quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: how is it possible to stop someone from selling say, and artistic rendering of a Harley?
Threat of lawsuit. I've actually been told getting a legal contract on anything is just a formality unless you have big guns behind you who can sue a contract breaker.
quote:Isn't it a work of art? I think we still do have that pesky 1st ammendment to protect that sort of thing.
If you are selling it, then it isn't just a work of art or protected speech. I'm not really sure about art works, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were verboten.
quote:Originally posted by human_2.0: Threat of lawsuit. I've actually been told getting a legal contract on anything is just a formality unless you have big guns behind you who can sue a contract breaker.
Ah, the Disney school of legal interpretations: it doesn't matter whether we're technically right or not, we can just scare the crap out of everybody, buy the verdict, and get out way because we're the big guy on the playground. Yech
Edit: that one on the gugenheim is ridiculous "unauthorized use of the name guggenheim is unlawful? I don't think so."
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by human_2.0: Threat of lawsuit. I've actually been told getting a legal contract on anything is just a formality unless you have big guns behind you who can sue a contract breaker.
Ah, the Disney school of legal interpretations: it doesn't matter whether we're technically right or not, we can just scare the crap out of everybody, buy the verdict, and get out way because we're the big guy on the playground. Yech
Edit: that one on the gugenheim is ridiculous "unauthorized use of the name guggenheim is unlawful? I don't think so."
Uhoh, Peeps are trademarked, better shut down the other thread. Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That pulitzer winner reminded me of notable stage productions of Woyzech, Hedda Gabler, Shakespeare -- none are safe. There's always the push to do something different every time someone decides to put it on stage. Post Modernity being what it is, each new incarnation can find itself becoming more and more removed from the original author's intentions and styles. The fortunate thing is many times that the original author is quite dead, and his opinions don't matter in the least.
I once saw an amateur production of "The Miracle Worker" where the director spliced together that script, along with "Monday after the Miracle" and excerpts from Helen Keller's writings. The director said that she wanted to make The Miracle Worker more about Annie Sullivan than Hellen Keller (otherwise the play should be called "The Miracle Workie") so she took it upon herself to change it. And because Theatre is such an evolving and transient art, she was allowed to do so. But why can she be allowed to do that, when presumably William Gibson was perfectly happy with the story and characters he wrote?
I'm dramaturging an original play next year, and the playwright has expressed that she is terrified of a director taking themes and concepts from her script that simply aren't there, and those themes and concepts coming out in the production against her wishes. It's a valid concern, because there can be such a push to do something innovative.
Of course, Theatre is much, much different from prose in that so many people must be involved in the process, instead of simply an author and a reader. An author has complete control over what is being presented to the reader, regardless of how the reader interprets what the author presents.
I finally broke down and read Chris's firefly fanfic. I thought it was great. I generally steer clear from HP fannon, but I have a friend who actively writes things like Snape's trial or Book III from the perspective of Remus Lupin and slides them by me for critique and perspective, since I know the books and can lend a listening ear.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I dislike the idea of 'March.' The same way I dislike the ideas for sequels to 'Gone With the Wind,' and 'Les Miserables.'
Or to 'Jane Eyre' *shudders in remembrance*....a bad sequel is one of the most painful things a reader ever has to endure.
'March,' is, however, a parellel novel, much like Ender's Shadow is to Ender's Game.
edit: except, of course, written by a different author and not the same who wrote the original, as I'm sure someone will be quick to point out Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sarcasticmuppet: That pulitzer winner reminded me of notable stage productions of Woyzech, Hedda Gabler, Shakespeare -- none are safe. There's always the push to do something different every time someone decides to put it on stage. Post Modernity being what it is, each new incarnation can find itself becoming more and more removed from the original author's intentions and styles. The fortunate thing is many times that the original author is quite dead, and his opinions don't matter in the least.
I once saw an amateur production of "The Miracle Worker" where the director spliced together that script, along with "Monday after the Miracle" and excerpts from Helen Keller's writings. The director said that she wanted to make The Miracle Worker more about Annie Sullivan than Hellen Keller (otherwise the play should be called "The Miracle Workie") so she took it upon herself to change it. And because Theatre is such an evolving and transient art, she was allowed to do so. But why can she be allowed to do that, when presumably William Gibson was perfectly happy with the story and characters he wrote?
I'm dramaturging an original play next year, and the playwright has expressed that she is terrified of a director taking themes and concepts from her script that simply aren't there, and those themes and concepts coming out in the production against her wishes. It's a valid concern, because there can be such a push to do something innovative.
Of course, Theatre is much, much different from prose in that so many people must be involved in the process, instead of simply an author and a reader. An author has complete control over what is being presented to the reader, regardless of how the reader interprets what the author presents.
I finally broke down and read Chris's firefly fanfic. I thought it was great. I generally steer clear from HP fannon, but I have a friend who actively writes things like Snape's trial or Book III from the perspective of Remus Lupin and slides them by me for critique and perspective, since I know the books and can lend a listening ear.
OSC wrote an interesting ArtWatch article on a Utah group that got shut down for taking out the "****s" from Neil Simon's rumors. Rumors
Apparently, Neil Simon doesn't like his plays "changed". In my high school, we cut scenes and edited awkward lines for a variety of reasons. Heck sometimes the actors just couldn't remember the exact line, and screwed up. Do you pull the plug for that.
If you perform the Complete Works of William Shakespeare, abriged, you have to change the the play. Some of the actors play themselves, so they use their real names and an obviously real biography. In a high school setting, the play gets edited so more than three actors are inolved.
When you put on any play, usually you have to pay royalities to the publisher (and the author) of the play. As far as I'm concerened, if the check is cashed, then the director and the cast can do anything they want to the play. If the playwright doesn't want the play changed, then he or she should not have the rights rented out at all. In fact, if the writer is that squemish, they should have a movie made. Then there's one interpretation (that's if Hollywood lets you do it your way - HA!) and it can be distributed among the masses. Heck the writer might as well make the work prose and hang on to the movie rights. Then people can't touch it.
posted
I think the way the world works sort of forces print writers to stomp on the fanfic. I get that.
But that issue and the scads of fanfic for movies and tV shows (which often actually help these properties bottom line) are two different animals. As is the all-fanfic-is-crap-because-I-say-so argument.
If I'm ever published, and if those works ever generate fanfic, I'm sure I will feel a warm flush of pride and affection just before I unleash my attack lawyers.
So, my take on the issue is centrist -- it's a fun hobby for those who do it in fandoms that allow it (and probably benefit from it), but I also completely sympathize with an author's need to protect their intellectual property. (And I'm also really puzzled that some people apparently desire to write, say, Ender fan stories, or fanfic in any print-only universe. I think the fanfic thing will become more of an issue for OSC when (if? ) the Ender's Game movie gets made, but I'm sure he'll be ready for it.)
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
This should be interesting... just found out that the SciFi group in Tampa holds a fan fiction convention every year.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's an interesting article, that reinforces my position on the subject: vigilant protection of the literary creation by stamping out fanfic.
It is an interesting article, and it reinforces my own position: idiot fans who don't respect the wishes of the authors deserve what they get. I eagerly await the second installment of this article, which will look at the viewpoint of the fans.
Something I'm curious about; one of the complaints of the writers against fanfic is that it takes control of the characters away and that readers may become confused that the fanfic is part of the "real" story. Has this happened?
Have any authors been approached by befuddled fans, or received letters asking why the latest book contradicts the story on this website? It may be a valid fear, but is it happening?
This is a different issue than the fan suing for royalties, that was a singular incident of an idiot fan that ruined things for the respectful ones.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Have any authors been approached by befuddled fans, or received letters asking why the latest book contradicts the story on this website? It may be a valid fear, but is it happening?
I don't know that it is; but I haven't spent a long time protecting anyone's property but my own.
If University professors can perpetuate false conclusions about a work of fiction on their students, it's NOT that big a step to say that educated fans can do the same thing for a popular work. ESPECIALLY if the author is not prolific.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Yes, they could. They could also read essays or critiques of books that delve into the interpreted motivations, histories, and futures of the characters and become confused when those don't match the author's intentions. And in such essays there also exists the same hazard of someone independently coming up with a future plot point the author was going to use anyway, or of competing interpretations of the work becoming widespread. But no one is calling for an end to critiques. It's the fictional interpretations that are bugging some authors because it would be easier to confuse one story with another than it would to confuse a critique with a story.
Which is why I asked: has this happened?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: Which is why I asked: has this happened?
There was an example right in the article wasn't there? In that case the author brought it partially on herself, but the potential for that fan to strike was already there. Its like OSC has said himself, with the reams of fanfic being produced about his work, the chances are that some fan will correctly predict the outcome of a future book. If that happens, it will jeopardize his work, even though he will of done nothing wrong.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not asking if someone has accused an author of stealing an idea -- that's happened without fanfic and will continue to happen if fanfic is "stamped out" -- that was what I was referring to when I mentioned idiot fans who screw things up for everyone else.
My question is have any authors encountered fans who were confused by fan fiction? Has fan fiction had an effect on how fans read or buy the original works?
I'm trying to gauge whether one of the listed threats really exists.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
In that case I have no idea. My instinct is to say probably, but not in a huge way.
The thing I would be worried about as an author is that the potential exists for these screw ups. I can't imagine alot of positive incentives for an author to actually host fanfic on his own website. It might increase fan interest, but it would come with too big a risk IMO. Risk of confusion, risk of tainting the series or of having some fan double-cross you. There is also fan burn-out to consider, although probably this isn't a big problem because the fanfic writers are hardcore fans anyway, so they'll keep buying even when the franchise goes south, (how do you think Enterprise survived the first season? )
You have to assume that if something is prevelant enough it is going to have SOME effect. Maybe positive, maybe not, probably both. I as an author would want to control that aspect of my work, and endorsing or allowing fanfic can threaten that control.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think for the writers that allow it, whether by encouraging it or by carefully not caring, it's a matter of "they can't write my world better than me, it's not a risk to let them play with my toys." Not all writers are that confident; the ones that are tend to have a strong voice in their work or have a very tightly plotted world, or both.
But then, I don't really know why those writers don't care while others do. I'm just glad.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Confidence is a maybe IMO. Any author who is attracting fanfickers and wanna-bes is already successful, and whether confident or not, certainly with reason to feel secure.
That being said, as an author I would be something like an amatuer chef in my kitchen. I invite friends over, and they come into my kitchen and start opening the oven and changing the gauges on the stove. Pretty soon they're trying to salt my special sauces and give me advice on desert. I don't want it, I don't need it, and for me the help is a hindrance.
If an author is like that, it would seem that confidence tells him he can and should be the one telling the story, and fear of another screwing it up keeps him from allowing others "into the kitchen." How competent would a chef be who allowed the patrons into the kitchen? He might be confident, but it would be confidence born in stupidity Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Something I'm curious about; one of the complaints of the writers against fanfic is that it takes control of the characters away and that readers may become confused that the fanfic is part of the "real" story. Has this happened?
Have any authors been approached by befuddled fans, or received letters asking why the latest book contradicts the story on this website? It may be a valid fear, but is it happening?
I'm not at all involved in either reading or writing fanfic, but I do have fun with Harry Potter fandom. One of the posts on my favorite HP forum implied that the poster was getting confused between the fanfic storylines and the real story. However, she never implied that she thought that J. K. Rowling had actually written said fanfic, or had anything to do with it. Which seemed to be what Robin Hobb was afraid of in the article. Surely people can tell internet fanfic from the real thing?
It's an interesting article, that reinforces my position on the subject: vigilant protection of the literary creation by stamping out fanfic.
Thanks for that link. Very enlightening. I feel for MZB. That has to be horrible. Writing a novel is hard work. I can't imagine how horrible it would feel to have to trash all that work because a fan tried to claim rights to your story.
I would also be very worried about getting a bad rep. If I read an author's work and the writing isn't good, there's a very good chance I won't buy any of her books. I would hate to read what I thought was a chapter excerpt and base a judgment of the author's work on what was actually just fanfic.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Any author who is attracting fanfickers and wanna-bes is already successful, and whether confident or not, certainly with reason to feel secure.
Writers are, as a class, one of the most insecure groups of people around (except for actors) But I get what you're saying.
You're trying to convince me of why authors wouldn't allow fanfic and I'm trying to convince you why some authors do, and we're both right. The fact remains that there are authors who have no problem with fanfic.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think fanfic increases sales. Not to new converts, really, but to fans who might forget about new releases several months (or years!) apart. Sharing in that kind of community makes almost certain that you will seek new material about your favorite characters as soon as it comes out.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are a few ways one could approach it, but part of the difficulty is that everything has fanfic.
Also, determining cause and effect is problematic.
Perhaps best would be to seek out a case study where of two series with similar sales one suddenly had an increase in fandom activity, and see if sales were higher for that series after that.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
I agree, fugu-- I think this would be a difficult thing to track.
BTW-- I'm listening to a radio drama from NPR containing Star Wars Episodes 4-6; and if the movies had been this good...geez. Sure the acting's not all that, and the lines are pretty corny, but MAN is it an improvement over what was shown in the theaters!
Leia Organa pretending to be interested in an Imperial officer, just to wheedle information from him!
The pacifism of Alderan explained!
Bail Organa as more than a name!
Luke showing competence before meeting Yoda!
Some really good stuff here. Mark Hamil voices Luke; from the material here, I think that Lucas made him too old in the movies. A sixteen or seventeen year old would have fit the role better.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
) the Ender's Game movie gets made, but I'm sure he'll be ready for it.)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
