Steven Brust Posts Fan Fiction...Under Licence?

[pseudohistorian]

Steven Brust (skzbrust) was one of several established authors who eagerly submitted outlines to Pocket Books when they had a contract to publish original tie-in novels based on the film Serenity. However, these outlines all required approval by Joss Whedon, which wasn't forthcoming, and Pocket eventually cancelled the contract as a result

Comments

[babylil]

I'm only just studying intellectual property at the moment (right now, in fact, as I'm reading your post during my break from reading about copyright infringement for my class tomorrow!), so I don't have in-depth knowledge.

I can tell you that, at least in the UK, a literary work can have copyright subsisting in it even though it also infringes the copyright of another work, so although he doesn't own the overarching intellectual property that doesn't necessarily mean there's no copyright in what he's written.

Hopefully somebody who's actually finished an IP course can give you a more detailed answer :)

[ladypeyton]

Having read the creative commons license wording, it's really not much different than any normal fanfic's disclaimer. It makes no claim to ownership and states that for any commercial distribution, one has to contact the copyright holder. It never makes any claim that Brust is the copyright holder.

IANAL, but I think the CC license is merely Brust covering his a$$.

[bigscary]

You always have the copyright on what you create -- just because it is infringing on someone else's copyright does not change this.

[stmarc]

I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice.

As the prior posters say, he has the right to do whatever he wants with his derivative work. Assuming it has significant creativity in its own right - and whatever I may think of Mr. Brust's action in this case I have no doubt that any novel he publishes will constitute an independently creative work - it is a copyrighted work and may be licensed accordingly.

As the saying goes in a much older branch of the law, "A thief has good title against the entire world except the rightful owner." His license is as strong as any other CC license, unless it has any kind of warranty that the work is free of other encumbrances.

M

[aesvir]

"A thief has good title against the entire world except the rightful owner."

Adverse possession, woohoo!

/driven crazy by Property

[stmarc]

I loved Property. Property has rules. I like rules. Plus the professor laid the smackdown GOOD AND HARD one on one of my classmates who SO had it coming.

Remind me to tell you the funny story about Taxation class and the Rule in Shelley's Case.

M

[sreya]

Rules are awesome. I was the only person in my law school who flat out enjoyed working with the Rule against Perpetuities. :~p

[rubymiene]

There was a case involving Sylvester Stallon over rights to the storyline of Rocky V(?). The plaintiff claimed a copyright over the script. The court ruled that the script infringed the derivative work right of the original, and thus could not have a valid copyright of its own