living in denial

[lagilman]

So, the results of my stance on the "fanfiction: pro or con" panel at Lunacon, and the resulting article in the NJ Star Ledger are beginning to bear fuit. Bitter fruit, at that -- have started getting hate mail.

People, get a clue. When I say that it's illegal, that's because it IS. Really. The courts have so-ruled, and it's been upheld. Argue against copyright. Push the fight to get rid of it, if you really think that's what's Right. For now, it exists. And if the copyright holder does not fight known infringment, they lose the right to claim copyright, which means that can't earn money off thier works. This is called "damaging your own livlihood."


Telling me I shouldn't be looking to make money off my work, because it's depriving you of your 'right' to create fanfic? Let's see you turn that around and hit your own paycheck, child. See how stringent you are about 'freedom' then.

Hell, I love fanfic. I wrote fanfic. I think writing fanfic is a great fannish thing. But keep it lo-key. Allow the official copyright holders to not see it. Don't trumpet yourself where they have no choice but to take note, especially the one-owner material (as opposed to media work, where there's more room to argue against the 'reasonable confusion in the market."). But remember that it's against established law, so when you're told to stop, you have to stop or face consequences. Why are you bitching at me for pointing that out?


Oh. And telling (threatening) me that you're not going to buy any of my books from now on? Hey, that's your consumer's privilege. I'm not about to cower in my shoes and stop speaking truth in public because of it.


But stop to think about what could happen, in a world where writers, and musicians, and actors don't get royalties from their work, and their income drops even closer to nil. You think you're still going to be getting these stories and shows you form fandoms around? Good luck.

Comments

[kradical.livejournal.com]

Brava! Well said! Fight the power! And other exclamations!

[ex-fashioni.livejournal.com]

I'll never forget, being at a con and chatting with Christopher Golden, when a girl came up to him as he was signing books. Following conversation went something like this:

FanGirl: I love your Buffy books, I've read all of them.

CG: Thanks, I appreciate that.

FG: I write too.

CG: Do you? Oh, that's great, really.

FG: Yeah, and a lot of my fans have told me that I write a lot like you-- and that my fanfic's even better than yours

CG: (muscle twitching ever so slightly) How nice for you. Except-- I don't write fanfic. I write licensed property novels under a contract from Fox while you're infringing on copyright law.

That's stayed with me for nearly five years. And I wrote fanfic too-- rehoned the writing chops on it before moving back into original material, but I would have never presumed to think it was my inalienable right or something.

[kefiraahava.livejournal.com]

"Telling me I shouldn't be looking to make money off my work, because it's depriving you of your 'right' to create fanfic?"

*facepalm* They didn't. No, no, I know they did, but what self-righteous little brats of whatever age!

If it's illegal, it's illegal. And just because they WANT doesn't mean they get to HAVE at the expense of someone else's livelihood, as you say.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

And just because they WANT doesn't mean they get to HAVE

I say this as a heavy heart because I am one of those fandom-is-a-way-of-life fans, but there is a loud and angry segment of panfandom that has a frightening sense of entitlement - and the internet gives them a louder, and more immediate voice. The ones who defend Real Person Slash and attack anyone who decries it, the ones who are protesting that JK Rowling didn't have the love affair they wanted in her latest book, etc.

There are some people in this world - and not just in fandom - who are simply not going to accept that what they can't have whatever they demand.

[klingonguy.livejournal.com]

articulate and compelling and concise, but I can't help feeling this just adds to the doom that hangs over you. won't a certain mindset just react to your arguments as if they're further justification (or at least impetus) to imitate your writing?

[lagilman]

That mindset is already set. I'm perfectly willing to ignore them -- but not when they're sending me hate e-mail. I'm lazy, not a pacifist.


Anyway, "doom?" What "doom?"

[ginmar.livejournal.com]

"Telling me I shouldn't be looking to make money off my work, because it's depriving you of your 'right' to create fanfic?"

But...but...but...OW! That hurt, it was so stupid.

That makes no sense at all. WTF are they putting in the water these days? Valium?

[dancingwriter.livejournal.com]

Sorry about the hate mail. Fan fiction seems to be such a thorny issue. I certainly understand the impulse behind it--wanting more stories about the fandom you love, wanting to be part of it. But I don't understand the lack of respect many fic writers seem to have for the creators of these fandoms--not only in terms of not caring about copyright infringement but also in terms of messing with the author's characterizations and the like. (I have more sympathy, though, for the whole Mary Sue phenomenon, so long as it's not a canon character being turned into a Mary Sue.) Thanks to the Internet, though, the old genie's out of the bottle. People are going to keep writing fanfic (not really a problem, as you even said) and publishing it--which is where the trouble lies. The days of keeping it low-key and just passing copies of stories around to one's friends seem to be over. But that doesn't change the fact that copyright infringement is illegal. It seems to me that you are doing a service to fanfic writers by letting them know this, so that they can make informed choices about their actions. I'm not surprised that a lot of people don't like hearing this, though.

Sorry for the rambling comment. I thought I was more awake than I am. Getting more coffee now.

[allaboutm-e.livejournal.com]

I don't understand people who feel a proprietary self-righteousness towards other people's intellectual property.
"Ooooh, Joss / Gene / Amy, I love your characters so much I'm going to imagine my own stories about them and share them with my friends!"
Well, okay, I guess, as long as one realizes the boundaries of this. (as noted, the genie's pretty much out of the bottle, and the only big difference today is it's on-line instead of mimeograph)
But it's still someone else's property being played with, and if one isn't doing it within the legal boundaries, one needs to realize it's no different than, say, printing and distributing unlicensed Bart Simpson or Garfield t-shirts.
That is to say, it's theft, plain and simple, regardless of the trappings of admiration it's dressed up in.
:: le sigh grande ::

Any weirdness with folks sending you Wren stories or the like?

[lagilman]

Any weirdness with folks sending you Wren stories or the like?



I've asked them not to. Don't see, don't have to respond. Likewise the person who was using the Retrievers universe as the basis for a gaming module. Don't tell me/my agent/my publisher, don't publish it yourself, go forth and have fun, my children.

[dianora2.livejournal.com]

That article actually did get published? I never saw it so figured it just went away. You don't have a link, do you?

[lagilman]

No link, no. I got sent actual physical clippings, courtesy of both the ex and my uncle, who saw it in the paper.

It was an okay article, although clearly, um, edited for space and Agenda.

[peggin.livejournal.com]

People are such idiots. They're ignorant of the law, they want to stay that way, and they get pissed off when people try to introduce them to reality. Because, obviously, since you're the one who told them it's illegal, that makes it your fault it's illegal.

I mean, I enjoy reading some fanfic (although most of it is complete dreck) and I even dabble a little in writing fanfic, but I know it's not my "right" to read and write the stuff.

But stop to think about what could happen, in a world where writers, and musicians, and actors don't get royalties from their work, and their income drops even closer to nil. You think you're still going to be getting these stories and shows you form fandoms around? Good luck.

I've had this kind of conversation with my brother, when he wants to know how, as a Libertarian, I can be in favor of patents and copyrights and so forth, since their very existence depends on the government. I'm not sure I can completely reconcile it with being a Libertarian, but to me, NOT having laws protecting intellectual property is just stupid..

Like when people protest the cost of a new "miracle drug" and claim that the pill only costs 5 cents to make, so why are they paying $20 a pill. Well, the second pill might have only cost 5 cents, but the first one cost $50 million. If the drug companies don't have the power to recoup those costs, if another drug company can come along, steal the formula, and start selling those pills for 5 cents, there's never going to be another first pill.

The only real difference with creative works is that creative people will probably still create, but if they can't make money off their creations they're not going to put nearly as much of an effort into finding an audience for their work. Also, since they can't earn a living off their work anymore, they're going to have to find another source of income. This means they'll have a lot less time to do their creative work. So the work will still be there, but there will be a lot less of it and nobody will be able to find it.

I'm not sure I had much of a point with this, beyond my first sentence: People are such idiots.

[lagilman]

Being a Libertarian requires a LOT of mental juggling and personal compromise-making, I've noted over the years. Great theory, tough to live in the real world.

[affinity8.livejournal.com]

I've written yet, you've written it, kradical's written it, Mercedes Lackey has written it, we've enjoyed it/enjoy it still, it's becoming more and more common, it's the genie let out of a bottle. We argue about it, we make class distinctions based on it (e.g., the geek chart), we talk about law and single ownership vs. media ownership, we talk about fanfic's merits and drawbacks, we talk about it as part of a literary traditon or as copyright infringement, and this is a conversation that will be going on for many years to come, with people often reiterating the same arguments. The trouble with fanfic, imho, is not that it exists, but that instead of once being a fan labor of love confined to small circulation fanzines, it's everywhere on the internet, and it takes about fifteen minutes for a teenage "author" to post a drabble on fanfic.net and start bragging about her legion of fans.

I do agree that if the sole copyright owner of a work asks that people not write fanfic based on his/her work, then fanfic writers should respect that. Or at least keep it very, very, very, very, very quiet, as in "I write it and my two friends read it and we're done now."

[lagilman]

And not call any author who disagrees with them "a moron."

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Well said! Sing on!

I know the pain of speaking out against copyright infringement. I did a panel on fanfic and copyright at Norwescon a couple of years ago (me, a couple of authors, and a lawyer) and was the target of a lot of hostility as a result. The panel ended on time, after an exchange that went something like this:

Fanboy: You can't stop people from writing fanfic. Information wants to be free; the Internet gives us the right.

Me: The Internet doesn't give you the right to steal, which is what you're doing. And if information wants to be free, please put it in a box and let's see it wriggle is way out with no help from you. The law is the law, dude. If you steal something that someone else created and owns, it's against the law.

Fanboy: But if I buy it, it's mine.

Me: If you buy a copy of the original, the copy is yours, not the original, which is what you're doing when you buy a book or a DVD.

Fanboy: Uh...

[kradical.livejournal.com]

And if information wants to be free, please put it in a box and let's see it wriggle is way out with no help from you.

May I steal this line please?

[neadods.livejournal.com]

The part of the article that I don't understand is the not-direct-quote wherein they say you say that fanfic is something that people outgrow. And I'm wondering about the context of that, because it sounds a great deal more dismissive than you usually are about fandom.

[lagilman]

The article was edited for space, as all newspaper articles are - I was on the phone with the reporter for over an hour, and many of my comments which bridged the space form "I wrote fic" to "I can't support it any longer" were cut. That...annoyed me.

That said, I DO believe that, for most people, writing fanfic is something they move on from. Either the fandom begins to bore or annoy them, and they don't find something else to refill the well, or they discover (as I did) theat they just don't have the time/energy to give to it.

It's not a dissing, just an observation, and one I stand behind (especially when confronted by what appear to be legions of teenage fic-writers posting everywhere).

That said, it has nothing to do with my comments about the legality thereof, which is what I was being attacked for.

[rosefox]

But stop to think about what could happen, in a world where writers, and musicians, and actors don't get royalties from their work, and their income drops even closer to nil. You think you're still going to be getting these stories and shows you form fandoms around? Good luck.

There was art long before there were royalty agreements. Musicians and actors would get paid per performance; writers would get paid upon manuscript delivery. This is a not unreasonable way to do things and it's the way things were done for a long long time. To use scarlettina's phrase, they're buying the original and may do as they please with their purchase. If the price isn't right, the artist can always choose not to sell.

Many artists are perfectly willing to create "open source art". Many are willing to publish for a pittance or for free. I entirely agree that those who release their work under more stringent strictures should be respected; I don't agree that if there were no such thing as copyright or royalties, art would disappear. I mention this not to twit you but because I think that last paragraph detracts from an otherwise strong and sensible position.

warning: moderate crankiness ahead

[lagilman]

True. And there used to be apprenticeships, wherein the master would pay for the apprentice's upkeep and education while learning the trade. And ther eused to be social structures wherein people were taken care of as they aged, rather than having to rely solely on what they could save during thier career.

Saying "what was" doesn't mean it's the way things work now.


As to your other point -- show me one artist who creates 'open source art' as the whole of their means of employment -- no trust funds, no grants, no outside income to pay their bills.

Me, I'd loooove to have a grant, or a patron, or a publisher who paid living wage advances complete with health insurance and benefits... but instead, the system is set up so that we earn our money on the backside, via royalties, IF the material sells well enough.

Don't like the results? Blame the system, don't penalize the people who have to work within it.

Better yet, UNDERSTAND the system as it works, before (generic you, not a specific) try to claim it's wrong, or untrue, or not fair.

/end crankiness

Mostly agree, but...

[jlassen.livejournal.com]

You said: "And if the copyright holder does not fight known infringment, they lose the right to claim copyright,"

This is absolutely not true. TRADEMARKS need to be defended, or they are lost. Copyright is never lost due to failure to fight infringement.

But yor point stands... copyright = the ability of creative people to get paid for their work, and overall is a good thing, even if it means you can't post your buffy/sabrina slash fic to the internet. You can still WRITE it... but you can't share it publically... Public... publish... they share a root for a reason.

Re: Mostly agree, but...

[spimby.livejournal.com]

"This is absolutely not true. TRADEMARKS need to be defended, or they are lost. Copyright is never lost due to failure to fight infringement."

Yeah, I was just going to say that. Not that this contradicts Laura in any way...fanfic is something that's usually tolerated as long as it's not sold, but it's not like anybody's under any onus to tolerate it, moral or otherwise. (Disney isn't really evil when they go after a day care center that adverises itself with unauthorized use of Disney characters, either.)

[seachanges.livejournal.com]

Fan fiction is a privilege, not a right. When I first became involved in fandom back in the Dark Ages, writing fic was considered an homage and an act of love, but it was also something done on the q.t. because we knew we could get in trouble for it. No-one questioned that the networks and/or the authors owned the shows/books/films we were writing about. We were just fans sharing our love for various characters and worlds.

Now it seems like fandom as a whole is pushier, more ill-mannered and prone to egregious displays of pure wank. I don't know why that is, but it makes me sad. The days of IDIC are long gone, and fandom is an uglier place because of it. It's gotten to the point where I don't want to have anything to do with fandom because the fans have become so petty and mean-spirited. And that also makes me sad.

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

And if the copyright holder does not fight known infringment, they lose the right to claim copyright, which means that can't earn money off thier works.

I think you may be confusing copyright with trademark infringement. I could be wrong about this, of course, but I don't think a copyright owner is required to protect copyright in the same way that a trademark owner is required to protect a trademark.

If that were the case, the copyrights to Trek, SW, and a lot of other works would have become public domain a long time ago, and they haven't; because the owners are most certainly aware that those rights were infringed. They sent C&Ds in the most egregious cases, true, but not in every case they knew about.

The infringement I think we ought to be a lot more worried about is what Google is attempting to do. They openly assert that their mission is to make all of the world's information freely available to everyone, and that information includes everything a writer writes. Sure, they claim that people will only be able to read "snippets" (which somehow become up to 20% of a book, which somehow becomes 100% of a book...), and librarians say that it's just too, too hard to locate copyright owners in order to get permission to make electronic copies of works.... Those are the real threats to writers' livelihoods, in my opinion. Writers have a vested interest in restricting access to their works, and unless we find a way of getting paid every time someone accesses it online, or decide to sell all rights for a one-time fee, we are going to find ourselves royally screwed within ten years.

Copyright

[(Anonymous)]

Correct. An author can not lose their copyright by not pursuing infringers. It is the creator's right to choose their fights. However, allowing too many infringers to get away with it can set a precedent that a court could hold against the author.

Whether an author could lose their copyright or not really is immaterial to the infringers. The diehard "Information wants to be free" people who want to do fanfic probably aren't too worried about the ability of authors to retain copyright. After all, what could happen -- there are no more authorized TV episodes or movies? Every show or film series comes to an end, but the fanfic would continue.

Personally and professionally, I agree fully about the legal status of fanfic. It is illegal and should not be freely available to all and sundry on the Internet. (I used to write Trek fanfic (no slash), but gave it up long ago when I realized it was not going to launch my writing career, and my writing time could be better spent.)

Sean

[badgermirlacca.livejournal.com]

...however, I can't argue in the least that you're not absolutely correct that yes, fanfic is, in fact, in violation of copyright law. Fans cannot claim fair use exemption. Every time they write it, they're breaking the law.

And to flaunt it under the owner's nose is plain rudeness, and if the copyright owner decides to skin the fan alive, well... the law is on the owner's side. Period. And the consequences are damned expensive.

Seems to me that fannish courtesy requires keeping it under the radar.

[naominovik.livejournal.com]

When I say that it's illegal, that's because it IS. Really. The courts have so-ruled, and it's been upheld.

The most recent court ruling related to fanfic as far as I know was the Wind Done Gone case, which was decided in favor of the defendants. (In case you're not familiar -- the book is a rewrite of Gone With The Wind, which is still under copyright, from the point of view of a black slave; the Mitchell estate sued to try and prevent publication and lost.)

Most copyright-infringement cases are about unauthorized commercial duplication and distribution of the author's work. Which few people would argue with, even the most extreme of open-source fanatics. But there's a wide gulf between someone copying your book and selling it for their own profit without paying you a cent, and someone writing fanfic and posting it on the internet at their own expense.

If you want to know more about the issue, this is the best legal article I've read on the subject:

Legal Fictions: Copyright, Fan Fiction, and a New Common Law
http://www.schrag.info/tushnet/law/fanficarticle.html

It's a long article, but well-written and easy to follow, IMO.

I will add that in my understanding (though I am not a lawyer and so this should not be taken as gospel or anything), that as already mentioned, you don't need to defend copyright, just trademark. You won't be making yourself vulnerable just by permitting fanfic; if you actively read it, then you might have issues if some loony fan accused you of ripping off a piece she sent you, but that's not the same thing.

[karenmiller.livejournal.com]

I admire your dedication to the facts, in standing up for this important (and I must confess, to me, obvious) principle.

I wonder if part of the problem is the divide between tv/movie fanfic and novel fanfic. While I happily wrote the former, it never occurred to me that I or anyone would write the latter. I nearly passed out when I learned of the Potter fic. (I know ... I'm very sad *g*). Somehow, the tv/movie sources never seemed to belong to one person, so many people had their fingers in the story, it just seemed ... open. Novels are entirely different. Not legally, I appreciate, but certainly artistically. At least, it feels that way to me. So perhaps other people feel that, and can't understand the way a lot of authors feel ... because some authors won't have a bar of fanfic and it has nothing to do with copyright issue, but 'ownership' of those characters, those worlds. Do novelists feel differently about the characters/worlds they create because they do not share in their creation the way worlds and characters are shared in the creation of a movie/tv show?

The internet has created an entirely new breed of fan, who can hide behind anonymous and cybernames and be truly, truly horrible and aggressive and slanderous and vile, and bear no consequences for that action. And society in general is now firmly ensconced on a path where civility is scorned, not celebrated, where individuals are never never never told that their private rights do not trump the rights and welfare of another, or the community at large, and that they are entitled to have what they want, when they want it, and screw everybody else. And these folk, who are so jealous of their 'rights', will viciously attack anyone who exercises *their* right to disagree or, as you've done, point out perfectly calmly that there are legal ramifications to their actions.

I think the only response is to do what you've done -- continue to tell the truth. You've set a great example. It pisses me off beyond the telling that you've been vilified, threatened and attacked because of it. This of course is the modus operandi du jour ... attack anyone who has the temerity to disagree with you. I hope the fallout isn't too horrible, and that the truth goes on being spoken.

The only argument against fanfic that gets me seeing scarlet is the assertion that it's not creative.

[djonn]

I'd agree that mediafic and lit-fic -- generally speaking -- raise different issues, and that there's a key qualitative difference between collective creations (most media universes) and individual creations (most literary universes).

The lines blur even further in the case of role-playing universes (the Forgotten Realms, etc.) and literary shared worlds (notably Eric Flint's 1632 universe), wherein readers/consumers are to some degree encouraged to engage in storytelling and in adding to the existing body of material. I believe that Flint has even described the anthologies (print and electronic) arising from the 1632 material as "authorized fanfic" or some such.

The copyright issues regarding fanfic are pretty clear; if a copyright holder doesn't want fans in the sandbox, then he, she, or it has the right to kick them out. Most of the qualitative issues, however, strike me as suspect; there are collective creations on both sides of the fanfic/profic fence, and there's excellent and execrable work on both sides as well.

[thecityofdis.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry you have to deal with the hate mail and abuse. You certainly don't deserve that.

I would second and third, however, the comments about the conflation of copyright/trademark infringement. I have no problem with an author publicly declaring that they will not allow fan fiction of their work - that should be respected immediately and without question. But there are also many authors who publicly endorse such endeavors, and I've yet to see them lose a thing.

In conclusion: people are stupid.

[djonn]

But there are also many authors who publicly endorse such endeavors, and I've yet to see them lose a thing.

Mmm; the Marion Zimmer Bradley case comes to mind. It seems fairly well-established that that particular dispute deep-sixed the novel MZB was working on over which the disagreement arose, and it stopped the Darkover shared-world anthologies dead in their tracks afterward. And that was pre-Internet....there are authors who were formerly fanfic-friendly who've modified their positions in the wake of the realities of Web distribution (Mercedes Lackey, for one).

[janni.livejournal.com]

The thing is, anyone can write as much fanfiction as they want; my private notebooks are my own, even if I show them to a few friends. What they can't do (legally) is put it up in a public place for others to see.

And the Internet is a public place. That's the part fanfic writers don't seem to understand.

I also think there's a small group of folks who assume good fiction will just happen somehow, and honestly couldn't care less if writers make a living.

[harriet-spy.livejournal.com]

When I say that it's illegal, that's because it IS. Really. The courts have so-ruled, and it's been upheld.

I do not believe this is true. As far as I know, there has never been a single case in which an amateur fanfic author has been found liable for copyright infringement in the U.S. courts. In large part, this is because such disputes simply don't get taken all the way through to verdicts, but the fact remains: we do not know if some form of fair use will be read by the courts to cover fanfic, because the contours of the doctrine are far from clear and we do not have precedent to guide us by. I've read a journal article by a respectable legal academic that makes a good case for its being fair use.

What other people have said above about your confusion of trademark and copyright is also correct--you do not need to "defend" your copyright to keep it.

This does not mean that I don't respect your right to make a living off your work, but if you're going to raise legal arguments, it's important to get them right. (Attention to the legal doctrines may also lead you to realize that the system as currently configured benefits you far less than it benefits vast media conglomerates, but that's less important.)

[djonn]

As far as I know, there has never been a single case in which an amateur fanfic author has been found liable for copyright infringement in the U.S. courts. In large part, this is because such disputes simply don't get taken all the way through to verdicts,

From a strict procedural standpoint -- well, maybe. I'm thinking of the Yarbro/Holmesian Federation case. That one got far enough that the settlement agreement didn't merely involve monetary payment, but an agreement to publish retractions in major trade publications. And if that agreement was entered into court records (very likely), that could very well be regarded as a binding acknowledgment that the defendants' actions constituted copyright infringement -- not just by the defendants, but by the court where the records were filed. [That's of limited value for appellate purposes, granted, but it's worth considering.]

I am not a lawyer, but from what I've seen of the legal/academic discussions, my sense is that while some fanfic of certain types might fall into a "fair use" category, I think it's highly unlikely that fanfic as a whole can legally do so.

on copyright and trademark

[lagilman]

To everyone who has chimed in saying that a copyright holder cannot lose their rights, I can only report back on what I was told by the lawyers retained by the Flightless Waterfowl Company, among others, who said that -- while trademark was a much more stringent test and Disney et al HAD to act on every single instance -- copyright still needed to be defended to protect the author's right to be sole owner of the worlds and characters. That was (again, as I was told) the basis of the Quinn Yarbro case, specifically, although that was as much about Good Manners (or lack thereof) as anything.

And talk about poisoning the well -- that case managed to turn a lot of writers off the entire concept of 'play nice with the fans' because the fans clearly did nt give a damn about the authors...

(yes, I'm back. But dog tired, so falling over now)

Re: on copyright and trademark

[djonn]

It's probably worth pointing people at Scrivener's Error's discussion of fanfic for as good an analysis I've seen of the murky waters in the copyright/trademark sea where fanfic is concerned. It's not light reading, and it's nowhere near as conclusive as either camp might like, but it makes a solid and reasonably even-handed stab at addressing the current legal context of the fanfic landscape.

[storytellersjem.livejournal.com]

You tell them, Suricattus.

[beth-bernobich.livejournal.com]

I (heart) you.

Your civility is impressive

[sexmuse.livejournal.com]

The selfishness and idiocy displayed by many fan fic advocates overwhelms my ability to form coherent, polite sentences. As an ORIGINATOR/CREATOR, I agree wholeheartedly with you regarding what will happen when when artists aren't given their royalties, or see them diminished through things like piracy and fan fic. Yes, there will still be free reading material out there--and such free material will continue to suffer from the mediocrity that characterizes most of it. It will be derivative (same old, same old), cliche, poorly proofed, etc.

I equate the mentality of those who advocate unrestricted rights to create derivate works without compensating the author with the mentality of those engaging in piracy.

I fear, however, that we will have to go back to a patronage system, and that will further erode the quality of work produced based on what our corporate sponsors are willing to be associated with. Artists will be packed into cubicles, churning out their daily word/image requirement. We will become technicians if we want to make a living doing what we love to do. (And WTF to whomever said they're happy with whatever time they can squeeze out of their schedule for writing--like their writing habits justify someone infringing my copyright?)

Okay, before I go off on a very aggressive, foul-mouthed rant, I will say YAY YOU for sticking up for the rights of originators and I hope the supporting letters are of sufficient volume/quality to make up for the hate mail.

Ann