When does imitation stop being flattery and start to become plagarism?

John Cleese is considering suing a production company which puts on a dinner experience called Faulty Towers. The two weathermen considered plagiarism.

Weatherman  1 : John Cleese is upset. A company has changed Fawlty into Faulty and is making money from a show with Basil and Sybil in it. Some reports suggest it’s a million dollar show.

Weatherman  2 : Not just one show, there’s a few of them touring the world.  I counted at least 3 Basils and 4 Sybils.

 WM 1 : John says they are living off the original show’s success and he isn’t getting any royalties. 

WM 2 : I read that he thought they were hiding behind a euphemism. “Tribute” means “rip-off” he argued.

WM1 : He has a point. But then he and Connie Booth based it on a rude hotelier in Torquay. They developed his character into Fawlty, and Basil borrowed his mannerisms and behaviour.  Can you copyright behaviour?

WM 2 : I hope so. My kid’s bathroom habits really don’t want to seep out under any door.

WM 1 : What about mannerisms?

WM 2 : Imitation is a sign of attraction. We do it subconsciously. If a girl sips her drink, we do too if we fancy her.

WM 1 : I tried that, but she walked out – it was her drink.

WM 2 : You can’t copyright drinking from a glass.

WM 1 : There’s a lot of fancying goes on at my local pub then...everyone is sipping and slurping. 

WM 2 : How can we know when we have an original idea? How do we know we are not plagiarising? Jazz is full of it. “Take it away” and the jazzer’s solos dip into his lexicon of phrases and motifs....99% of which he got by listening to and copying others. And if I write a song with a bossa-nova piano part, can Tom Jobim sue for plagiarism? It’s all a bit blurred;  “in the style of” may be gentle pastiche or theft...depending on your frames of reference.

WM 1 : There’s no accident in the Faulty show.  Its raison d’être is exploitation of the original. But they call it homage and that’s okay according to them.

WM 2 : Authors are always saying  “ I based this character on...” and cite their sources.

WM 1 : You can’t copyright a person.

WM 2 : So if someone lampoons us, when they write it down – it’s theirs. Their idea results in them holding copyright on partly fictitious events and people.

 WM 1 : It’s the same with a location. No copyright on a city, or a beach or a mountain. You can write what you want about it and you own the description.

WM 2 : Fawlty Towers gave birth to caricatures; this is what the argument hinges on.

WM 1 : Imitation may be flattering,  but only if we are  financially compensated too.  Compliments don’t pay the bills.

WM 2 : Neither does litigation – save for the lawyers involved. Someone may get rich from this but it probably won’t be Fawlty or Faulty.