"What's Stupid About It?"

I got this email today:

"Fan fic writers have no deadlines, networks/producers/actors to please, and often have a better grasp on the characters and their history than the tv writers usually because We Are more Emotionally attached."

You said that comment is stupid. I don't get it.  What's stupid about it?

Okay, the email is probably a fake, but I'll treat it like it's not.  I create the characters and the world they live in. I figure out the relationships, what they do, and why they do it. And then I come up with every single thing that happens next.  I also hire the actors,  the directors, the writers,  the set designers, the costume designers, the composer etc. etc.... and they all are charged with interpreting my vision of the  show as I see it. We all spend every waking hour making the show (and even non-waking hours...my dreams are often filled with scenes and characters from the show I've spent all day working on).

And somebody who merely watches the show says he has a better grasp on the characters and their history than I do? That he's  more emotionally involved in the series than I am? The guy who created the characters, who came up with every single thing they have ever said or done or experienced?

Okay, let's say I'm not the creator. I'm a hired gun, one of the writer/producers. I am working hand-in-hand with the showrunner to articulate his or her creative vision of their show. All I do every day is live with those characters, whether I'm writing a script of my own, rewriting someone else's script, plotting a story, editing an episode, prepping an episode with a director, or discussing character with one of the actors. I am as emotionally involved as it's possible to be. The show is all that I do and all I am thinking about for most of the working day...and, because I am a writer, I can't stop thinking about it once I go home, either (even if I don't have a script or story to write/work on every night).

And somebody who watches the show thinks he's more involved than that? Knows more about the  characters than I do?

That's why it's a stupid comment.

...but I can see how the fanficcer's emotional involvement with a show is very different than the one that I have as a TV writer/producer. A TV show is something I write, something I do, it's not my world, it's not my religion, it's not who I am and my reason for breathing. It's not my obsession.  I don't dress like the characters, wallpaper my house with their pictures, or fantasize about having sex with them.  Whe the show is cancelled (or I leave it for whatever reason), I stop thinking about the characters and their "lives." I move on creatively and emotionally to something else. There are viewers who are incapable of doing that...who become so emotionally attached to fictional characters and an imaginary world that they can't ever let go. And in that sense, yeah, a fanficcer is more emotionally attached than I am.  Frighteningly so.

Comments

[Holly Lisle]

No matter how hard you fight to make them understand this, fanfic writers won't. Anyone who suggests that creators have a legal right to maintain the integrity of their own work, anyone who hints that the author's vision is the definitive one -- anyone who suggests anything, if fact, that would interfere with fanfic writers doing what they want to do, which is spray graffiti all over the author's vision and while calling it art, will be met by the derision, contempt, and hatred of fanfic writers everywhere.

Fanfic is to writing what "Piss Christ" was to art. Though mostly without the sacrilege.

But knowing that is true, stating it's true, even getting a cease-and-desist order upholding the legality of that truth, won't change anything.

Sadly.

[Jocelyn]

There's no doubt that the original author's vision is the definitive one. But what many opponents of fanfiction refuse to acknowledge is that their rights concerning their work and their ideas aren't absolute.

An author does not have total control over their ideas, no matter how brilliant or unique. They have control over the profits made off their ideas, but not discussion/commentary/criticism/parody. And, arguably, not fanfic.

The issue won't be resolved solidly until a court or a legislature nails it down.

[Holly Lisle]

Spoken like a typical graffiti artist busy defacing someone else's work. Best of luck with those screenplays, Jocelyn.

[Richard]

Actually, by the minor affairs of our constitution and laws authors do have a right to their chartacters and the mileau's they create.

So a fanfic writer wants to take the characters off into an area the copyright holder finds offensive. The Copyright holder has no rights to this?

A Trekkie wants to write an episode were Spock molests young Tribbles? That is fine, because it is the right of the fanfic writer? Sheer giberish.

Lee and other have noted, Fanfic is the lair of the emotionally riven in which no law or argument against their silliness can ever be accepted.

[Jocelyn]

I'm working on one of my novels first, actually, Holly. Once I've finished my fanfiction before its deadline, that is. ;-)

And again, if you have any evidence beyond your own opinion to justify your assessment of fanfiction as "grafitti," please feel free to present it either here or over on my blog.

[Jocelyn]

So a fanfic writer wants to take the characters off into an area the copyright holder finds offensive. The Copyright holder has no rights to this?

A Trekkie wants to write an episode were Spock molests young Tribbles? That is fine, because it is the right of the fanfic writer? Sheer giberish.

Lee and other have noted, Fanfic is the lair of the emotionally riven in which no law or argument against their silliness can ever be accepted.

Actually, Richard, fanfic is a new and relatively obscure area of expression that the lawmakers and interpreters haven't quite figured out what to do with yet.

The issues surrounding use of a copyrighted work is whether the use actually affects the original work.

That's the difference between Intellectual Property and Real Property: if I "use" your car, you can't use it at the same time. But if I "use" your idea, you can still do just as much with the idea (ie, my writing fanfiction won't stop you from writing new novels with your own material, etc.)

Copyright Law is intended to make sure that the owner's right to use their ideas isn't damaged. That's where "fair use" comes into play: fair uses are the situations where a person may use another person's copyrighted work, but the use has no impact on the owner's ability to keep on using what they own (ie, libraries, criticism, parody, etc.)

How fanfiction fits into this, whether it has a real impact on the copyright owner's ability to enjoy their rights to their material, is the subject of much debate.

This isn't delusional fanfiction fanatic rambling--it's legal academia. Until the courts or the legislature make up their minds, all we can do is debate.

[JDRhoades]

That's the difference between Intellectual Property and Real Property: if I "use" your car, you can't use it at the same time. But if I "use" your idea, you can still do just as much with the idea (ie, my writing fanfiction won't stop you from writing new novels with your own material, etc.)

I think I said this in the prior thread.

You will be hearing from my lawyers, Madam.

;-)

even getting a cease-and-desist order upholding the legality of that truth, won't change anything.

And wouldn't it be kind of like swatting gnats with a 105MM cannon?

Educate me, folks. I am, after all, only an egg. Is any professional writer losing money or even readers from fanfic? Is there any tangible damage here?

[Holly Lisle]

Lee, in case you're interested, here's a fairly lengthly piece on fanfic that includes commentary on derivative works verus fair usage. Defining fanfic as "derivative works" appears to have the stronger hand; with luck it will end up being the only hand as a body of cases build up.

And Jocelyn, no. While its interesting that you encourage copyright owners to look at your footing as equal to their own, and mention fair usage but conveniently forget derivative works, authors of original works can in fact do considerably more than debate. They can also sue.

[claire]

You and I have gone around the block on this already, Jocelyn. Fanfiction is hardly new. It's been around for decades. The exposures it gets today and the audience it reaches because of the internet is relatively new. The argument always comes back to one of ethics:

1) Should it be done at all, after all you don't own it.
2) Who is harmed?

Go to the question of adults writing dodgy material in a children's universe...what is done to authors of children's material which is abused by the fans who claim to respect it? Does my singular opinion regarding Rowling's failure to put a clamp on the pornography written in a universe she describes as a children's story important?

Probably not. But what about many parents who understand their kid can't google Harry Potter the same way they can google Judy Blume? What about parents who begin to understand that what JKR says and what she does are two different things and pull their kids back from what was once a fun experience? Now the author's reputation is hurt and perhaps there are financial losses.

How hard will Ms. Rowling cry? I can't answer, I'm not her. Personally, if I wrote a series for children and saw people use it the way that series is used I'd be devastated to think that my intended audience is being pointed away. I'm willing to bet C.S. Lewis would think the same about his Narnia collection.

No matter what the hairsplitting legal definitions are regarding copyright infringement, harmful to minors, etc., the question of 'Is it right?' should be paramount.

[Jocelyn]

No matter what the hairsplitting legal definitions are regarding copyright infringement, harmful to minors, etc., the question of 'Is it right?' should be paramount.

But again, you keep bringing up the issue of kiddie pornfic as a means of condemning all fanfiction, which is about as logical as banning the Internet because of kiddie porn websites.

The question of "harm" is indeed paramount, but copyright "harms" and criminal "harms" are two different areas of law. I'm not saying both can't be applied--they can. If JK Rowling or the Lewis Estate or anybody wants to go after kiddie pornfic writers, more power to 'em. What's more, they can bring criminal charges against people who write legally obscene material, and possibly claim a "harm" to their market by that token.

But in general, Claire, the courts and the laws have tried to define what's "right" for centuries, and still haven't succeeded to anyone's satisfaction.

[Holly Lisle]

JDRhodes -- Yes. Authors ARE getting hurt by it. So are readers. Marion Zimmer Bradley had to withdraw publication of a book because some fanfic writer claimed her novel infringed on his fanfic of her work.

A fan used Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's character, St. Germaine, without her permission in a fanzine story; Yarbro had to sue in order to protect her trademarked rights to that character, and the fan and fanzine had to print retractions in a number of issues of Publisher's Weekly. Cost her money, cost the magazine money, cost the fan money.

Any time an author's ability to publish his own work in his own world is damaged, the writer is damaged. While there are other cases (Sylvester Stallone, TSR, etc.), these two are fairly well known.

[Jocelyn]

On the Marion Zimmer Bradley and Yarbro cases, there you are opening up a different can of worms: whether a fanfiction writer possesses any ownership rights to his/her ideas expressed in fanfiction.

Although I haven't researched this as much as the right to write fanfic, the answer is most likely no, if the Prince ankh guitar case is any indication. (Fan made special guitar based on Prince's symbol, Prince saw it and made one too, fan sued and lost, because Prince retained right to make derivative works on his own symbol.)

As for trademark, that's a different area of law than copyright, and the standards for an author to possess a trademark in their characters are very different. There are more requirements to actually have a trademark than a copyright; for a trademark, the author has considerably more hoops to jump through in registration before they can legally defend it. But if that's what Yarbro had done prior to the fan using the character, then there was probably standing to sue.

However, fear of a frivolous lawsuit doesn't constitute "harm" in a legal sense.

[JDRhoades]

JDRhodes -- Yes. Authors ARE getting hurt by it. So are readers. Marion Zimmer Bradley had to withdraw publication of a book because some fanfic writer claimed her novel infringed on his fanfic of her work.

I must confess, I am more than a little gobsmacked by this...why did she "have to withdraw" it? The claim was clearly bogus. If MZB's publisher was too cowardly to defend it, that's a problem, but not one caused by fanfic.

Hey, does this mean I can write a Da Vinci Code fanfic and threaten to sue the publisher and get the book pulled off every shelf in the country? Man, that would rule.

A fan used Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's character, St. Germaine, without her permission in a fanzine story; Yarbro had to sue in order to protect her trademarked rights to that character, and the fan and fanzine had to print retractions in a number of issues of Publisher's Weekly. Cost her money, cost the magazine money, cost the fan money.

Well, let's not shed any tears for the fan and fanzine. And protection of trademark is an angle I hadn't considered. Is a character actually a trademark, though? That seems to be stretching the definition a bit far.

[Jocelyn]

JDRhoades: Is a character actually a trademark, though? That seems to be stretching the definition a bit far.

Theoretically, you can get a trademark for a character or some other unique element of a story. (Ie, Harry Potter, Hogwarts, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or other well-identified, well-known story characters/elements could probably get it)

But the standards for registering such a trademark are tighter (don't know exactly what they are, but I believe there's more proof/time/money involved) and proving a trademark infringement without a registration is next to impossible, from what I know (and I admit my knowledge of this area is limited.)

However, if Yarbro had successfully obtained trademark in St. Germaine, she could theoretically bring a successful action against a fanwriter. And, apparently, she did.

Hey, does this mean I can write a Da Vinci Code fanfic and threaten to sue the publisher and get the book pulled off every shelf in the country? Man, that would rule.

HA! Sorry, love, copyright damages don't work that way, even if you (as Lewis Perdue is currently alleging) had been plagiarized by the author of the "Da Vinci Code." You can only get back copies of an infringing book that haven't been sold yet--you can't take the copies that are already in stores or on people's/library shelves.

That's an issue I just dredged into at my job.

[claire]

The question of whether or not money is made on fanfiction is interesting. In general, not in the traditional sense, though one distributor of unlicensed material which I pointed out in a previous comment somewhere in a previous thread has made money off it. It's also recently received C & D's from various owners of properties they were selling. Did a lot of whining about it also.

These kinds of operations operate 'under the radar'.

The other ways people profit by it are real, and not much less tangible. The phenomena of fandom and fanfiction itself is an academic discipline taught in our universities. Professor's write papers on it, build their resume's, give lectures and teach classes in it. Presuming they draw a paycheck, the correlation between their desire to legitimize the work and their livelihoods and reputations is obvious. There are plenty of J.D.'s out there building reputations dismantling artists' rights and defending the much beleaguered ficcer's when those artists do, *gasp* take exception to improper use of their work.

A little googling will bring the interested person to organizations dedicated to these endeavors. They'll find they've support and space from educational institutions to pursue them.
**
Jocelyn, I don't use the kiddie porn issue to condemn all fanfiction in general. I told you that. It's the natural progression for something like this. When the porn becomes the subject of academic interest, legitimitized in pseudo-intellectual discussion groups or calls for academic papers, it traverses a line that's disturbing to consider. The fandom community's silence on the subject is appalling and suggests complicity and agreement. Their support of the porn is doubly appalling. 'Experts' speaking out both sides of their mouths on the topic is triply appalling.

Regarding the writing of fanfiction...if people kept it in private little groups, understand it for what it is - use of somebody's else's creation - kept it quiet, kept it respectful, don't work hard to separate the artist from his rights, splash it all over the internet, swarm like locusts when somebody speaks up against it, declare the artist has no right to object...I don't care. Betcha most people here wouldn't care either. Know why? They wouldn't know about it. Nobody would.

[JDRhoades]

HA! Sorry, love, copyright damages don't work that way, even if you (as Lewis Perdue is currently alleging) had been plagiarized by the author of the "Da Vinci Code."

Another dream shattered. Ah, well, back to work.

[Harry]

I must confess, I am more than a little gobsmacked by this...why did she "have to withdraw" it? The claim was clearly bogus. If MZB's publisher was too cowardly to defend it, that's a problem, but not one caused by fanfic.

"Cowardice" has nothing to do with it, and I find it strange that you'd even use the word in this context.

It's more likely that they expected court costs would be larger than the profits from the novel. Lawyers cost more than books earn, usually.

But the standards for registering such a trademark are tighter...

Not only that, but a trademark holder is required to defend that trademark, or lose it. "Aspirin" and "trampoline" are examples of trademarked terms that were not defended and entered the public realm.

If Ms. Yarbro had not sued or threatened to sue, she might have lost her right to the trademark.

[Jocelyn]

Not only that, but a trademark holder is required to defend that trademark, or lose it. "Aspirin" and "trampoline" are examples of trademarked terms that were not defended and entered the public realm.

If Ms. Yarbro had not sued or threatened to sue, she might have lost her right to the trademark.

Aha! And there we have it! Thankee, Harry!

I know Frisbees are one example of a trademarked name that is still defended very vigorously (looking around nervously expecting to be served). You have to use the phrase "flying disk" to refer to anything that isn't a toy actually made by the Frisbee manufacturers. They nailed a newspaper for referring to a Frisbee festival in a park that hadn't actually used their "flying disks".

Fascinating area of law, trademarks. I'm taking a class on it next year.

[Dean]

Forgive me if I'm half-informed here, but as I understand it, copyright law attempts to preserve a creative person's exclusive right to profit from his/her work.

As I understand it, it's ok to create derivative works (after all, nobody can stop me from writing about Harry Potter), it's just not ok to sell them. Where things get confusing is when someone wants to publish them. Is uploading something to a fanfic board 'publishing'?

As I said when Tod brought this subject up, my personal opinions on this are mixed. On one hand, Lee's absolutely right: the notion that a fanfic author has more invested in a creation than the original author is just stupid. I've spent years coming up with my characters and the worlds they live in.

On the other hand, if (when!) I am ever a published author, and (god willing) I am plagued with fanfic, I intend to look the other way, for two reasons:

1. There's no such thing as bad publicity.
2. 99% of the fanfic I've read has been utterly awful. Terrible, wretched dreck. It's no threat to any competent author. Hell, even good fanfic isn't a threat.

I suppose that the legal argument is whether or not fanfic is 'fair use'.

[Jocelyn]

Where things get confusing is when someone wants to publish them. Is uploading something to a fanfic board 'publishing'?

That's one of the many questions relating to fanfic that the legal minds are debating. Is posting on the internet "publishing" or is it "distributing" or both or neither? New technology makes old laws very complicated.

The legal questions about copyright infringement generally concern two things:

1) Is the alleged infringer profiting from the use of the copyright owner's work?

2) Is the alleged infringement affecting the copyright owner's ability to profit from their own work (ergo, affecting the market)?

[JDRhoades]

"Cowardice" has nothing to do with it, and I find it strange that you'd even use the word in this context.

It's more likely that they expected court costs would be larger than the profits from the novel. Lawyers cost more than books earn, usually.

But the precedent set is terrible, and worth a lot of money to defend, I'd think. MZB isn't their only author, and if some kid writing fanfic can scuttle publication by making a claim that is, again, clearly bogus, then the publisher is held hostage to the fanfic community.

Rather than "cowardly", how about substituting "horribly short-sighted"?

[Holly Lisle]

How fanfic is like graffiti (for Jocelyn):

Graffiti is a form of vandalism, which is: The malicious and deliberate defacement or destruction of someone else's property.

Writers of fanfic don't own the worlds they write in, or the characters they write about. They are using other people's property.

When they put words into the characters' mouths that the author did not put there, when they completely alter a character in some crucial way -- for example, decide that a character the author created as heterosexual should be homosexual (to use the common fanfic slash scenario), or put the characters into situations that the author did not put them in, they are defacing the author's work.

Fanfic isn't discussion/commentary/criticism. Neither is it parody. It doesn't lampoon the author's work; it simply rewrites the author's work in ways the author did not approve. It is derivative of the author's work. It would not exist without it, and its existence damages the author's rights to his work.

So whether you're writing Potter/Dumbledore pornfic or something you think has a bit of quality to it, Jocelyn, you're still defacing characters and worlds that don't belong to you.

[Dean]

So whether you're writing Potter/Dumbledore pornfic or something you think has a bit of quality to it, Jocelyn, you're still defacing characters and worlds that don't belong to you.

I disagree. Not that I'm defending Potter/Dumbeldore pornfic (ewwww!), but from what I understand copyright law does not grant you ownership of ideas. It grants you the exclusive right to profit from your creation.

Your interpretation strays dangerously close to declaring fanfic to be thought crime, in my admittedly nonlawyerly opinion. Where would you draw the line? Are fans allowed to speculate about characters? Offer opinions?

Look, as I've said, I have mixed opinions on this, as I suppose the law does, and that's why this discussion is happening. On one hand, I understand that you don't want people messing with your characters. I've created some of my own, and I know the work and love that goes into them.

On the other hand, I have real trouble with the notion that some kinds of thought are subject to control. Profits, sure. Thoughts? It bothers me.

[Jocelyn]

Graffiti is a form of vandalism, which is: The malicious and deliberate defacement or destruction of someone else's property.

When they put words into the characters' mouths that the author did not put there, when they completely alter a character in some crucial way

No, they don't. That's the whole point of intellectual property: when I write fanfiction based on Harry Potter, the words on the pages of JK Rowling's books do not change.

To "deface" implies to "damage," and fanfiction does not do that.

That's the reason we've been discussing the possession of "ideas." An author does not own the IDEA, just the expression of it.

The argument surrounding fair use and fanfic comes from the fact that I could write slashfic about your characters until I was blue in the face (which I never would, but just for the sake of argument) and that would not in any way impact YOUR ability to continue to write your stories, sell your books, sell movie rights, etc.

An author can say, "Ew!" all they want, but that doesn't create a legal right to stop fanfiction any more than it does to stop crude reviews of someone's book or parodies.

[kete]

I've no idea how anyone can actually trademark a character named St.Germain, btw, as the Comte de St.Germain was a historical figure.

Soon we will have some half-educated American writer holding the trademark for Friedrich Barbarossa.

O tempora....

kete

[Gomez]

I don't read fan fiction, and the vast majority of our culture does not, and it's not likely that any writers will make a bazillion dollars writing fan fiction, nor change the landscape of the show or movie or franchise or novel upon which it is based.

Thus, and forgive me if I'm being far too dense, I don't see what the big deal is. If Lee doesn't like it and wants to vent his opinion on his blog, fine, everyone go back to their caves and quit bugging him. If it makes the fanfic writers feel good to write and share, then fine, and what does it matter if someone doesn't like it? Let everyone have their opinion, and forget about it.

[JDRhoades]

I went looking for some more info on the Marion Zimmer Bradley incident and found this from Mercedes Lackey's site, which I'll toss out here for discussion:

Some time ago, Marion Zimmer Bradley ended up having to cancel the idea of EVER writing a particular book, because a fan (who shall remain nameless) demanded equal collaborative credit and money, if she used a particular "idea" that had come from a fan-fiction story. It got to the point where the fan threatened to sue Marion if she did not get equal collaborative credit and money (and remember what I said in the paragraphs above). As the fan actually had somehow gotten an agent and had the resources to do just that, Marion scrapped the book altogether---one which was greatly anticipated and would have been integral to her Darkover series, may I add. When I was co-writing a Darkover book with Marion, the same fan had the chutzpah to send ME a manuscript---which, needless to say, I returned unopened.

As a consequence, our agent (I have the same agent as Marion, Russell Galen of Scovil Chichak Galen) wanted us to forbid people to write fan-fiction altogether. And lest you think that can't be done, there are several authors and their publishers who have successfully done just that, Chelsea Quinn Yarbro for one; all it takes is a lawyer. Neither Marion nor I wanted to deprive people of the enjoyment of playing in our worlds, so we compromised; anyone who publishes their fan fiction in amateur fanzines has to send us a complicated release form saying basically that they know this is MY intellectual property and that they understand that their work essentially becomes my property, so long as it references my world and characters.

More at : http://www.mercedeslackey.com/text/1mlask01.shtml

So, even though MZB did get burned by a fanfic writer, she didn't want to totally forbid her fans from writing the stuff, or, as ML calls it, "playing in our worlds".

Interesting way to look at it.

[Bill Rabkin]

The legal issues over fanfic will remain unresolved and unlitigated for a long time and it's not because it's such a complex issue. The courts will not issue a ruling because not one case will ever go to trial.

And it's not because authors and copyright owners don't care, or are afraid, or realize that fanficcers are indeed more emotionally involved with their characters.

It's because there's no money in it.

Trials are expensive. It's unlikely an author has enough disposable income to fight this out in court. So it's up to the Viacoms and Sonys of the world. And they won't do it because fanfic doesn't cost them anything -- it's not like piracy, which can immediately impact their sales. And even if they win, they know they'll never get anything out of it, because almost by definition, fanficcers have no assets to take.

But the fact that this whole subject is too trivial to litigate doesn't prove that fanfic isn't theft -- just that there's no percentage in pursuing it.

And if you doubt that, you should start writing fanfic in which Mickey Mouse is cornholing Pluto. I think you might find that case going to court pretty damn fast.

[JDRhoades]

No one fucks with The Mouse.
-Harlan Ellison

[Dean]

And if you doubt that, you should start writing fanfic in which Mickey Mouse is cornholing Pluto. I think you might find that case going to court pretty damn fast.

If it did, I would bet that it was because of an alleged trademark violation, not a copyright violation.

[Daisy]

I really wasn't going to get drawn into this, but it just seems like there's one aspect of the debate that people keep missing; that is, what would happen if the fanficcers got their way and derivative works became legal and publishable? Do they really think that it would become a time of freedom and creativity, with all of the world's great fictional characters available to the people who loved them the most? Or is it maybe just possible that the market would be swamped with cheap rip-offs, put out by anyone who wanted to make a quick buck? Do we really need a rendition of Star Wars brought to you by the creators of 'The Littlest Groom'? (Actually, that would be pretty awesome.)
Of course, that's exactly why it's never going to be legal- because the people who would stand to lose the most by that sort of thing are the big media companies with their massive packs of rabid lawyers, who know a thing or two about protecting copyrights.

[Lee Goldberg]

Another discussion about fanfic and copyright:

http://www.authorslawyer.com/weft/fanfic.shtml

[Bill Peschel]

And to add a little snark to Daisy's post, suppose fanfic writer #2 wrote and sold a novel that used elements from fanfic writer #1's reworking of a legit author's work. How do you think FFW#1 will react:

a) a hearty handshake and laurel wreath to FFW#2 for publishing and profiting off his work, or

b) a cease-and-desist order plus a demand for a share of profits?

[Mark A. York]

Hail hail the gang's all here.

[Brian Hogg]

Just a brief note about what Daisy said about derivative works. They WERE legal, once upon a time. They stopped being legal (so far as I'm aware) when copyright holders trudged out the notion that changing a single word in a novel would be technically producing a derivative work, so screw that and all.

[Dean]

And to add a little snark to Daisy's post, suppose fanfic writer #2 wrote and sold a novel that used elements from fanfic writer #1's reworking of a legit author's work.

Nobody is suggesting that fanfic be allowed to be sold. At least, nobody sane. Nor are people like me, who are suggesting tolerance of fanfic, saying that fanfic authors be allowed to profit.

Creating derivative works is kinda lame. Selling derivative works is actionable, and that, I hope, isn't going to change.

[Brian Hogg]

Derivative works are not the same thing as fan fiction, certainly not within the context of this conversation. I suppose you could look at fan fiction as a subset of derivative works, but without -- ha ha -- the artistic merit.

Derivative work allowed Disney to spring to popularity. For example.

[Jonquil]

"1) Should it be done at all, after all you don't own it."

Did Malory own the Morte d'Arthur? At best, he could have gotten a compilation copyright on it; chunks of it are taken from earlier works (and greatly improved). Many of Shakespeare's plays are derivative works.

I am defending a specific point: excellent work can be produced riffing on an earlier creator's characters and situations. Note, for a modern example, Laurie King's Sherlock Holmes pastiches.

[Guyot]

I cannot tell you how happy I am that we are all home again. Feels good. Feels right. I do wish Keith Snyder were here...

Okay, to clear this all up - once and for all. Everyone - THAT MEANS YOU - is missing the point. Is missing the real essence behind this whole thing.

It matters not what the law says or doesn't say. Some counties have "No dancing" laws on the books.

It matters not whether it's a trademark or copyright or is-it-right argument.

It is simply this:
Those that engage in fanfic production do so because they lack any real creativity or originality. Now, they will scream and shout that their work is creative and an "original" version of someone else's original idea, but that's crap. And they know it's crap. Example:

Does anyone notice that whenever Jocelyn - despite all her posturing about the law and her passion for fanfic - wants to justify herself as a writer, she mentions her original work. Not her fanfic. Because she is intelligent enough to understand that in the final analysis a writer is only truly a writer if they are creating - meaning thinking up their own characters, own worlds, etc. Not riffing on someone else's.

I don't have an opinion about the legal questions re: fanfic. Who cares? The opinion I hold is simply that fanfic is not only disrespectful to the author, but personally embarrassing and a waste of time.

I love Harry Bosch. LOVE that character. Do I wish I created him? Absolutely. Would I ever think about writing something with Harry Bosch in it? Absolutely not. Why? Because:

1) it's disrepectful to Mike Connelly (am I right or wrong about this? There is no right or wrong. It is only opinion).

2) I would be embarrassed because it is saying to the world that I have no ability to create. Oh, I can take someone else's idea and riff on that - make Harry gay or a Trekkie, or whatever - but that's not creating, that's not writing. Despite how hard fanfic producers will try to convince themselves they are creating - they are not.

3) And maybe this is the most important reason - my ego. I've got my own ideas and my own characters. I want to write them! Because I think they're pretty bitchin. Let Connelly have Bosch. Let JKR have Potter. I love my characters!

The bottom line, the end-all, the final analysis is simply that if you are writing fanfic you are lying to yourself. You are not a writer. You are not learning to be a writer. You are wasting your time. If it makes you smile and makes your other fanfic buddies smile, then more power to you - go write the shit out of it. But just know that you will never be what you truly, deep-down-inside want to be - a writer.

How can I make such a bold statement? Because to be a writer - a REAL writer - one has to have the soul of a writer. And that particular soul understands in no uncertain terms that fanfic is soulless.

[claire]

Because to be a writer - a REAL writer - one has to have the soul of a writer. And that particular soul understands in no uncertain terms that fanfic is soulless.

Well met. I sit down.

Thank you, Mr. Guyot.

[anonymouse]

So, Paul, what does that make your buddy Lee Goldberg? He writes DIAGNOSIS MURDER and MONK novels (in addition to his "stand alone" stuff). They aren't fanfic in that he's doing it with the author/creator's consent/input and all of that, but that doesn't make him or what he does any less soulless does it? And what about your work on JUDGING AMY and LEVEL 9? Wasn't that soulless since you were writing about characters that weren't your own?

[Harry]

... fanfic is soulless.

Puh. Leeze.

I'm no fan of fanfic, but this is ridiculous. Fanfic writers have published their own original works, and some continue to write fanfic. It has nothing to do with whether they're real writers or not.

Guyot, that whole post is embarrassingly pretentious.

[Guyot]

Anon: asking those questions just makes my point. Or that you're an idiot.

Harry: yes, it does.

[marty]

Interesting debate. So the objections to fanfic are along the lines that it is deriviative, thusly unoriginal (or as Paul Guyot (apparently) puts it, means they aren't a "real writer"), and the fanfic err.. fans say, well yes, it is deriviative, it's meant to be. Mr Anonymous (or Ms) puts in that since Lee writes books based on other peoples property (mind you, that is a) with permission and b) in a world he helped put together) that makes Lee equivalent to a fanficcer. I think the point is that of permission or more accurately "Lee, can you write this book?" -- fanfic is without a doubt a deriviative, but it is also unauthorised.

As an example, the Star Wars books, set in the Star Wars universe, using (sometimes at least) the characters and settings of the movies, are obviously deriviative works. They are also with the permission of Lucas. This elevates them above mere fanfic. It doesn't make their authors "not writers" though -- Timothy Zahn, for instance, has written quite a number of his own original works.

I own two different story collections set in the Darkover universe, both written by fans of the MZB stories (some by other published writers, but many by unknowns). Fanfic? Maybe. Perhaps these were the BEST that were found or submitted at the time. Is it that a good writer can write in another's world, but a good writer can also write in their own world?

[Elaine]

I know several professional writers who write media tie-in books or who ghost books for established series and they also must put up with pompous remarks that they have no creativity so that kind of remark isn't limited to fan fiction writers. I've seen media tie-in writers mocked on message boards and in articles; told that writing books about someone else's characters is the work of a hack or a literary loser; that 'real' writers would not do so and by accepting that kind of work they mark themselves forever as a writing wannabe; that they are, in fact, less of a writer than your average PA writer because the PA writer is original.

And I've seen media/ghost writers also waving their original works in the air saying, "Hey, I write original stuff -- stop picking on me." Do they wave their original works because they accept the stupid labelling of their tie-in work as proof that they are losers and wannabees? Do they do so because they have an intrinsic shame for doing series work, or tie-ins? No, they wave it to get pompous assholes off their backs.

Creating from scratch is only one slice of the pie that makes a "real" writer. And those who do work that ties in to a pre-existing world must also bring skill, creativity, and talent or they don't get the work. They ARE real writers and writing from a pre-existing world does not strip the title from them.

Now fanfiction, as it is unauthorized (and much of it, I am sure is horrendous -- I don't read it. I have trouble enough reading through all the stuff I have to review) also displays the skill (or lack there of) of the writer. I assume some is good, some is so-so, and a lot of it sucks. Clearly it makes some writers really upset. Well, guess what? Body piercing makes some people really upset -- but the upset-ed-ness of others is not the bottom line for all things. Upset people, unfortunately tend to muddy their own arguments with absolutes and histrionics. Stupid remarks like the one about fanfic (and pornographic fanfic at that) being splashed ALL OVER the internet.

Guess what -- there is no fan fic on this site. There is none on mine. None, in fact, on any site that I have gone to in the last six months (and I spend a lot of time researching online). So, it is far from all over the internet. I assume I could find it easily enough if I looked for it...but then I could find almost anything easily enough if I looked for it.

I suspect MOST fanfic is someone's harmless hobby...much like collecting and trading pictures of celebrities, or drawing art inspired by your favorite book or other 'fan' behaviors. My husband collects sports debris and although it makes some of the rooms in our house questionably stylish, and it uses both his time and money unproductively -- it hardly marks him as a sicko. He's a fan. He likes being one. And that is how he shows it. I suppose fan fiction writers are fans of a specific show/movie/book, they like spending their time in playing "what if" with the show, they write about it. As long as they aren't selling it or going insane trying to extort money etc from the originator through lawsuits -- then about the only "damage" they are doing to the original creator is emotional (and not every creator feels they have received any damage at all).

I know -- personally -- writers who cheered when they discovered fanfic from their books. It meant they had "arrived" because kids were not just reading their books, they were putting themselves into the worlds and creating. I've heard them run on and on about how great they thought it was. Not every writer feels fan writers are the spawn of satan. Heck, my mother thought Bill Clinton was the spawn of satan -- but that didn't make it so.

Would the writers I know have cheered if the fanfic had been pornographic? Of course not -- but not because they personally are all emotionally wrapped up in their characters so they feel personally abused or feel they now have damaged goods when they try to write the next book. They would have been upset because their readers are KIDS and they don't want KIDS looking for more about their books and running across pornography. But they know porn is a portion of fan fiction -- not a defining characteristic -- and they aren't interested in bashing all the babies so they make sure to eliminate the next generation of serial killers. If you hate men who beat their wives, you're probably emotionally healthy. If you go on to hate all men and assuming they all WANT to beat their wives or are about to beat their wives, you're not thinking clearly. Hating porno fanfic seems perfectly reasonable, but thinking all fanfic is evil because some is porn, seems a bit unbalanced on the issue.

For writers who find fanfiction of their own works personally upsetting, I would love to think fanfiction writers would respect that. They won't of course -- not because fan fiction writers are evil bloodsuckers but because people (in general) tend to be selfish about catering to their own wants. Plus if the writer who doesn't want fanfiction about his own works posts a lot of crap about how all fan fiction is soulless and evil, la la la -- some of the kids (and those adults who are like them) writing it, might target that writer's stuff just to be annoying. I will admit to doing things once or twice just to annoy people I found pompous and ridiculous -- I just haven't ever commited the sin of fan fiction to do it.

[Mark A. York]

Paul's right. This faux comparison of fanficcers to contract televison scriptwriters is beyond a straw man. They're hired to produce the work, thus, don't need to be the original authors. They're not doing it for private use and that includes sale. Professionals are different from fans.

[Jocelyn]

It is simply this:
Those that engage in fanfic production do so because they lack any real creativity or originality. Now, they will scream and shout that their work is creative and an "original" version of someone else's original idea, but that's crap. And they know it's crap. Example:

Does anyone notice that whenever Jocelyn - despite all her posturing about the law and her passion for fanfic - wants to justify herself as a writer, she mentions her original work. Not her fanfic. Because she is intelligent enough to understand that in the final analysis a writer is only truly a writer if they are creating - meaning thinking up their own characters, own worlds, etc.

Good lord, Guyot, until now I thought you were one of the more sensible of the lot!

And again, you generalize. How can a person who "lacks any real creativity or originality" if they also write original fiction?

Are you telling me that any hobby for which a person cannot make money is soulless and reflects badly on that person's character?

And by the way, I do not posture. I've been nothing but honest with you and everyone else in this debate. My point in explaining the VARIOUS types of writing that I do is to prove that fanwriting is neither morally nor ethically beneath original writing. My motive for fanfiction and original fiction is the same: I love writing it. I post my fanfiction on the archives and discuss it with the readers, and hope to publish my novels in the near future.

The bottom line, the end-all, the final analysis is simply that if you are writing fanfic you are lying to yourself. You are not a writer. You are not learning to be a writer. You are wasting your time.

And since when did being a published and/or original writer make you the be-all, end-all expert on what writing is, my friend? That to me seems to be the absolute epitome of arrogance.

A hobby is never a waste of time.

You are the one lying to yourself, and I'll thank you to confine your egocentric judgments to issues where you actually know what you're talking about.

Forgive my bluntness, but that one peeved me.

[Jocelyn]

A slightly-more-coherent but considerably more strongly-worded response to Guyot's previous exercise in arrogance is posted below:

http://jocelyncs.blogspot.com/2005/06/guyot-what-bit-your-ass.html

[David Montgomery]

See Jocelyn, this is why you weren't invited to participate in the Blog Short Story Project. You don't get it.

For those of you who miss the days of the SATs...

Writing is to Making Love as FanFic is to Masturbation

The latter pair are self-indulgent, vaguely embarrassing, accomplish nothing, and only temporarily enjoyable. They are largely the province of adolescent boys and are in no way practice for the real thing.

There's a reason that people who write FanFic are always going on about "wanking." Even they realize what they're all about.

One can both make love and masturbate, but that will never mean the two things are the same. FanFic will never be writing and no amount of posturing, blathering, or arguing with every fiber of your oh-so-passionate being will make it so.

[Jocelyn]

Again, David, I welcome you to explain precisely HOW you know the thought processes surrounding fanfiction and precisely HOW you are able to define writing, other than presuming that being published automatically gives you some divine power to judge.

Writing is writing, be it research papers, biographies, fanfiction, published fiction, media fiction, or nonfiction, and no amount of posturing, blathering, or arguing with every fiber of your oh-so-arrogant being will make it so.