Me vs. Ao3 Take 3

Ao3's response to my emails:
( Ao3's response to my last email )

My response:

( My response )

ETA - I went to read their terms of service, and they don't list the content of mine that they want to remove anywhere in there...
( Read more... )

Sigh. These idiots give fandom and the legal profession a bad name. Also they are skating a thin line in regards to the legality of their site and interpretation of what a transformative work actually is. They'd be better off limiting some of the fanfic and allowing more fan reviews and commentary. Less likely to get kicked by copyright holders. That's what other sites like DW, Tumblr, and various fanboards did. If fanfic is not permanent, the copyright holder is less likely to get pissed about it.

Discussed this with Wales today, who was highly amused. First I had to explain my history with the site.
( Read more... )

( Fanfiction considered an infringement of copyright by people )

Hence the reason they have copyright attorneys. Albeit not necessarily good ones. A transformative work - fits critical review, analysis, scholarly analysis, episode reactions, or a fanfiction that falls under meta or commentary on the work (such as parody, satire, or non-commercial sharing of ideas). But apparently they don't have contract attorneys. Note like all professional fields, attorney's are not knowledgeable in everything - they tend to specialize. And contract law and copyright law varies from state to state, province to province and country to country - but one thing remains true - fanfiction isn't legal under intellectual property law, it is allowable under a loop hole known as the "fair use" clause. Also, if you are not precise and clear in your contractual terms of service - your terms could be voided by a court of law for vagueness. Particularly since you have multiple languages and translations.

Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is a fair use and identifies certain types of uses—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use. Section 107 calls for consideration of the following four factors in evaluating a question of fair use:

Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes: Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair. This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below. Additionally, “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair. Transformative uses are those that add something new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work.
Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.
Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work.
Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread.

In addition to the above, other factors may also be considered by a court in weighing a fair use question, depending upon the circumstances. Courts evaluate fair use claims on a case-by-case basis, and the outcome of any given case depends on a fact-specific inquiry. This means that there is no formula to ensure that a predetermined percentage or amount of a work—or specific number of words, lines, pages, copies—may be used without permission.

Go HERE for more information. Source US Copyright Office.

I wouldn't have any issues with Ao3 - if they were clear, and honest, and not self-righteous hypocrites. The "transformative non-ephemeral/permanent" bits are highly problematic per the above. Because ephemeral fanfic is more likely to be allowable than non-ephemeral for well obvious reasons.

I'd understand if they were targeting works that could be considered copyright infringement but these are film reviews.

Anyhow, I'm done with that site.

(no subject)

Went out with Wales today. We went to Hamilton's again for brunch. ( Read more... )

***

I've been watching Virgin River and Paper Girls this weekend, along with another episode of Alone (the season prior to this one).

Paper Girls isn't that good - it's kind of annoying. The set up, a bunch of girls on a paper route in the 1980s, who aren't really friends - just acquaintances on the route, are thrust through time - without explanation. Except it doesn't appear to be their timeline, since their future selves don't remember having friends or a paper route. Also, I find it kind of insulting that these television writers don't think much of paralegals and single folks. [Our media has got to stop judging people.] Also the plot doesn't quite work. I've given up on it.

It's working off of the idea of how would you deal with your future self or vice versa.

Virgin River's problem is Jack Sheridan is not the most sympathetic of characters, and the actor kind of walks through the role. He's the romantic lead. The other characters are more interesting. But the acting is rather restrained, and the only ones with any ability are Annette O'Toole, Tim Matheson, and the older characters. The younger group is kind of lacking. It's very Hallmarkish. I like it because it's basically pudding television, comforting. Also, the focus isn't really on Jack that much.

Alone - the best of the bunch, proves once again that women can handle the "alone" bit longer than men apparently can. Although to be fair - this guy's issue was less about being alone, and more about grieving his four year old daughter who'd died less than a year ago, and doing it without his family around was kind of more than he could handle. Which is a bit different than just being lonely.

[By the way - those snippets are what I define as blogging. I wouldn't post reviews like that to Ao3. It has to be at least four paragraphs and stand a lone. And usually nothing else in the post but that film review. That's what I thought they meant by non-permanent or ephemeral works - or works that are just a blog. Snippet reviews like the above. I am annoyed with them - because I did operate in good faith, it's not my fault they weren't clear and can't be bothered to be so. This is the problem with organizations run by people - people are dumb. Put them in an organization and the idiots rise to the top. ]

***

Zoom service at Church, was basically "Why do we Compare Ourselves to Others" - nothing good can come of this. ( Read more... )

***

Noticing more typos in my writing - I keep skipping over words or leaving them out. I think my mind is moving faster than my fingers can type, and I think I've typed out these words and haven't?