Fanfiction. It's probably legal.
Currently trawling through the history of UK copyright in its primary sources. All nuts. Size and significance of gulf between dominant academic and legal understanding of literature is funny.
Even before I knew anything about postmodernism, Barthes etc, I thought it v. counterintuitive that one could 'own' a text, painting, melody, etc. First tell me what the text is, and how a person can own that. Short answer: in the natural state of things, one can't. The idea is nonsense. Rightly ruled so by Lord Chancellor in 1774. This ruling, subsequently misinterpreted as saying that a natural right exists which was limited by statute, affects copyright law mess to this day.
Some of the threatening letters sent to fanfic authors, as archived @ chillingeffects.org, are based on paper-thin legal justifications. Philosophy (and reality) aside, could make a *strong* case that it is legally impossible to own a character, setting or plot.
My current favourite quotation from the UK Copyright service.
'A derivative work is a work that is based on (derived from) another work.'
LOL. Tautology much?
This is all for a dissertation on the problems of UK copyright law and what it should be doing. I'm not against literary copyright per se. Necessary evil whilst Capitalism lasts,* which I see for a while yet. I'm against the scope, vagueness, irrationality of literary copyright, and its abuse by hegemonic globalized media. Can I do something about it? Dunno. Hope so. Let's see if I can finish this and get it published somewhere noticeable by next year.
* related issue - patents on medicine. Don't know enough about this to comment but it has horrific results. See Lawrence Lessig, 'Free Culture'. Can be downloaded for free, btw.
Even before I knew anything about postmodernism, Barthes etc, I thought it v. counterintuitive that one could 'own' a text, painting, melody, etc. First tell me what the text is, and how a person can own that. Short answer: in the natural state of things, one can't. The idea is nonsense. Rightly ruled so by Lord Chancellor in 1774. This ruling, subsequently misinterpreted as saying that a natural right exists which was limited by statute, affects copyright law mess to this day.
Some of the threatening letters sent to fanfic authors, as archived @ chillingeffects.org, are based on paper-thin legal justifications. Philosophy (and reality) aside, could make a *strong* case that it is legally impossible to own a character, setting or plot.
My current favourite quotation from the UK Copyright service.
'A derivative work is a work that is based on (derived from) another work.'
LOL. Tautology much?
This is all for a dissertation on the problems of UK copyright law and what it should be doing. I'm not against literary copyright per se. Necessary evil whilst Capitalism lasts,* which I see for a while yet. I'm against the scope, vagueness, irrationality of literary copyright, and its abuse by hegemonic globalized media. Can I do something about it? Dunno. Hope so. Let's see if I can finish this and get it published somewhere noticeable by next year.
* related issue - patents on medicine. Don't know enough about this to comment but it has horrific results. See Lawrence Lessig, 'Free Culture'. Can be downloaded for free, btw.