I just thought I'd clear up the particular point re the holding of copyright in derivative works because I've seen comments to the effect that violation of copyright is theft and if you do it you've got no rights at all to any derivative work you produce.
Okay, gotcha. And I think, (without actually going back and reading it) I was presenting probably two thoughts slammed together regarding creative rights. One) that, as you pointed out, there is the perception that fan fic creators have absolutely no rights to their work, because it's theft. But that is the perception, even if it's wrong. And 2) that, while there may be an argument on paper for the rights as a creator of derivative works, it's not iron-clad and unless you are totally willing to commit your life, if not your finances, to proving that right in court, a fan really doesn't have any recourse -- and (I could stretch the point) no real "right" at this point in time, because that "right" theoretical or implied, has never been tested in court that I know of.
I don't actually think we disagree and you were totally within your right (gack!) to clarify the point, and I appreciate it.
I have to admit that I don't think of infringement and theft in the same lines, and while I'm sure I've used the phrase "Stealing someone else's ideas/character/situations...) I, personally don't view fan fic, or fan vids, or fan anything much, as theft the way I do, say, Plagiarism. Theft implies the taking of something and treating it as if it were your own and it's your "right" to maintain possession -- be it candy from a store, money from a bank, or someone else's creative output. Infringement is more like...uhm, party crashing. You know it's not your house, not your party, not your beer and chips, but you partake anyway and kind of hope the host won't mind too much as long as you don't walk off with the silver punchbowl and try to sell it, or try to usurp his place as host in the eyes of his guests.
In terms of fan to fan transaction, I think that still holds true. Yes, we often share the same love of source, both parties acknowledging it isn't our personal, original work, but there is a sense of ownership of the context in which we take those similar characters and situations. Context that once again, can be infringed upon, and should be accorded the same crediting of source as the original media source. That there's a hierarchy among some fans to the way people think about who should be due that kind of credit for source, makes my head hurt. I don't often feel put upon to actually even ask permission of another fan although more often I do for courtesy's sake, but I do think acknowledging my source, be it amateur or pro, individual or corporation, is the minimal amount of what I *can* do to make sure everyone knows I actually am fully aware that I'm borrowing without asking.
Which when I look at it written out like that seems pretty silly -- but it does kind of cover my own rationale. Yes, I am borrowing your stuff and yes, I know you may not really like it, and no, I promise I won't make any money off it but seriously, it's sitting on your shelf and you have more than one and well...I mean if you're not going to use it in this way, I'm thinking, that it really isn't a big deal.
Of course that's assuming that the whole branching off of conceptual and contextual paths takes off in so many directions and interpretations that a single person or even a single company couldn't explore them all in a hundred years. Kind of like having a warehouse filled top to bottom with toilet paper, but designating it all for a single toilet. I mean sure, if you can afford to do that, it's fine, but it's kind of ridiculous.
Okay, that was a scary metaphor {g}. I think I need coffee. Or a beer.
Re: Just to clarify
Okay, gotcha. And I think, (without actually going back and reading it) I was presenting probably two thoughts slammed together regarding creative rights. One) that, as you pointed out, there is the perception that fan fic creators have absolutely no rights to their work, because it's theft. But that is the perception, even if it's wrong. And 2) that, while there may be an argument on paper for the rights as a creator of derivative works, it's not iron-clad and unless you are totally willing to commit your life, if not your finances, to proving that right in court, a fan really doesn't have any recourse -- and (I could stretch the point) no real "right" at this point in time, because that "right" theoretical or implied, has never been tested in court that I know of.
I don't actually think we disagree and you were totally within your right (gack!) to clarify the point, and I appreciate it.
I have to admit that I don't think of infringement and theft in the same lines, and while I'm sure I've used the phrase "Stealing someone else's ideas/character/situations...) I, personally don't view fan fic, or fan vids, or fan anything much, as theft the way I do, say, Plagiarism. Theft implies the taking of something and treating it as if it were your own and it's your "right" to maintain possession -- be it candy from a store, money from a bank, or someone else's creative output. Infringement is more like...uhm, party crashing. You know it's not your house, not your party, not your beer and chips, but you partake anyway and kind of hope the host won't mind too much as long as you don't walk off with the silver punchbowl and try to sell it, or try to usurp his place as host in the eyes of his guests.
In terms of fan to fan transaction, I think that still holds true. Yes, we often share the same love of source, both parties acknowledging it isn't our personal, original work, but there is a sense of ownership of the context in which we take those similar characters and situations. Context that once again, can be infringed upon, and should be accorded the same crediting of source as the original media source. That there's a hierarchy among some fans to the way people think about who should be due that kind of credit for source, makes my head hurt. I don't often feel put upon to actually even ask permission of another fan although more often I do for courtesy's sake, but I do think acknowledging my source, be it amateur or pro, individual or corporation, is the minimal amount of what I *can* do to make sure everyone knows I actually am fully aware that I'm borrowing without asking.
Which when I look at it written out like that seems pretty silly -- but it does kind of cover my own rationale. Yes, I am borrowing your stuff and yes, I know you may not really like it, and no, I promise I won't make any money off it but seriously, it's sitting on your shelf and you have more than one and well...I mean if you're not going to use it in this way, I'm thinking, that it really isn't a big deal.
Of course that's assuming that the whole branching off of conceptual and contextual paths takes off in so many directions and interpretations that a single person or even a single company couldn't explore them all in a hundred years. Kind of like having a warehouse filled top to bottom with toilet paper, but designating it all for a single toilet. I mean sure, if you can afford to do that, it's fine, but it's kind of ridiculous.
Okay, that was a scary metaphor {g}. I think I need coffee. Or a beer.