to be in a world of pain.

I was under the impression that the writer doesn't get properly paid. The royalties go to the credited "author," and the real writer just gets a one-time fee.

I can understand ghost writing an autobiography, afterall, most people who are the subjects of auto-biographies aren't professional writers, and most people who read them are aware that, for example, K-Fed didn't really write his own. But ghost writing on academic subjects is just plagiarism and bribery together.

And to make things worse, a writer gets his work on the strength of his old work. If a writer can't take credit for his work, and people looking to hire writers go looking to hire credited writers who can't really write, then it's just a lousy deal for everyone.

That's also not exactly true. A film written by Charlie Kauffman will have a much different cadence and lexicon than a film written by Neal Purvis, this is true.

And, depending on the nature of the film, different characters, a different plot, a different concept, a different pace.

But if you hand both of those scripts to the same director, you're going to get two very similar looking movies.

If one is at sea and the other is on a mountain then I think we're looking at a very limited director.

Every film is ultimately the completed vision of the Director.

Unless he came up with the idea for the film then that vision is limited.

Which is what the little "written by" or "screenplay by" thing in the opening credits is for.

Sure, because they wrote it. And the guy who directed it gets his own "directed by" credit. That's fair.

And, depending on the nature of the film, different characters, a different plot, a different concept, a different pace.



If one is at sea and the other is on a mountain then I think we're looking at a very limited director.



Unless he came up with the idea for the film then that vision is limited.



Sure, because they wrote it. And the guy who directed it gets his own "directed by" credit. That's fair.


Really? We're going to do this? Ok then. When I wrote my reply, I was taking it as a given that we were talking about similar screenplays from different writers. But yes, if you have two guys writing about two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things, then you'll have two completely different movies. Know when else you'll get that? When the SAME guy writes about two completely different things. Funny, that.

And as for the "very limited director" portion of your reply, I think that either you're being deliberately obtuse, or you haven't seen many movies. Tim Burton has only made one movie involving men with hardware for hands, but I know a Burton movie when I see one.

Really? We're going to do this? Ok then. When I wrote my reply, I was taking it as a given that we were talking about similar screenplays from different writers. But yes, if you have two guys writing about two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things, then you'll have two completely different movies. Know when else you'll get that? When the SAME guy writes about two completely different things. Funny, that.

But why on earth would two writers just happen to write the same thing? It's about as sensible a presumption as thinking that two directors will direct a film in the same way.

And as for the "very limited director" portion of your reply, I think that either you're being deliberately obtuse, or you haven't seen many movies. Tim Burton has only made one movie involving men with hardware for hands, but I know a Burton movie when I see one.

So do I. But I don't agree that Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Edward Scissorhands look the same - they simply share a similar style. And of course, Burton is one of the foremost examples of this - most directors have a more flexible style.

And of course something like Play it Again Sam is billed as a film by Herbert Ross but it would be impossible to argue that Woody Allen's contribution isn't more important.

But why on earth would two writers just happen to write the same thing? It's about as sensible a presumption as thinking that two directors will direct a film in the same way.



So do I. But I don't agree that Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Edward Scissorhands look the same - they simply share a similar style. And of course, Burton is one of the foremost examples of this - most directors have a more flexible style.

And of course something like Play it Again Sam is billed as a film by Herbert Ross but it would be impossible to argue that Woody Allen's contribution isn't more important.

The other thing you're not taking into account in the "film by" credit is that the director--apart from the rest of the crew--has a hand in every aspect of the film.

Re-writes happen on his say so. The DP films what the director tells him to, and that scene is lit the way the director wants. Actors are cast and released at his whim. This is why, while there are many contributors, the film is "by" the director.

It's the same with any compilation book you read. Who's name is listed on the spine? Each and every author who contributed? No, it's the editor. The book is "by" the guy who collected, edited and arranged the individual pieces together into the narrative he wanted, even if he didn't write a single word.

The other thing you're not taking into account in the "film by" credit is that the director--apart from the rest of the crew--has a hand in every aspect of the film.

He does. That's what directing entails. It doesn't mean he is the author which is the implication of the filmy by credit.

Re-writes happen on his say so. The DP films what the director tells him to, and that scene is lit the way the director wants. Actors are cast and released at his whim.

There can be interference from others but that's just quibbling. You're right, but that doesn't lead to your conclusion that:

This is why, while there are many contributors, the film is "by" the director.

It's the same with any compilation book you read. Who's name is listed on the spine? Each and every author who contributed? No, it's the editor. The book is "by" the guy who collected, edited and arranged the individual pieces together into the narrative he wanted, even if he didn't write a single word.

But in film the individual contributors are listed and the director gets top billing. Anything above that is simply vanity at the expense of others.

Btw, your post wasn't a reply to my response.

He does. That's what directing entails. It doesn't mean he is the author which is the implication of the filmy by credit.

No, that's the implication of the "written by" credit.



There can be interference from others but that's just quibbling. You're right, but that doesn't lead to your conclusion that:

"This is why, while there are many contributors, the film is "by" the director."

Actually, yes it does.


But in film the individual contributors are listed and the director gets top billing. Anything above that is simply vanity at the expense of others.

When filming The Towering Inferno, Steve McQueen and Paul Newman engaged in heated battle with Irwin Allen's production team over which actor should get top billing on the promotional materials. To reach a compromise, McQueen was given first typed billing, but Newman's photo was placed a half an inch higher. You're surprised and affronted that actors and filmmakers are vain? Now your argument is crossing over from "what should be allowable" to "what is absolutely necessary." It's not necessary for it to be "Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey", but it's true.

No, that's the implication of the "written by" credit.

The writer isn't the author of the film. He or she is a co-author.

When filming The Towering Inferno, Steve McQueen and Paul Newman engaged in heated battle with Irwin Allen's production team over which actor should get top billing on the promotional materials. To reach a compromise, McQueen was given first typed billing, but Newman's photo was placed a half an inch higher. You're surprised and affronted that actors and filmmakers are vain?

Not at all. The film by credit is actually embedded in the DGA agreement. It's just insulting to those who also make films.

It's not necessary for it to be "Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey", but it's true.

It may be true, but it's not right.

He does. That's what directing entails. It doesn't mean he is the author which is the implication of the filmy by credit.
.

if he writes the screenplay and directs do you think a "film by" credit is appropriate?

if he writes the screenplay and directs do you think a "film by" credit is appropriate?

I'm more sympathetic to that, but I'd still agree with Craig Mazin's stance:

Had a great first day, and a friend suggested that I briefly mention whether or not I’m taking a “film by” credit on the movie.

After all, I’m not just the director, but the writer too. So c’mon, written and directed by the same guy? I’m the auteur dammit! So I should take the possessory credit, right?

Wrong.

I’m taking a directing credit and a writing credit. But the film is by all of us. Me, the DP, the editor, the grips, the costume designers, hair, makeup, craft services……everyone. I’d be nowhere without the crew. I’m part of the crew. We’re a team. No us…no movie.

Of course, this opinion isn’t too popular among the DGA folks. And I just joined the DGA.

I'm more sympathetic to that, but I'd still agree with Craig Mazin's stance:

im glad to see you say that. film is very much a collaboration that can be improved or ruined by quite a few key players.

im glad to see you say that. film is very much a collaboration that can be improved or ruined by quite a few key players.

Collaboration is the key word but it is particularly the wild over emphasis on the director that is objectionable. That's been responsible for thousands upon thousands of lousy movies.

re Star Wars...

The Lando Calrisian (sp??) books were written by L Neil Smith...and the Han Solo books by Brian Daley...both expanded the Star Wars universe ...so you can have multiple writers using the same universe so to speak...

Holy cow, do you have all six of those too? :D
I just finished reading Han Solo at Star's End again recently... inspiration's my specialty. ;)

Mosaic and shared-world novels (such as the George R.R. Martin-edited Wild Cards series, one of my favorites) can be excellent. There are some that are ghastly.

Whatever you do, if you come across Ghost Ship, which was the first of the "Star Trek the Next Generation" original novels, RUN. The first chapter, which does NOT have anything to do with the Star Trek characters, is interesting. The moment the franchise pops up, a suckfest of epic proportions ensues.

True...but nothing can be as bad as Gor....

I know...single author but even so....

Oh please, doesn't every girl fantasize about being a sex slave? ;)

I was under the impression that the writer doesn't get properly paid. The royalties go to the credited "author," and the real writer just gets a one-time fee.

I can understand ghost writing an autobiography, afterall, most people who are the subjects of auto-biographies aren't professional writers, and most people who read them are aware that, for example, K-Fed didn't really write his own. But ghost writing on academic subjects is just plagiarism and bribery together.

And to make things worse, a writer gets his work on the strength of his old work. If a writer can't take credit for his work, and people looking to hire writers go looking to hire credited writers who can't really write, then it's just a lousy deal for everyone.

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/f/alan-dean-foster/

Well, Foster is openly credited with Star Wars...
http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=ghostwriting+contracts

Holy cow, do you have all six of those too? :D
I just finished reading Han Solo at Star's End again recently... inspiration's my specialty. ;)

LOL yeah afraid so...I much prefer the Han Solo ones...I also have Splinter of the Minds Eye. I just googled it as I had forgotten the full title I noticed that there are quite a few Star Wards themed books.

Inspiration is good...hence I read lots of Michael Moorcock LOL

Oh please, doesn't every girl fantasize about being a sex slave? ;)

LOLOL!!!! I hate to say it but I read about the first ten books...

/shame

Celebrity is the catalogue of merit. There is simply too much media of all sorts for any reader to judge it all on merit.

Bad thing is, the catalogue is compiled by idiots, the general population!

As the OP notes, it's often autobiographies which are ghosted. A really interesting character will sell anyway, even with someone else's name as co-writer, and proper credit helps the discerning reader tell if this is a good or bad collaboration. It often comes down to the research skills of the ghost-writer, their ability to get under the big name's skin, get good material, and write sympathetically with their ... er, co-author.