![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oldmanatom) wrote2013-03-05 04:07 pm
Response #3 [AO3 meta]
edit 9/19/25: hey, so, given the fact that all my work is on AO3, and also the fact that this was published like...over a decade ago, this is not where i currently stand on AO3 and even the OTW in general. i'm a big believer in the idea of transformative works and the importance of them (and us creators) being able to exist in peace without the threat of legal action hanging over our heads more than it already always is.
the fannish landscape is very different now than it was then, in many ways, and my relationship with fandom and fan works even more so. i think, especially in today's world, it's kind of...wild to think that you can seriously "control" or dictate how fans can and should interact with your work, and that part of releasing that work into the world is coming to terms with the fact that once it's out there, it's out there. you have to let go of the idea that you can still really control the narrative around it, especially in regards to how people react and respond to it. you can try and influence it, but it's not solely in your hands any more. that's one of the points of publicly releasing something to begin with—you want others to experience it.
i suppose there's a conversation about respecting a creator's wishes, which is mostly what i was on about back in the early 2010s when i was taking the stance i took then. but also...if you don't really like fanfiction/fan art/whatever of your work, just let people know you don't want to interact with that content and move on. trying to actively keep people from even creating that stuff in the first place feels like a fool's errand, even putting aside what it says about how you view and respect your fans.
i'm leaving this post public for a variety of reasons, but i did want to make that clear for anyone who might be paging back through this journal's archive. this is a reflection of my views when it was originally written and posted, not now.
###
For those of you just joining us, here's a roughly chronological timeline of the posts with links:
Sachehund's initial post about the OTW, and the follow-up that makes the link between the OTW and AO3. (One link because both posts are on that page.)
My post, outlining why I chose to wipe my AO3 account (and also a response to/echoing of Sachehund's follow-up post).
Anne Apocalypse's call for opinions.
--There are several reblog opinions off of Anne's post that I'd suggest reading to get a broader view of the perspectives of the situation. All the ones I've read have brought up valid points, a lot of which I hadn't thought of.
My response to the responses to Anne's post, which is mostly clarifying my position and directly responding to some of the points brought up.
Sachehund's addition to my post.
meinterrupted's posts. (They were posted on Tumblr and Dreamwidth, but I'm just liking the DW ones for simplification.) The first one is a more general counter post to Sachehund and me, the second one is a response to Sachehund's response to me.
Sachehund's post about meinterrupted's cross-posts to DW and the conversation(s) going on there.
EDIT: myinterrupted's response to Sachehund's post, which I missed.
This post, also a response to meinterrupted.
Cut for length.
(A note: Anything that's italicized or in block quotes (and isn't just a word or two) is a quote. Also, though I make references to Sachehund and where she stands on things and use collective pronouns in a few places, I'm solely speaking for myself and my opinions. I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth. EDIT: Also, I'm going to be coming back and tweaking stuff--phrasing, mostly--so if stuff changes, that's why.)
I'll start this off by saying that I checked out the post you linked to, and while I understand the poster's overall point, I don't get how, exactly, it relates to this specific discussion. Like I said, I'm not against fic as a whole, nor do I think fic is "immoral and illegal," or "just plagiarism," or "for people who are too stupid/lazy/unimaginative to write stories of their own." I wholeheartedly believe the opposite of those things, and based off the large amount of fic Sachehund's posted I'm going to guess she's in the same boat. (I have a problem with the post, though, but it's also mostly unrelated to this discussion. I left it as a note at the bottom of this response.)
Basically: I'm okay with fic existing publically. More than okay, even. But I'm not okay with taking away a creator's legal recourse for dealing with fic if they have a problem with it. Compare this to:
If you, on a personal level, want to respect an author's wishes, I think that's wonderful. But I don't think that, on an organizational/legal level, it should be required.
--and that's where you and I disagree.
I'm uncomfortable with taking away a creator's legal ability to try and take action** against derivative works--like fanfiction--that bother them. (Notice that try.) Why? Yeah, I guess it does stem from the fact that I think it's absolutely rude to say to a creator "I think I have the legal freedom to say I don't care about what you want."* I guess it might also come from the fact that we do fundamentally disagree on whether fic is or isn't transformative and how we view creators' rights. But at the end of the day, I'm not okay with trying to make fic completely legal and impossible to take a legal issue with. (Or completely illegal and similar to some sort of virtually-traded contraband, for that matter.)
And, as far as I can tell, making fic unequivocally legal and stripping the creators of any kind of legal rights to take issue with it is exactly what the OTW wants to do. They don't have nuance or restraints in their stance, at least not where I, some passerby on the internet, can see them. Which is why I've decided to stop associating myself with them. If other people are okay with directly or inadvertently supporting their whitewashing approach to the debate about the legality of fic, fine, but me? Nope.
[EDIT: I'm reading over the OTW's mission statement again, and I'd like to modify this statement. Primarily because I've realized that it's a little too jumping-the-gun. Some quotes:
We envision a future in which all fannish works are recognized as legal and transformative and are accepted as a legitimate creative activity. We are proactive and innovative in protecting and defending our work from commercial exploitation and legal challenge.
And from their goals/accomplishments section: Establishing a legal advocacy project and forming alliances to defend fanworks from legal challenge.
Which I am all good and fine with, so long as that "proactive" is not "we want to go out and change the laws and make it impossible for authors to do anything about fic," similar to my fears/disagreements in the paragraphs just before this edit. Defend your position--yes! I'm okay with this! So long as it doesn't go too far past defense. See my first and second asterisks for a little more detail on this.]
So that's my problem with the OTW. Now about that nuance I keep talking about. I want to make it clear that I'm not all "ra ra go get 'em authors I think you should rule with an iron fist," either. There's dangers in saying one side or the other is right, end of discussion, no exceptions.
One of the issues that's likely to crop up on both sides of that black and white coin is one that Sachehund actually brought up in the very first part of that excerpt you quoted.
I honestly think it’s a good thing that this is continuing to be talked about, but I think some of the responses are missing the point in a big way. I mean no insult, because this has become a more convoluted issue over time.
The problem, is that it’s not talked about. At all. It has been this stupid ‘us vs. them’ paradigm for a long fucking time, and it’s time it stopped.
There is no ‘vs.’
At all.
And, really, why are we trying to split it down so decisively? Why are we trying to make it a fan vs creator thing and make people pick sides when all that's going to do is cause more issues?
Technology's changed from fic's beginnings in the '60s. We've never been so close to creators before, and, likewise, creators have never been so close to us and what we do. Google fic or fanfiction and FFNet is the first result. More creators know about fic, and more creators are probably reading fic, even if they don't say as much, and so of course there's going to be more issues, more creators saying "no, I don't like what they're doing" for whatever reason(s).
(And it's worth asking as to why the status quo of creators/companies officially ignoring fic is in place. I think it's a combination of free advertising, proof of a devoted fanbase to rely on (and quietly monitor to see what trends are popping up to take advantage of), and the fact that the cost far outweighs the benefit, in most cases. But that's more of a discussion for another post.)
But doesn't all this new technology and new ways of interacting with the people that make the stuff we like mean we should reevaluate our view on the issue and make it more nuanced than just "complete freedom for fans" or "complete control for creators"? Shouldn't we update our views to take into account the intricacies that all this new stuff is introducing into the relationships between creators and fans? New technology has been the catalyst for revision of laws before--there's no reason it can't or shouldn't be in this matter. This is not a black and white, right and wrong issue, and treating it like there's no gray area is only going to strain our interactions with the people creating the source material we like. (And I want to make it clear that that's what it looks like the OTW is doing with their "fic is legal and that's just how it is!" approach to this, which is my biggest issue with them.)
I'll repeat what I said in my earlier post: My ideal "solution" to this whole thing would be for there to be some step where troubled creators and fans could talk out their issues before getting into complicated, expensive legal battles. That's entirely possible to make happen. The technology is there to do it. I mean, hell, didn't Obama have some sort of Q&A on Reddit or whatever? (Not that I think Reddit is the ideal place for interaction, but it's an example of how distance can easily be closed through technology.)
Granted, that's assuming everyone would be open and willing to sit down and hear each other out, but the people that just completely do not want fic to exist at all are few and far between. Check out the "copyright holders' attitude towards fan fiction" section of the Wikipedia article on the legal issues with fic if you want proof of that. But having some sort of official forum for creators and fans to talk out their issues and come to some sort of compromise about them seems like it would serve both sides of the relationship well.
This doesn't really deal with the whole "is it legally allowed or not" issue, I know. After all, compromises don't mean anything unless they're actually binding in some way, usually legally...which brings us right back to that argument over fic's legality. But I wanted to bring it up again because I still think it's a better way of handling all this than just picking sides and constantly fighting it out in court. I'm interested to see a more solid, consistent legal precedent set for how legal fic is--which is something that I'm aware is probably not going to happen in the near future, if at all; see the quote in the first asterisk--but I'm more interested in trying to resolve things without having to slap lawsuits on people every single time a problem comes up.
Working with the nuance in the situation instead of ignoring it goes a long way toward that second one, and really, that's what I'd like for the OTW to do. I want them to draw their lines a little darker, really get into the subtle details when taking their stance, or at the very least explain why they aren't doing this. Of course, what I want and what they want/are doing/are going to do different things. But I can hope.
(And I'm going to take a detour and quote one of your comments for a sec:
I saw one of the posts over the weekend, and had to force myself to wait a few days to ensure that my response wasn't just "no nono you are a moron why do you even TALK?!"
Emphasis mine, to make extra clear exactly which part I'm talking about.
That part right there? That's rude. No two ways around it. If that's really how you feel deep down, though, then please and just come right out and say it directly to me. I'd like to handle whatever that is head on.
EDIT: Following my request for all comments on this post to be focused on the arguments and not the people and for people to work out their personal problems elsewhere, I realize I should've addressed this in a more private way. I apologize for that.)
NOTE 1: The issue I have with Aja's post is that it's naturalizing the category of fanfiction across time and space. The category of fanfiction, as we understand it today, didn't exist until the late '60s with the first Star Trek fanzines. Behavior that we, today, would see as writing fanfiction has obviously existed for much longer than that, as the post proves. There's a definite distinction between categories and behavior, and reading our categories back onto situations where they didn't have them is problematic, because it's ignoring whatever social/legal/moral/ethical/etc. perspective the creators and their society had of their work when it was produced. (Of course, some of they examples used were written at a time where the category of fic existed, so I'm not talking about them; I'm talking about anything used as an example that was written before the '50s and '60s.)
I get that the point of the post was mainly to illustrate the fact that fic is not some horrible dirty thing by pointing out all these traditionally acclaimed works that would fall into the modern category of fic. But that method ignores the more intricate historical context a lot of the works have, which weakens the argument for me. Who knows how the work was received when it was contemporary? We don't. We weren't there.
NOTE 2: Someone in the comments on one of meinterrupted's post brought up fanart in relation to this big discussion-type thing. Honestly, I'm really not up-to-date on fanart and how it relates/doesn't relate to this, but I think it's also something worth at least acknowledging, since it's a huge part of fandom culture, as well. I don't have anything particularly intelligent to say about it, though.
*--I think you are conflating "wrong" and "rude." Is it rude to continue to write fanfiction against the express wishes of a creator? Maybe. But it's not illegal, and it's not wrong. OTW understands that, and is willing to back up their views when a creator takes legal action.
So, basically, y'all are firmly standing behind your position, and are willing to invest time and money to defend it. Okay. I don't want to be associated with the OTW, but I'd be interested to see how the legal stuff goes down. So long as they don't try to speak for me, I don't have any reason to police what they want to do with their money, time, and voices.
I'm going to skip the first three sentences. I have a lot to say on the second and third ones in particular, but that's going down a fairly subjective road. The answer to the first question you pose, at least in my case, is "yes, of course it is" for a variety of reasons that I can detail out if you'd really like to hear them. The part I really want to focus on is this sentence: But [fic is] not illegal, and it's not wrong.
Can we back up and just ask the question behind that statement? Which is: Is fic illegal? Because I don't think it's nearly as cut and dry as you're making it out to be. The legality of fic is a very nuanced discussion, and while I'm not an expert in copyright law and how it applies to fanfiction, a quick glance at Wikipedia's page about the legal issues of fanfiction makes it pretty clear that, at the very least, the answer to "is fic legal?" is not completely "yes" or "no."
It's a gray area, and considering the fact that "[f]air use is assessed on a case-by-case basis,"*** there's a very good chance that it's going to remain a gray area for a very long time. So as long as it's unclear (in the copyright law world) as to whether or not creators have the right to take legal action against derivative works that bother them that are produced from their source material, I'm going to stand on the side of "they should be able to." Maybe even after it gets decided, if it ever does.
[EDIT: I'm rereading that last paragraph, and since I don't want to just start drastically ripping things out, I'll revise it here. It's not unclear as to whether or not creators can take legal action against derivative works. They can. I'll refer to that legal issues page on Wikipedia again, because a look at that will reveal that, obviously, they have the ability to do that. What I don't want is for that ability to get taken away. Nor do I want the fic author's ability to protest that C&D order/injunction taken away. See the next asterisk.]
**--Notice it's "take action" or "take issue with," not "blow off the face of the earth whenever they want." Right now, creators and the companies behind them can put out C&D orders, get injunctions, or otherwise go after people if they have a problem. Authors can technically challenge those and go to court to try and fight out whether or not that C&D/injunction is legitimate, if my reading of the Wikipedia article is correct. I know that "technically" doesn't equate to "actually," and that most people wouldn't have the time or money to go to the mat on most of this stuff whereas most creators would have the backing of the company that distributes their work. But I'm fairly sure there's organizations that can and would on behalf of the fan(s), the OTW included, I think. Which is something I support!
I'll say it one last time, just so it's clear to me and everyone else what my position on this whole thing is: People on both side of the fence should be able to fight this fight. Both sides should have the legal right to support and defend their positions. I'd like want some sort of forum for authors and fans to dialogue about it before it gets to the lawsuit stage, but this is my baseline belief. I disagree with anyone that wants to take away either side's rights to do so.
I'm all for seeing how it plays out in the legal arena and getting a wide variety of solid legal precedents available to base legal arguments off of. I don't support the position the OTW's fighting from, but good for them and the people that support them for fighting it. So long as I don't have to be a part of the group that supports them, we're good.
***--Some quotes pulled from that Wikipedia article I linked presented with little commentary, the second of which has that "fair use" quote I put in the first asterisk. (Also, the article's extensively sourced; I just took out the footnote numbers because they don't mean anything without the links, and I didn't feel like going through and linking the dozens of footnotes. If you go and ctrl+f parts of these sentences on the article itself, you'll find everything fairly easily.)
Copyright owners and fic writers:
According to current United States copyright, copyright owners have the exclusive right "to prepare derivative works based upon [their] copyrighted work." A derivative work is any work, including fanfiction based upon one or more preexisting works. In the case where a copyright owner chooses to exercise his/her exclusive right to prepare derivative works against a work of fanfiction, s/he can sue the fanfiction writer for copyright infringement. To prove infringement, an owner must present evidence establishing that the accused has copied protected elements of the original work and the accused work does not constitute fair use.
What counts as "fair use," anyway?:
Fanfiction is not infringing if it constitutes fair use of the underlying copyrighted work. In determining whether a particular use constitutes fair use, courts consider the following four factors:
1. "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."
Fair use is assessed on a case-by-case basis. While such genres as parody and criticism are enumerated by statute and case law as presumptively fair uses of a copyrighted work, fan fiction has not historically been recognized by U.S. courts as necessarily constituting these or other enumerated fair use genres, and thus neither falls categorically inside nor categorically outside the presumptive boundaries of fair use. Works of fanfiction are more likely to constitute fair use if they are “transformative” with respect to the original work, if they are non-commercial, if they appropriate relatively little of the original work, and/or if they do not tend to detract from the potential market for or value of the original work.
About what legally constitutes a transformative work, which I'm aware is different from my current opinon on the matter:
In determining whether Randall's work rose to the level of transformative, Circuit Judge Birch used the guidelines for transformative works laid out in the Supreme Court's Campbell v. Acuff Rose Music. Birch found Randall's work to be transformative because it "[provided] social benefit, by shedding light on an earlier work, and, in the process, creating a new one." Campbell had already established that the greater the transformative value a work held, the less important the other factors in the fair use test became.
Issues with fanfiction with regards to trademark law and "trademark dilution":
Trademark holders may also allege that the use of trademarked characters, settings, etc. may constitute trademark dilution. The concept of trademark dilution is that overuse or improper use of a mark, even when it does not create consumer confusion, can lessen the mark’s uniqueness and value as a source identifier. A dilution claim requires that the mark in question be famous throughout general consuming public and that the use of the mark create a likelihood of either 'blurring' or 'tarnishment.' A likelihood of blurring occurs when the use of the mark creates an association that is likely to impair the distinctiveness of the famous mark; a likelihood of tarnishment occurs when the use of the mark creates an association that is likely to harm the reputation of the famous mark.
Even if a likelihood of confusion or dilution were found, trademark law provides various defenses to alleged infringement. These defenses fall into the categories of "fair use" and "First Amendment." [...]
But fic is less likely to run into issues with trademark law, primarily because violations of trademark law involve things like people confusing the infringing work with the original product.
About the OTW and their position on the legality of everything, plus AO3 stuff:
OTW has since [2007, after some UC Davis law professors wrote about the legality of fic] advocated the legitimacy of fan fiction due its transformative nature. OTW's position is that fan fiction and other fan labor products constitute copyright fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107 because they add "new meaning and messages to the original" work, and thus fall under the exemption to U.S. copyright law the Supreme Court defined in Campbell and which was later revisited and followed in Suntrust. OTW's vision includes seeing 'all fannish works recognized as legal and transformative and ... accepted as a legitimate creative activity.' Toward this end OTW works to educate fan writers and published writers about copyright laws, particularly the open legal questions around fan fiction and other fan works.
OTW also maintains its own fan fiction archive, the Archive of Our Own, commonly called AO3. All fan fiction on the site is recognized as non-profit derivative works. While OTW provides a centralized netspace for fans to acquire knowledge and aid regarding their own creative works, and a voice for the fan community, it does not represent all fans. [OP NOTE: Source for that sentence.] Fans have many different views on the legalities of fan works, from the pure question of whether these works are transformative, to differences in how fans feel fan works should be disseminated.
Then there's a whole big section on creators' views of fic, which mostly confirms that the percentage of people who actively go around trying to ban fic based on their stuff is very small. They have a lot of more modern examples of interactions between creators and fic authors, so I'd suggest giving it at least a skim through, if only for the history and context it gives to the whole thing.
I don't have any specific commentary about these that I want to offer right now. Just wanted to give more context and throw some interesting/relevant quotes out there. Also for your reading pleasure: Wikipedia's page on fair use.
To anyone thinking of commenting on this post: I want any comments to be focused on the arguments presented, not the people involved. Please work out your personal issues with one another somewhere else.
no subject
And yes, when I first saw your and sachehund's posts about this I did say some very rude things to a few close friends and to myself. That is the reason why I waited a few days to reread the posts to see if my reaction was warranted--the feeling was, the vehemence wasn't--and THEN write up my reply. And I did it without attacking anyone personally, or at least, that was my intention. I apologize if you felt personally attacked or offended by anything I've said.
The disconnect we're having seems to be two-fold. One is what I mentioned earlier, the understanding of what the creator/creation relationship is, whether it's a toy or a child. I don't believe that anyone who whole-heartedly understands a creation as a toy that can be "taken away" will ever agree that fanfiction and other transformative works should be protected in all* cases. And those of us who think of it as a child see the works that spring up around it as part of the conversation between creator and audience, even if we don't agree with them.
The other issue is legality. I believe 100% that fanfiction is legal in all* cases, based on my reading and understanding of US copyright law. It is fair use; it is not plagiarism or detrimental to the property. I believe that eventually a case will come up that will clarify that in the court system, and then this discussion will be over. Your understanding of the law is different, and you disagree that fanworks are covered by the fair use doctrine. (Correct me if my reading of your views is wrong.)
That's not to say which one of us is right or wrong--even Supreme Court judges disagree on what is and is not legal under specific laws and based on previous court cases, and God knows, they're better at it than we are (and have hordes of brilliant interns to do research for them). So this conversation can continue until such time as that case comes up before a court, as the OTW does not actively lobby for changes in laws (and neither does any other fan organization I'm aware of). They do file amicus briefs when cases come up that they believe will affect fans, positively or negatively. (They helped get a DMCA exemption for vidders, for example.)
I haven't quite read through everything you've posted, and some of it I already addressed in my latest post (though that was directed specifically at
*When I say "all," I'm excluding cases of obvious and outright plagiarism, or situations where a fan attempts to profit monetarily from their fanworks. That's a whole 'nother kettle of fish and I don't feel qualified to speak to that.
no subject
Re: your first paragraph. As far as I can tell, whatever happened between you and Sachehund is over, insofar as you two have stopped talking to each other (publicly). I'd like to leave it at that, in regards to the personal issues.
To anyone thinking of commenting on this post: I want any comments to be focused on the arguments presented, not the people involved. Please work out your personal problems with one another somewhere else. I don't think it'll be an issue, but I just want to shut that down before anything gets started. (Following that, I realize I should've addressed your particular comment in a more private manner, for which I apologize. I'd edit it out, but people tend to frown on that.)
One [disconnect] is what I mentioned earlier, the understanding of what the creator/creation relationship is, whether it's a toy or a child. I don't believe that anyone who whole-heartedly understands a creation as a toy that can be "taken away" will ever agree that fanfiction and other transformative works should be protected in all* cases.
I'm hesitant to say they should be protected in all cases, yes. I'm hard-pressed to think of a legitimate copyright violation outside of the two situations you mentioned, but I still don't want to just whitewash everything else as completely fair use. I think that stems less from our differing views of the creator/creation relationship and more from my discomfort in making generalities like that.
Obviously we have somewhat differing views on copyright law and how it applies to fic, but the different circumstances and different outcomes of the fic-related cases makes it seem, to me, at least, that saying "all* fic is fair use no question about it" is oversimplifying the matter.
I believe that eventually a case will come up that will clarify that in the court system, and then this discussion will be over. Your understanding of the law is different, and you disagree that fanworks are covered by the fair use doctrine.
I don't entirely disagree that fanworks are fair use. I just want to make sure that they can continue to be challenged as not fair use. Whether or not they're fair use isn't quite as important to me as the question of whether or not they're fair use not getting decided completely one way or the other and closing off any further court-based discussion about it.
(Which, logically, means I hope that first sentence doesn't come true. Honestly, I doubt that there will ever be such a case because of how many different variables there seem to be in fair use cases. A number of cases that establish a precedent for future fair use cases, yeah, that might come around, but not One Magical Case that Forever Defines the Legality of Fic. As you say, "even Supreme Court judges disagree on what is and is not legal under specific laws and based on previous court cases"--and based on the circumstances of the case at hand.)
...the OTW does not actively lobby for changes in laws (and neither does any other fan organization I'm aware of). [...] briar_pipe (who is a tag wrangler at AO3) and I had a discussion about what the AO3 specifically stands for, and she linked this FAQ which is the source of your "does not represent all fans" quote.
Then we're good. I don't know if you caught this post before or after the couple of significant edits I made, but after looking at the OTW's mission statement I realized I was jumping the gun a bit. So long as they're not trying to talk for me and aren't pushing to change the laws--which, apparently, they're not--then we're fine.
As I've been thinking about all this, I've come to the conclusion that my big issue isn't necessarily about whether or not fic is free speech, but protecting everybody's right to try and engage in a legal argument. Whether or not courts decide to hear that argument, based on the results of similar cases, is a different matter. Whether or not precedent already makes a certain case a foregone conclusion is a different matter. People can spend money and time on "pointless" fights if they want. [EDIT: Not that I'm saying you're calling anything pointless. You haven't, as far as I can tell.] I just want it to continue to be an option.
Honestly, I'm not really concerned with which way specific types of lawsuits turn out. Maybe I should be, but in the context of this discussion and what my issues with AO3 are, I'm not. What I'm concerned with is making sure both sides get to present and defend their positions. If a creator thinks a fic is harmful to their work in some way, they should have every right to send a C&D order. And the fan on the other end of that C&D order should have every right to say "no, this is fine," and then the two can go to court and get things settled.
Again, I'm aware that though the fans have the right to challenge legal orders like C&Ds and injunctions, the vast majority don't have the time or money to go to the mat with a big, expensive legal team. But that's where larger organizations--like the OTW--can help out. And I think that's great. That's leveling the playing field and I'm happy to see it.
Honestly, now that I know all this, I'm better with the OTW in general. I still don't want to be associated with them, but now it's not so much because I fundamentally disagree with what they're doing as it is I don't personally agree with their position enough to feel comfortable with posting my fic on AO3. I'm aware that's basically stranding me without any sort of legal help if someone comes along and tells me to take down my stuff and I disagree with their reasons for it, but it's a risk I'm willing to take.
[Edited to fix some typos.]
no subject
I just...don't understand why the OTW is not doing this? Like, the OTW is not the dictator of the world. Being on one side of an argument isn't the same as making the argument impossible to have or "whitewashing" it.
Why are we trying to make it a fan vs creator thing and make people pick sides when all that's going to do is cause more issues?
Definitely the line between creators and fans has blurred - after all, various of the AO3/OTW creators are authors and there are authors writing fic under their own names. But I think the idea that the OTW is "making" it a fan vs creator thing is misguided. They are there in part so that if a fan is sued over their fanworks, that fan will have protection. In that case, it would be *literally* "fan vs creator" and not because of anything the fans did. I really don't see where the OTW is being aggressive against authors or anything; they're defending fans and the right of the reader to interpret and transform as they choose, but that's not the same thing.
no subject
I just...don't understand why the OTW is not doing this? Like, the OTW is not the dictator of the world. Being on one side of an argument isn't the same as making the argument impossible to have or "whitewashing" it.
Going back over my posts and comments, I realized that I was unclear in regards to this point. They aren't making the argument impossible, no--see my next response--and by "whitewashing," what I meant was that I don't think they're seeing any nuance in the "is fic fair use" question. Their answer to "is fic fair use" is "yes, always and absolutely (provided it's not plagiarized and isn't making money)."
Which is a fine stance to take, I'm just not comfortable with the implication it has: Namely, that because fic is always and absolutely fair use (provided it's not plagiarized and isn't making money), authors have no right to ask fic writers to not post their fic. I disagree with that on a personal level; if a creator asks me to not post fic, I won't do it, because I personally think it would be rude to do so anyway. The implication of the OTW's stance is really the big issue I have with the organization, though I haven't made that clear in my posts.
But, of course, my issue with the OTW's stance on C&D orders is just me. I don't expect other people to hold that view, something I've mentioned but maybe not something I've made explicitly clear. I'm not out crusading to get everyone to agree with me on this, and I get why a lot of people wouldn't.
But I think the idea that the OTW is "making" it a fan vs creator thing is misguided. They are there in part so that if a fan is sued over their fanworks, that fan will have protection. In that case, it would be *literally* "fan vs creator" and not because of anything the fans did. I really don't see where the OTW is being aggressive against authors or anything; they're defending fans and the right of the reader to interpret and transform as they choose, but that's not the same thing.
You're absolutely right. I made a mistake, didn't read my sources quite as carefully as I should've, and came to the wrong conclusions. I know now that they're not out trying to start a big "creator vs fan" battle, but are there in a more reactionary position, ready to step in if someone wants to take issue with a C&D order and needs support to do so.
From your other comment:
...Right, you are aware that the OTW isn't trying to make creators a social underclass who are unable to take legal action, right? Human beings can take other people to court whether or not they'll win.
Of course, if they try to do it over stuff that's legal, the case will get thrown out. So you think fanfic should be a little illegal...?
I am aware of that, yes. And no, I don't think fic should be a little illegal. Actually, my point was exactly what you said: Human beings can take other people to court whether or not they'll win. I know the OTW isn't trying to change that. I know that, in fact, they're working to make sure that's a possibility for fans that can't afford to go up against expensive legal teams. And I like that aspect of the organization, I just don't agree with their position.