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

Comments

[droneish]

And Tobias Buckell's blog and on Scalzi's Whatever. :) Lots of discussion, some hostile, a fair amount friendly (see Teresa Nielsen Hayden's comment on boingboing), and some just... odd. viz. OTW seems OK because it "looks like they’re not interested in slash or some of the other aspects of fan fiction". Uh, yeah, right.

[femmequixotic]

Oh, thank you so much for those pointers! We'll add the two blogs to the post!

[rogue_planet]

Why does everyone seem to think we want to make money off this stuff? *sighs*

[cathexys]

i know! i was so annoyed by the boing boing comment, *not* because of the "original" argument, which I disagree with but at least comprehend but because of the asinine insinuation that there's profit involved...

[copracat]

Because they would want to make money. Many of them appear to be professional or aspiring professional writers.

[elfwreck]

Because they cannot imagine anyone doing a potentially money-making activity for free. They can understand "I'll do it for free until I find a buyer," but not "I'm gonna do this because I love doing it. If other people get paid for it, well, that's their right; it's not what I want to get paid for doing."

A lot of people really just can't imagine loving a hobby in a way that doesn't connect to questions of income. Especially not a hobby that *can* be lucrative if done the right way. They think that the line between "amateur" and "professional" is one of skill, not one of avocation.

[rishabree]

Femme, it looks like your Netribution and Tobias Buckell links are going to the wrong links.

[caras_galadhon]

Actually, OTW was also given a small mention towards the end of Round 22 of the Fan Culture Debates hosted by Henry Jenkins, and was mirrored here.

[amireal]

*possibly commented on that as well*

[elfwreck]

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]

Ask Baen Books about (1632) fanfic. :)