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

[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

Re: warning: moderate crankiness ahead

[rosefox]

User Friendly's J.D. Frazer does it full-time and it's technically distributed for free. He makes his money through advertising and donations. Here's his FAQ entry on intellectual property. I'm not claiming this model will work for everyone, of course.

I would love a return to apprenticeships and patronage. Sadly, it seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Re: warning: moderate crankiness ahead

[lagilman]

Hr. User Friendly (which I love) also has merchandising licenses, yes? Are they also open source or does he get paid for them?

Also: in order to make money off advertising, you need to have advertisers willing to pay you. But publishers -- who used to have ads in the back of books -- refused to pass along the payments, claiming (within reason) that it was THEIR space they were renting, not the writer's. The same proboem arises when material is placed on a web site not run entirely by the writer -- who gets the advertising revenue? So... unles syou're advocating a 'net-only model where the writer is not only writer but also web-master, that runs into its own problems...


And now, sadly, I have to go off and Be Productive Elsehwere, so won't be able to respond for many hours. Am not ignoring you, just connectivity-impaired!

Re: warning: moderate crankiness ahead

[onalark.livejournal.com]

I would love a return to apprenticeships and patronage.

I dunno. My history books tell me there were far too many instances of masters keeping apprentices on permanently, never allowing them to achieve higher status because it was essentially slave labor. (It all depended on the laws of the region.)

Patronage sounds great, but it has its own problem: namely, one is beholden to the patron. If the patron wants to kick you to the curb with two-weeks notice without warning, the patron can do that.

Meh. I like being independent. I've learned to economize my time. I work a day job, I come home, I write. And I do more writing now than I did when someone else was footing the bills. (shrug) YMMV

My belief is that if someone is destined to be a writer, aritst, poet, or musician, they'll make a way -- wealthy patron or no. I'm optimistic like that. :)