Authors and fans (was: Re: The Fair Use Doctrine)

[sistermagpie]

> 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:
Yes, I heard that. And I admit I thought it was a little annoying. 
Why blame fandom for the fact that somebody tried to infringe on your 
copyright? It could have just as easily have been somebody who wasn't 
in fandom who had the idea--Seinfeld didn't do that. She's also 
mentioned this has stifled her creativity so that she stopped work on 
her new novel and that she's losing her interest in publishing her 
own encyclopedia. It just sounds too much like ff.net authors 
demanding reviews or they won't continue. 

I'm sorry that she has to go through this hassle, I really am. It's a 
pain when somebody tries to infringe on your copyright and you have 
to go after them. But I don't think it's fair to threaten to punish 
fandom in general for it. Most of fandom had nothing to do with RDR 
or SVA deciding to publish a book, or whatever relationship JKR had 
with SVA and the Lexicon.

Nowadays creators of things have actually relied more on fansites, 
not less, because they know an active fandom is a good thing. They 
also know there are risks in that. Authors aren't usually the ones at 
the center of things. Usually we're talking about TV shows and things 
like that--things with more than one creator. Warner Brothers has 
already been out there tracking stuff down on their own, since they 
have ownership in the property too (and they've got trademarks).

I think we're in a period where people are fighting for territory, 
but that the fans are a force to be reckoned with. The thing about 
the Internet, imo, is that it combines a lot of things. Some authors 
who hate fanfic (the dreaded Lee Goldberg, for instance) consider it 
all stealing and the Internet as publishing. Personally, I think that 
ignores the fact that Internet is social and fandom is a 
conversation. People don't put up stories as just a virtual version 
of publishing so much as a virtual version of passing their stories 
around fandom to talk about the characters and the stories amongst 
other fans. HP happened to explode at the same time as all this, and 
the Internet has made it very different from other fandoms. The 
creators are suddenly shoved up against this stuff. And also, fans 
have more access to each other--if Warner Brothers tries to shut down 
some teenager in Poland, that teenager might suddenly have a dozen 
attorneys from all over the world defending her. Fans enjoy talking 
about their canon and telling stories about it, and naturally they're 
going to be annoyed if somebody tries to seriously interfere with 
that and not see why somebody else should have the right to do that 
just because they use the Internet to do it (and that's where they 
can actually find people who share their interest).


> 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.

CJ:
> 
> 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.

Magpie:
Yeah, but that's emotional, and any creator or celebrity is in danger 
of that sort of thing if they get personally involved with strangers 
they meet as fans, imo. Everyone always hears references to the 
Zimmer Bradley story, which is complicated iirc, but had to do with 
her working with a fan and then the fan sueing her for stealing her 
ideas--something like that. (Perhaps MZB and the fan both felt 
violated.) But how does one trust "fandom?" Fandom is made up of 
thousands and thousands of people. Not all of whom are there to be 
fans of the creator personally (many writers wind up talking to fans 
on boards or reading them and seeing perfectly well that fans are 
vocal in their critiques). 

In this case, she had a sort of personal relationship with SVA. 
Perhaps it's jarring that a guy who presented himself as a huge fan 
of her personally, is publishing this book. (Personally why I'm much 
more comfortable being a fan of the fictional people and wanting no 
personal relationship--real or imagined--with the author.)

But it still just seems like...what are you going to do? It's a 
copyright issue. From what I've heard from one lawyer SVA's contract 
actually leaves him open to being sued by RDR when it's all over, 
should they choose to do so. But if JKR feels like she gave away her 
trust too easily, what's to do? Must that mean authors should be like 
Anne Rice and restrict all fanfic (and yell at anybody giving her bad 
reviews on Amazon) and become disliked? Or just not form any personal 
relationships with specific fans because those relationships are 
fraught with peril? That singer Selena got murdered by a fan she 
encouraged and then disappointed. Encouraging somebody who so wants 
to bond with you that way is potentially dangerous. 

Or maybe just not expect too much back from fandom? Because that's 
often where the shoving match starts. Much of fandom really isn't 
there for the person behind the work, but the work itself. They don't 
necessarily feel obligated to be positive about the work or follow 
directions from the author. In this case I guess the lure of 
becoming "part of canon" in some way, or making money was more 
important to SVA than what he seemed to know was JKR's wishes. How 
would she protect herself from being violated again this way? Not 
personally validate anybody in it? Fine by me--as I said, I'm a bit 
creeped out by the "I talked to JKR and that makes me more important 
and special than other fans!" type of fans. Seems like for the most 
part she's turned a blind eye rather than put trust in us--which I 
think is a great thing to do. 

My own feeling, as I said, is just that the internet has 
unfortunately jammed private worlds together so now the author can 
see people discussing and playing around with her books where in the 
past this stuff would be going on, but she would have little way of 
coming across it (unless somebody sent her a 'zine or something). We 
just have to, imo, work out a compromise where we don't bother each 
other or infringe on each other's space. Like, for me I think the 
author has no business telling me what I can say to other people 
about her book, or about things she's said, even if that came down to 
me imagining a story with the characters and letting them read it. 
Otoh, I have no business publishing a book for money using material 
that belongs to her, that she created. (I realize that some people 
put the line between those two things in a different place.)

-m