It's a bit strange if people disagree with me for a reason and then don't address the arguments I made in my essay. It makes me feel like you didn't actually read it before commenting. Firstly, I don't care about legal definitions here. This isn't a legal case.
Before I can take this derivative work seriously, you've got to first convince me why that matters.
Why is a story about a pony in equestria less creative than a story about a human in London? Why is an anthropomorphic fox more creative than an anthropomorphic Pokemon? In all the cases you take a setting or creature or whatever and use that to tell a story. What difference does it make if that base comes from the real world or someone else's imagination?
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
It's a bit strange if people disagree with me for a reason and then don't address the arguments I made in my essay. It makes me feel like you didn't actually read it before commenting. Firstly, I don't care about legal definitions here. This isn't a legal case.
Before I can take this derivative work seriously, you've got to first convince me why that matters.
Why is a story about a pony in equestria less creative than a story about a human in London? Why is an anthropomorphic fox more creative than an anthropomorphic Pokemon? In all the cases you take a setting or creature or whatever and use that to tell a story. What difference does it make if that base comes from the real world or someone else's imagination?
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~