NY Times: JK Rowling criticizes fan accused of stealing her work

Oh no, RDR is real. Small, but real. They've been running an internship program with a nearby university for a while now. Now, I'll agree they're shifty characters of dubious moral fiber, but RDR's previously published books are all legit.

 

I think it's funny the guy's working on two other HP-themed books. I wonder how those will be received...

 

He is?

He doesn't learn, does he?

Well greed is a powerful too. I do know that if he is able to publish any HP books I won't buy them.

 

one sentence, not counting this one.

copyright is totally overrated.

 

Heh heh heh, but you can bet LFL is watching this one like a hawk.

Not thrilled to have to say that, either. It just makes it that much harder for those of us who DO want to do things legit and are busting our asses trying to do things legit.

I just think it's sad that this poor dude got taken in by an unscrupulous publisher. Dude-man is actually 50 years of age and should have bethought himself to seek independent legal advice.

*sigh*

Oh, well.

Anyone see where the judge is trying to get them to settle to avoid years of appeals? What does everyone think of that?

 

Best opinion I've read on that front is from internet legal beagle praetorianguard. Her entire commentary on the case is quite good; I highly recommend it.

Easy for you to say, as I doubt you have anything copyrighted. Sure, we want to be able to use our fanworks however we please. But that's not fair to the authors who are responsible for giving us something to be fans of in the first place. It's about respect, not about money. We don't try to sell our fan fiction because without Lucas, we wouldn't have something to write about. If you want to make money at it, come up with your own original ideas.

Best quote I've heard on the subject: "The concept of the death of the author doesn't mean you should be sniping them from a clocktower."

 

Very interesting. I liked the analysis. Thanks, DWH for the link.

 

DWH, if you are familiar with copyright laws, you would know that even if our works are not published, they are copyrighted just because they are written down, anywhere.

In fact, this post is copyrighted. Don't believe me? It would show how much you know.

 

Before you start flinging insults about ignorance, I've actually read up a lot on copyright law since this case began. And online copyright and printed for profit copyright are two different things- you don't profit off your comments on this board, and thus have a different set of standards applied to them, which I'm sure you already know. Print and online publication are not at all comparable.

 

PSA: There is absolutely no reason a discussion of copyrights, of all things, should become personal. Comment on the topic, not the poster.



Copyright has a few different meanings. While both the guy who writes a novel and sticks it in a filing cabinet and the guy who publishes a novel have copyrights, they're different "levels" of copyright.

 

DWH: How do you know I won't print this thread and then hand it in to a psychologist who publishes his thesis using it as a source for his works cited?

FYI they're still overrated, and everything I posts are still copyrighted.

The Face: As for levels of copyrights, they're a man made concept made by money hungry corporations who exploit people who aren't yet in the know.



Face edit: We're done "slinging insults", and we're done talking about them. Keep on the issue.

 

I can definitely back DWH up on this. Their headquarters building is just down the road from my apartment

 

Thanks as well for posting the link to this commentary! It was both entertaining and enlightening. I've heard about this case, seen bits in the news about it, but I haven't been following it too much.

It strongly looks to me like Rowling will win her case and the effect on fanfiction will be minimal, but it's worth looking at.

 

I believe you are right, Ard.

stamned shame.

You think so now, but a precedent is a precedent. Next thing you know JKR will bawling her eyes out saying that she worked centuries to stop people writing fanfic.

Edited.

 

How about we all stay on topic?


I just hope this doesn't really affect fan fiction. Authors don't really want to be going to court about this kind of thing, I wouldn't think. This whole thing sets a bad precident.

 

I've been reading this petty argument... and I'm calling the argument petty, not the persons involved... the post you feel started the insult slinging was not necessarily meant to insult. Let's leave it at this.

Please, just stop this, it's degrading to this whole board.

 

I have the strangest feeling of deja vu. I've asked us to discuss the topic at hand. Not your fellow posters. And not "who started it". If you want to talk about those things, PM a mod. If you want to talk about the case JadeSolo posted, and issues actually related to it, that would be great.

 

Back to copyright- the latest in analysis from praetorianguard- Day Two: Settle, You Crazies!

She makes a point here that I think is very relevant to fandom: RDR can win one of two ways- fair use, or implied license. If they win on fair use, it won't affect fanfic at all. Fanfic is an entirely different argument from a lexicon, and it's an argument no one really wants to make. If they win on implied license, however, we could be in trouble. If the Lexicon can be printed because it was already published online, then it would logically follow that anything published online could be printed for profit. And do I think for a second that copyright holders would let that happen? Ha. Lucas would have his legions of Stormtroopers descending upon websites with C&D letters the next day, I suspect.

I honestly don't think RDR has enough to stand on fair use. One look at the Pie Chart of Fail tells me that (it's Exhibit A). It's the implied license that worries me. I don't think they should be the same thing, but who knows what a judge, or a group of rabid lawyers will say? The outcome will be truly interesting to see.

 

The issue about whether or not posting something online is precedent setting. From the commentary it does not sound like the judge is sympathetic to the defendant, but the ruling could be terribly important to fanfiction.

If posting fanfic online is license to print something for profit, what else is? What about people who role play? They come up with stories. Aren't there SW game books? To play that you have to come up with stories, either on or off-line. What if someone narrates their own SW adventure? What about fanfilms???? Is posting something on YouTube license to make a profit from it? Will any copyright owner be expected to police the internet for offenders or risk losing that copyright? Sure big movie studios and publishers might be able to do that, but the individual artist could never keep up.

If posting things on the internet became a license to publish for profit, this would open up a huge can of worms going far beyond fanfiction.

And thanks again for posting the links, especially for the pie chart. I'd heard about the pie chart, but didn't know where to find it. I strongly think that they'll lose on the fair-use issue.

 

My favorite part of Exhibit A is the "0.68% Facetious remarks".

 

I need an icon with a pie chart that reads something like, "Only 0.67% Facetious."

I read somewhere that once a work (any work, though presumably original novels and the like) was 10% on the web that publishers wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. It's sort of interesting to see the reverse here, copyright issues aside. I wonder if this marks a new view of the publishing industry as a whole or if it's just showing how crackpot RDR is.

 

Ask, and ye shall receive.

 

DWH - keep up with the links. This has been really interesting!

 

What about a derivative work claim? If RDR can prove that enough originality went into the Lexicon, it'll be treated as a separate work (though it seems they'll have a tough time). Think about fanfic and AUs, or even canon fics - how do you define "originality"? I guess it depends on whether or not the SW novels are seen as derivative works.

Myself, I hope the judge rules in favor of Rowling. Expanding freedom of creativity is one thing, but authors can be slaughtered so much more nowadays just by the different forms of media available to people. Like ardavenport said, it's no longer just about a fan profiting of written work, and I hope the judge is considering that.

No doubt it's an honor to a fan that people are willing to pay for his work, but I wonder, are people going to buy the work because they think it's a truly good work, or just because it's a Harry Potter work?

 

Nah. I read a couple of cases where people got book contracts for a novel they'd posted on the web.

Doesn't happen often, but it does happen.