OTW mentioned on Zuckerman's blog and Boing Boing

[femmequixotic]

OTW has been mentioned on Ethan Zuckerman's blog.

By using the word "transformative" in the organization name, the organizers of the group are advocating a legal argument - writing fan fiction based on the characters and universes of copyright-protected media is a transformative use, protected by fair use clauses in US copyright law. In other words, this is an attempt to stand up and fight for this interpretation, rather than hiding from copyright holders, which is a huge step forward to this subculture....

OTW has taken a very interesting step in declaring that fan culture has a dominant gender. In their statement of values, they note, "We value our identity as a predominantly female community with a rich history of creativity and commentary." Here, again, it's important to understand the definition of "fan culture" - media fandom, fanfic and vidding, a culture that's predominantly female, though not exclusively so.

Zuckerman's blog post has also been noted on Boing Boing.

ETA: OTW has also been mentioned on Netribution, and on the blogs of Tobias Buckell and John Scalzi. (Thanks to droneish for the links to the last two.)

--femmequixotic, bethbethbeth, ciderpress, mirabile_dictu, shrift, svmadelyn
Community Relations Committee

Comments

[ithiliana.livejournal.com]

I admit to commenting on Scalzi's blog before coming over here to link, but I got so grumpy about the "they want to make it legal to make money off fanwork" that I just wanted to smack people. It's good to get the publicity even if it does lead to less than brilliant commentary....I guess.

[amireal.livejournal.com]

*possibly commented on that as well*

[elf]

Gaaah I let myself get dragged into discussions at Scalzi's blog. Now I'm worried that some total strangers are gonna think "who IS this wingnut?" (Okay, not exactly "worried." I'm not a BNF, but I'm also not hard to find if anyone wants to figure out "who is this person and why is she ranting at me?")

I think it's important to mention that a claim to fanfic's legality is not the same as a claim about it's marketability--that saying "this is legal" doesn't mean "this should be sellable."

Sex is legal. Doesn't mean you can sell it. (In most states.) Doesn't mean you can perform it at city hall, either.

[mythusmage.livejournal.com]

Ask Baen Books (http://www.baen.com) about (1632) fanfic. :)

[elf]

I adore Baen Books' attitude towards readers and fen. And their happy greedy acknowlegment that "the more people who read this stuff for free, the more books we sell. And the more interaction between authors and fans, the more books we sell. Wow, this open access thing sure is a cash cow."

It's a great nuisance that many authors and publishers seem to think that literary entertainment is a zero-sum game: that if readers enjoy more fanfic, they'll read less original works, or if they get some books for free, they'll refuse to buy that many books next year, or something like that.

As if we allocated ourselves 500,000 words per year to read, and eight books per year to buy, and when we hit the limit, we stop.

[lynnenne]

I don't know how you maintained your cool with commenters like Ed Bartlett on that thread. I found his comparison of fanfic to a "quilting bee" sexist and condescending. But the remark that annoyed me the most was this:

Therein lies the difference between an homage and fanfic, legalities aside. One honors the source, the other doesn’t.

With that, he demonstrates quite clearly just how little he knows about fanfic and fan writers.

[elf]

I'm rather enjoying the back-and-forth with him; I rarely get the openings to explain Why Fanfic Is A Good Thing in neat, succinct posts.

I decided to take the tack "not all homages have a 1:1 comparative value," rather than "but parody is legal, and acknowledged as valid commentary on a piece... do you mean that mockery is an appropriate response, along with direct imitation, but other reactions are not?"

I didn't mind the "quilting bee" comparison--I've been to quilting bees. I have no problem comparing fanfic to "women's sewing circles." And anyone who's ever had to rely on those circles for their clothing and linens wouldn't mock them, nor disdain the art & creativity that come out of them.

He's also woefully uninformed about fanfic in general; he seems to think it's an internet-inspired thing, instead of a practice with several hundred years of history, which has only been problematic in the last 50 or so: when TV and telephones combined to give thousands of people quick communication about their favorite topics, and photocopiers gave them cheap ways to distribute their fanworks.