[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: The Fair Use Doctrine

[Lee Kaiwen]

CJ:
> Either way, I think fandom may be in for a rough ride.

Kemper now:
> That's wrong. If she wins sites will remain up, future fans of other
> works will write fanfic, create fan art, establish fan groups, go to
> conventions, etc. It is already established that Original creators
> have defined how they are willing or unwilling to grant fans indulgences.

I hope you're right, Rowling has already expressed misgivings about how 
tolerant she's been. I strongly suspect any fan attempting a site of the 
scope and breadth of Steve's in the future will have a much harder time 
gaining her approbation. I suspect many sites up now may feel pressured 
to re-examine their content. And I wouldn't be surprise if publishers of 
other popular series start asking their authors to reconsider their own 
tolerance of fan endeavors. Whichever way the case goes, I just don't 
see fandom continuing business as usual.

> Why piss off your fans? They are a writer's pita and hummus.

Because that's what lawyers do best. And in any case we're only talking 
about an extremely small chunk of the fanbase. Even if every fanfic 
author, reader and Potter-related website admin out there got a major 
grump up over JKR's crackdown, I suspect impact on sales would be 
negligible. I'd bet the vast majority of JKR's fandom has never heard of 
-- let alone logged into -- an HP site, participated in an HP discussion 
group, or joined an HP fanclub. They just buy and read the books. And 
those folk aren't going to care one way or 'tother about this case.

CJ:
 > If she wins, sites will come down (or not go up) for fear
 > of copyright infringement.

Magpie:
 > I don't see why. There was no problem until they decided
 > to publish a book about the thing for money. She didn't go
 > after the Lexicon's website.

I hope you're right. But (as I said above) JKR has already expressed her 
misgivings about her past tolerance for Steve's site. My guess, based on 
what little I've read, is that she (and/or her publishers) is rethinking 
her current tolerance. But all we can do is watch and see.

Magpie:
 > I don't think you have to protect your copyright. I
 > believe it's trademark that you have to protect or lose.

Yeah, you're right. I'll admit to misspeaking on that one. However, I 
think this:

Magpie:
 > but it just doesn't seem like JKR can be said to have
 > given away anything by not going after a website that
 > didn't make money.

isn't quite right. JKR has already described the emotional ordeal she's 
gone through in the affair. Now I strongly suspect that was largely for 
show, and she was coached by her lawyers to ham it up for the judge, but 
I don't doubt there's a kernel of truth in there somewhere. What JKR has 
given something is her faith and trust in her fandom. She feels violated 
by the whole affair, and may well begin tightening control just to avoid 
being violated again in the future. So perhaps she hasn't given anything 
up legally or financially, but she doesn't talk as if those are the only 
concerns for her.

All of this is just speculation, however. Time is the determiner of all 
things.

CJ