(Untitled)

Jul 27, 2006 15:59

Hello everyone ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

lost_erizo August 21 2006, 18:09:34 UTC
OMFG this is on Fandom_Wank? No wonder the almost dead thread suddenly exploded again yesterday.

When kyler got into it I just had to sigh and bang my head on my desk. I desperately wanted to find him and tell him "you're not helping!" but that would probably backfire as much as anything else.

I got into the discussion because A: it's something I've always been interested in and B: I seem constitutionally unable to let an argument go once I get into it. B is the reason I rarely post anything - better to avoid than to get sucked in.

I don't really think I'm going to change Mr. Goldberg's mind-for one thing he hasn't actually addressed any of the points I raised about the profit motive or ownership of ideas and it's pretty impossible to convince someone who won't engage. But that thread seems to have attracted the attention of a fair number of writers outside fandom and it seemed like an opportunity to get people outside fandom to at least think about this stuff. Unfortunately, I undermined my own credibility by relentlessly pursuing an analogy (spec scripts vs fanfic) that in the end proved unconvincing.

I also find it really ironic that this is taking place in Lee Goldberg's blog, since as far as I can tell almost everything the man writes is derivative. He also seems to be unaware that he's got links on his front page so some well known fanfic writers. ;-)

The other is to get a list of names of people or companies that don't mind fanfics at all and have stated it. FF.Net used to have articles on that.
Check out Fanworks.org, they have a list of people/tv-shows/etc and what their feelings on fanfic are. It's a little out of date and their interpretation of allowed/not allowed doesn't quite agree with mine, but it's a useful resource.

Reply

cathexys August 27 2006, 00:14:38 UTC
also came here via FW -> Lee -> you ... nice job over there, even though it really is ultimately futile. Lee and his cohorts seem to have fairly limited logical faculties and return to the same three ideas (most of them problematic if not faulty) again and again. No amount of sane reasoning (like you tried) leads to anything!

FWIW, if you're interested, there's some decent stuff that actually addresses the copyright issue (b/c even *that*'s not fully decided), for example, here. And as you point out, the moral/ethical issue is *far* from solved (as a postmodern literary critic, I am utterly bemused by the ownership he asserts for authors...).

Reply

lost_erizo August 28 2006, 04:55:36 UTC
Hi there and welcome!

I realize the whole discussion is pretty futile-especially since Mr. Goldberg (who is, after all, the one who keeps starting these threads) refuses to engage. He just keeps copying and pasting earlier, and largely irrelevant, responses. And it's a bit like playing "whack a mole" when new people pop up with the same arguments over and over. But my current field (biology) is so dry, that it's actually kind of fun to do the kind of writing I haven't had much of a chance at since college Lit and History classes.

The scary part is that most of those guys are writers. These are people who produce literature (sort of) for a living and they don't understand the basic issues about their profession. Not that they need to agree with me particularly, but that they are issues, with multiple sides and dissenting opinions. Which could potentially effect how they do their work. sigh.

Thanks so much for the link-that essay makes for really interesting reading. I hadn't really thought about how removing the registration requirement from copyright really limits authors who don't want to copyright their work.

Reply

lexin August 28 2006, 15:44:02 UTC
I realize the whole discussion is pretty futile-especially since Mr. Goldberg (who is, after all, the one who keeps starting these threads) refuses to engage.

Friended you also after reading your comments on Goldberg's blog. I'm not completely sure why, but I've been trying to engage with him for some considerable time and it's like trying nail jelly to the ceiling: he learns nothing from previous discussions and always starts from the same place. A bit like an episode of ST-TNG.

Still, we hack on.

Reply

lost_erizo August 28 2006, 21:28:57 UTC
"it's like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling"

Can I quote that? It's beautiful!

Thanks for your support-it's nice to know I'm not the only one bashing my head into the wall. :-)

Reply

lexin August 28 2006, 21:30:55 UTC
Can I quote that?

Of course - it's not mine, it's just a saying from where I'm from.

Reply

lost_erizo August 30 2006, 19:01:30 UTC
I'm an idiot. I just realized you're Rommel.

I want to thank you for getting into the action over there. I didn't respond to your comments there because I've already monopolized his blog for more than a week just defending my own position and I didn't want to take up a lot more space giving your thoughts the responses they deserved. But I thought that your comments were refreshingly insightful, especially the points about how not everyone in the discussion, or even in SF, is a white, male, right-wing, capitalista or libertarian.

Although I do think there's more creativity in TV dialog than in designing widgets. If there wasn't, I wouldn't squeal with delight at watching the early seasons of Buffy. ;-)

And dude, you're a Blake's Seven fan! I haven't seen an episode in years but I used to have a computer I named Orac :-)

Reply

lexin August 30 2006, 19:15:19 UTC
Although I do think there's more creativity in TV dialog than in designing widgets.

Oh, I agree. It just seems to me that modern TV is sold like widgets - it's a 'product' in the same way as biscuits or computers, which is why so much of it is derivative bollocks. The idea that I'm suppose to treat this dreck as if it's the "Mona Lisa" or "Elegy on a Country Churchyard" really does stick in my throat.

Meanwhile a friend found this
which I think you may find interesting. It's about George Orwell and where he is (and isn't) public domain. A friend, in private email, made the same points Patterico makes about Kipling.

Blake's 7 totally rocks. It's now available on DVD and I've been rewatching it - takes me straight back, that does.

Reply

amireal October 1 2006, 20:42:02 UTC
You're rommel! Oh! Hi!

And Hi to Erizo! I suppose we found each other through the jelly legged limp bisquit as well!

Reply

lexin October 1 2006, 20:53:30 UTC
Rommel...yeah, that's me!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up