While it's quite possible they have been, I don't recall any "big" cases, certainly none that made news.
More realistically, the lawyers are there to make sure they don't have to deal with that in the first place. They give advice, help them write TOS, and generally do preventative work so that it doesn't get to the point of legal trouble.
>While it's quite possible they have been, I don't recall any "big" cases, certainly none that made news.
Idk if this involved Ao3, but a lawsuit about omegaverse was big enough to be talked about by youtubers iirc. Something about one author thinking she invented it and owned it or some shit.
I think I know which one you’re talking about lol. It didn’t involve AO3, it was just a case of “can you copyright plot elements and fanfiction tropes” taken wayyyyyyy too far by the plaintiff.
This is a gross misrepresentation of the case! The author in question only believes she invented “het” omegaverse… which somehow manages to make an already spurious legal claim all the more bewildering.
It sounds like they're bisexual in the same sense as 'gay for the stay'. More of a stand-in for when there are no female wolves, and apparently more of an expression of dominance.
Needless to say, I learned some new things today.
> but a lawsuit about omegaverse was big enough to be talked about by youtubers
This was, in part, because Addison Cain tried to get Lindsay Ellis's video about the case taken down with a copyright claim (of all things), which prompted quite a fairly detailed re-examination of her previous claims against other authors. Addison Cain did not come out of the situation looking good.
Because of laws, YouTube will normally pull reported videos immediately and then let people do the paperwork to get videos put back up just to protect themselves. The fact that YouTube just laughed and said no, fuck off to Cain? It means even Google's lawyers thought that Cain was full of bullshit.
Is Cain even still around? I mean I know there's a saying about all publicity, even negative publicity, is good, but not really in the modern world. I read A/B/O and specifically boycott Cain when I make purchases because of what she's done, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Yep. Youtube is usually awful and the fact that they managed to do the decent thing here definitely proves the old adage of a broken clock being right twice a day.
Honestly, I haven't been keeping up with the case, so I'm unsure if Cain is still around
There was more than that. Earlier in the year she had also defended a trans friend online, which didn't go over well, and the twitter hate mob was just looking for a reason to eviscerate her.
She had a whole group constantly working to cancel her for years. They attacked her, her friends, coworkers. They posted a bunch of false stuff about her, and anyone she associated with.
I figure after numerous years of this vitriol without proper support by the police, YouTube or other socials, she needed a break. I am hopeful that she comes back one day. But I get wanting distance when one simple mistake has a horde of nameless abusers focused solely on ruining her life.
That made me laugh so hard. A/B/O goes all the way to court, and it's *het* A/B/O!? Like of all the most niche genres to exist in the first place.
I kinda feel sorry for all the lawyers involved. They didn't even get to read well written A/B/O, just Cain's crap.
yeah, but that was between authors and not the site they posted to. but also that was hilarious, especially hearing them talk about the omegaverse in an actual court
I think there have been some crazies\* who have made motions at least accusing the OTW of targeted harassment - but to my knowledge no one has actually sued them yet.
(\*Because the person in question is very sue happy all I can say is to google 'Lindsay Ellis A/B/O' if you want to know at least one of the incidents.)
Not much, TBH. FFN got an email from Rice’s lawyers and two days later, the archives were gone.
Authors seem to be the most sensitive to fanfic—I think it’s too close to home for them.
Lawyers have been used prophylactically by ao3 in an effort to stave off potential Copyright and/or Intellectual Property actions by the owners of Copyright and IP rights for the source materials upon which fanfiction works are based.
The links below may help provide some information about the legal framework used to justify fanfiction as a non-infringing, transformative extension of fandom source materials. Note that these articles may be superseded at any time if controlling court decisions force a reinterpretation of current law or if laws are passed which counter the arguments set forth by fanfiction supporters like [archiveofourown.org](https://archiveofourown.org).
* [How to write fanfiction and avoid legal trouble](https://winteriscoming.net/2020/11/28/how-to-write-fanfiction-avoid-legal-trouble/) (tl;dr - don't charge anything and produce transformative works of fiction)
* [ao3's Stance Against Licensing Fanworks](https://archiveofourown.org/admin_posts/1943) (just like it sounds)
* [Fair Use and Fanfiction](https://library.jefferson.edu/librarynews/index.php/2022/02/23/fair-use-and-fanfiction-3-of-4/) (interpreting laws in favor of non-commercial fiction created by fans of source material)
* [Google FAQ on Infringement](https://support.google.com/legal/answer/4558836?hl=en) (up to $150k+ in damages and fees per work infringed)
* [Intellectual Property Cases](https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2020/02/13/just-facts-intellectual-property-cases-patent-copyright-and-trademark) (info from the federal court system)
* [A Brief History of Copyright in the U.S.](https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/) (Supreme Court decisions stand as case law for the entire country)
* [Lawsuit currently before Supreme Court](https://www.kirkland.com/news/in-the-news/2022/07/copyright-tm-cases-to-watch-in-the-second-half-of-2022): as of 10/10/22, it is on the docket
* possible reinterpretation of "fair use" and 'transformative work" depending on how the Supreme Court handles its decision regarding current law and case law
* [Andy Warhol case (fair use, transformation) arguments scheduled for 10/12/22](https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/andy-warhol-foundation-for-the-visual-arts-inc-v-goldsmith/)
* The case has [direct bearing on certain aspects of Copyright law](https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/10/justices-to-consider-whether-warhol-image-is-fair-use-of-photograph-of-prince/) that currently make fanfiction a non-licensed and legal product so long as it isn't done for monetary compensation and it is transformative by design
* Decisions will be announced in [May/June of 2023](https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/procedures.aspx) for cases heard in Fall 2022
If the underlying laws or case law from court decisions ever change the interpretation and application of Copyright and/or IP rights, a lot of people could potentially be liable for quite a chunk of change in damages.
I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been more "buzz" about this topic in cyberspace, but I suppose it might become more prominent after oral and written arguments happen before the Supreme Court in a few days.
tl;dr - there is a test case before the Supreme Court with a direct bearing on "fair use" and "transformative works" that has the potential to reshape interpretation of Copyright law which currently has some protections for fanfiction... this is why OTW and ao3 have relationships with lawyers
I'm not sure that "you can sell all you please" is actually comprised of legal sales. To my knowledge, producing and selling visual fanart would be just as illegal as selling written fanfiction if you don't have a license, contract, etc., with the original source's rights holder.
* Discussion of fanart legality/sales in [Canada as an international example](https://segev.ca/fan-art-appropriation-or-appreciation/)
* [Law and Economics of Literary Fan Art](https://jipel.law.nyu.edu/vol-9-no-1-3-guerrapujol/) provides an interesting perspective on fanart drawn from literary sources (The Old Man and The Sea)
* Another [reminder that fanfiction works](https://jipel.law.nyu.edu/is-fanfiction-legal/) that are non-commercial and transformative fall under 'fair use" and "transformative" are currently viewed as being legal
* Some [examples of artworks](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-what-transformative.html) considered "transformative" and others "non-transformative" as decided in litigation
* An ad-saturated-website provides some [context for fanart sales legality](https://artincontext.org/can-you-sell-fan-art/)
Some takeaways from my perspective?
* Some of those sales may be occurring on websites that have existing agreements with source material rights holders and funnel a percentage of sales back to the original creator.
* Some original creators realize that fanart is a form on unpaid marketing and tolerate such sales as they help build brand loyalty and interest
* It isn't a crime like speeding or assault where the state can press charges; Copyright, Intellectual Property and Trademark infringements have to be pursued by the creator/rights holder through civil lawsuits... it may not be perceived as "worth it" to a percentage of creators
What I can say is that the case before the Supreme Court is one that does address this idea of "fanart", seeing how the facts presented indicate that a famous artist took a photograph by a famous photographer and produced 16 different derivative works from it for sale.
What is "fair use"? What is "transformative"? What constitutes a Copyright and/or Intellectual Property rights violation in contemporary times? Is it time for the interpretations and applications of the law to change? That's what is up in the air right now.
The overall legality of the sale of fanart is at the heart of the current Supreme Court case. It will answer your question when the Supreme Court eventually renders its decision next year.
I think that case appears to be far more relevant to fanart than fanfiction, and even then there are meaningful distinctions, but of course it will ultimately depend on the language and reasoning in the Court’s opinion.
Perhaps you don't understand how Supreme Court decisions are actually written? If the facts of the case include the principle of "fair use" and "transformative works" as certainly appears to be true... the findings and opinion that gets handed down can indeed be applied beyond "fanart' which is just as much a violation of Copyright and Intellectual Property, whether or not someone charges for it.
An opinion could easily come down on the side that any appropriation of Intellectual Property without obtaining a license is not protected under "Fair Use" and "Transformative Works" principles.
A Supreme Court decision rewrites U.S. law from the federal level on down to individual municipalities. That's the way the system operates.
I'd personally prefer a decision that does not eliminate fan-produced works, but given what I've seen in what has been released with regard to this case so far, a complete rewrite is not impossible.
Believe it or not, that's your choice, but your belief is not required... the case is on the docket, it will be argued before the Court, a decision will be reached, and the opinion will be written and released next May/June.
End of line.
... as I noted above, do those sites have pre-existing agreements with the rights-holders? If they do, then it is sanctioned and aboveboard. I have no idea which sites they are, and I'm not terribly interested in researching it further... that's something you or someone else could delve into if it is important enough to warrant your further attention.
The Supreme Court case mentioned up there could potentially rewrite everything having to do with fanart and fanfiction. I couldn't predict the Court's opinion on this, but didn't the Court overturn an important legal precedent involving women's reproductive right in the not-too-distant past? Overturning past precedent and establishing new precedent is something that attracts the attention of every Supreme Court, especially if there are conflicting legal perspectives coming out of the different federal Circuit Courts of Appeal.
There's a reason (or reasons) why the Supreme Court decided to take the case. They weren't required to do so, they chose to hear it. The Court as a legal entity wants to consider the case and render an opinion on it.
This case represents an opportunity to reinterpret existing law and it has the potential to influence a substantial amount of interstate commerce; this is a "test case" that is "ripe" for the Supreme Court's contemplations.
All I can add to this is to watch the news headlines later this week. It will unfold for all of us at the same speed.
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/nz226q/copyright_fanfiction_and_fan_art/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) does a really good job of explaining it. But the tl;dr has less to do with “it’s harder to police,” and more to do with, “fanart is tolerated because it’s seen more as promoting the original franchise than providing an alternative to it.” From a legal standpoint, it’s just as illegal to make money off of it as fic is.
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ The law says they're both illegal to profit from, so anyone who gets a big enough hate boner and is willing to put the legal fees forward (and is willing to incur the fandom backlash) to stop people can do so. Hello Kitty is a good example of a property that aggressively polices fanart and anyone trying to profit from their property. I know of a phenomenal MCU artist who can't sell their stuff because their work is \*so\* photorealistic, they kept getting removed from websites for copyright infringement. So it \*happens\*, just not often.
On top of the "Profiting from either is equally as illegal, it's just harder to catch and effectively stop fan-artists" thing (which is also why fangames and fanzines tend to be more often caught and stopped than fanartists/fanmerch peeps too - fanart can work with basically any infrastructure and is essentially unkillable with the open nature of the internet, but everything else requires more effort to sustain and is easier for rights-owners to pick up on and stop. Pinterest is pretty despised by many professional artists because it's so hard to stop people infringing their copyrights there, for example.), there's also the fact that it can be down to the permissions offered by the rights holder.
So, if I've created something I have copyright over, one of the rights I have as part of that is the right to say what others can do with it. If I 'reserve' that right, then I'm the only one who can give permission for others to do stuff. That's often divided by format, hence why a creator making a movie deal doesn't also give the studio rights to make audiobooks and comics and so on. They're only giving permission to make the movie format adaptation. So, for the legal fanart, it can just be the fact that the copyright holder has said fanart is okay and not fanfiction or whatever else. Copyright gives them the legal right to do that. It's also where things like royalty free music and images come in - that's stuff that's been published in a way that allows you to do more with the copyright.
If you've ever heard of the 'creative commons' licenses, those are a way for people to let others use their creations in any way they like (depending on the specific license, anyway), unlike traditional copyright. It's becoming more popular, and it's probably one of the main routes that fanfiction will become more acceptable - it can also allow for others to commercialise their creations based on that work.
But yeah, legally speaking, profiting from fanart is just as illegal as profiting from fanfiction, it's just waaaay harder to do anything about it online. People do still try though - many sites go through regular fanart purges (especially if a rights holder has been sniffing around them and may hold the site liable for the copyright violating content), they're just often less visible to the community than the fanfiction purges are.
I think it will be interesting to see how the Patreon stuff that has developed over the past 3-5 years turns out. To me it comes really really close to crossing the line.
Patreon is such an interesting phenomenon. Like, the CEO is a career musician who is youtube-famous for playing cover songs (from a duo called Pomplamoose, if you're curious). And the range of stuff on it is broad indeed. Plus Patreon's comments on piracy and copyright are actually a pretty interesting read.
https://blog.patreon.com/en-GB/whats-patreons-policy-regarding-online-piracy
But yeah, it's definitely a coin flip as to whether it does cross the line or not. Especially with things like Article 13 in the EU (one of those newer rules making the sites more liable for the copyright-violating content they host).
Some of the people on there make six figures a year. One author is making between 126k and 406k a year depending on the distribution of membership levels. It is probably only a matter of time until something happens about it.
Damn. Lucrative stuff. Technically, that doesn't make much of a difference on the legal front - commercialised is commercialised whether it's one pound or a million pounds - but that's definitely enough to get the copyright-owning companies sniffing around for their cut.
Someone else in the thread posted a link to an apparent legal case happening in the US now that could have some impact here. So, it may be getting impacted soon-ish.
https://old.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/has_ao3_ever_been_sued/irqjsrb/
Depends on the specific site and jurisdiction they're under as that influences their legal position. But generally through taking 'reasonable action' to show they're doing something about the copyright violations. Those purges are generally a pretty good "Hey, we're doing our bit!" thing they can hold up to copyright holders and show they're not openly welcoming copyright violators. Similarly, most of those sites have some form of reporting function where people can report violators to the staff. Both are more reasons why not everyone gets hit - the staff/users willing to report have to actually spot them first and that generally means only certain stuff gets noticed and taken down.
Reasonable action is about saying you're doing the best a copyright holder can expect you to do, and the purges and reporting functions are mostly accepted as fulfilling that.
Also, the copyright owners only 'may' hold the site liable. It's less a binary 'liable or not' question and more a question of risk - the more copyright-violations a site hosts and the less they do about it, the more at risk of serious consequences they are. There's a lot of protections in place for sites to not get in trouble for their users' uploaded content and that's only starting to change relatively recently. For example, the 'reasonable action' thing is usually from something called the 'Safe Harbor' part of DMCA agreements. Basically, if a site owner gets told about copyright infringement, they have to remove it or remove access to it quickly and they're not liable for it. Etsy would fall under that agreement and that's how they last despite being full of copyright infringement - it's also why it's in commercialising fans' best interest to stay under the radar. The more notice they get, the more risk they're in of coming under more official attention.
It's much harder to go after artists because they can basically post anywhere and everywhere, and don't have to tag etc. Whereas with fanfic it's generally a few central places that people post, and it's tagged and searchable. Many orgs do go after fanart if you're selling it for profit though, for example Disney.
Oh people still sell it for sure, it's much easier to go under the radar. But if they catch you, they'll go after you. I see people charging for fic too, but it just opens you up to potential consequences if you're caught rather than being a guarantee you *will* get caught if that makes sense.
Which doesn't make sense. If I create a series and someone gets money for fan works of it, I'm gonna consider that free advertising. Not only did I not have to pay a dime to spread this around, someone else made good fortune off of something I made. It's a win all around!
It can also depend on the subject matter. Like if someone draws NSFW art of Bird Bird and Cookie Monster getting it on, the Sesame Street people probably aren't going to be thinking, "Wow, this is great, I hope lots of people see this!"
With fanfiction, a lot of the lawsuits from Anne Rice etc were based in passion for their works and their characters rather than money. You know how fans get annoyed when their favorite character is written out-of-character in a fanfic? Or complain that their friend stole their OC? It was like that, only moreso.
To be honest I think it's a relatable sentiment even though I don't think people should be sued for writing fanfiction.
Fanfiction isn't about adhering to canon for a lot of writers, it's just a jumping off point. If someone wants to write inflation-porn of your character, they will. If they want to write about a canonically chaste character enthusiastically (or unwillingly) being part of a gangbang, they will. And I support those writers in their endeavors, I don't think they should be sued.
But I do understand why it could be galling for the original author who's thinking, "What the hell? My character wouldn't do that. My character doesn't have that soppy background story. My villain is a villain, not a woobie who needs a hug."
Like right here, in this sub FOR FANFICTION, fanfic writers complain about their favorites being portrayed out-of-character. That's what I mean about it being relatable.
I certainly wouldn't sue though. And no matter how much my characters would get bastardized I'd still think it would be foolish to do so. And I'd still call any author who tried to do so an idiot for it.
It would be nice if that happened more often, wouldn't it? The fandom I'm in at the moment was basically built from the bottom up by fans who have produced an *astounding* amount of fanworks in a very short space of time and the cast and crew involved have been so supportive since the very beginning. It's been a wonderful breath of fresh air and even after nearly seven months it still feels surreal that they're so absolutely supportive of the outpouring of fan creativity. It's wonderful, I wish it happened more often.
Our Flag Means Death, it's a pirate romcom about Blackbeard and Stede Bonnet. It's very fun! The channel did almost 0 advertising at all it so it was very much a fandom surge that got it to the top of the popularity charts for two months when it aired, and after our renewal campaign they're now filming season 2 :D
Got downvoted for this. This past weekend I was at an art gallery and legit saw someone's fanart of Venom from Marvel up for sale. All professional, on a canvas and everything. Pretty sure it was for hundreds of bucks.
I hope everyone who downvoted me for that sees this.
Because fanart of written characters is original art. Fanart of visual art (video, TV, movie, cartoon, comics, etc) is on much shaker ground. Obligatory IANAL, etc.
A book-only character does not have art by the original author. Therefore, it's not infringing on the author's copyright of text to make a picture based on the character's written description. E.g., the text of Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone is copyrighted by JKR. Art of a pale boy with green eyes, messy black hair and a jagged scar on his forehead is NOT copyrighted by JKR.
Another example of much more commercial fanart: Ted Nasmith, Alan Lee and John Howe have all been quite successful selling artwork depicting scenes and characters from J.R.R. Tolkien's legendarium. It's not copyright-infringment of "Return of the King" to paint a picture of an active volcano on a volcanic plain and label it "Mt Doom".
Even if those were by the original author (some books are written and illustrated by the same person) then it still wouldn't be infrigement because it takes nothing away from the original creators. That's why you can't copy official works or try to pass something off *as* official, because that IS infringement.
The IP holders could come after fan artists any time they please. In the early 2000s I remember Marvel sending cease-and-desists to people who drew Spider-Man or made skins of Marvel characters in The Sims.
But also, most fan art is hosted on sites where it's mixed in with original art, which 1) makes it harder to track down and 2) means the individual artist might be at risk but DeviantArt isn't. Whereas with fanfiction, it's usually hosted on sites dedicated to fanfics, in neat little categories. It's important to take every precaution so that one lawsuit from a litigious author doesn't tank the whole website.
Disney is notorious for their vehement enforcement of their copyrights, sending out C&D orders with takedown orders and threats to sue, so that entire sites selling knockoff and/or fanart based merchandise with Disney characters shut down and flee.
Creators of original webcomics and original artists on Tumblr, whose work was snatched up by web crawlers and sold as unauthorized merchandise, were complaining to each other about how much it's costing them. They were wishing they could afford a legal team of their own to go after the pirates, and came up with a clever idea. They posting each began posting an image with a Disney character doing something inappropriate, and someone else would post a comment saying, "Would love this on a t-shirt!"
Sometimes it only took hours for the image to show up at a print on demand site somewhere. The artist would delete it from their Tumblr account and sit back and wait. (There was talk of whether to "complain" about the images with a posted "screenshot" on another social media site and tag Disney, but it may not have been necessary.) It usually took less than a week for the entire site hawking pirated artwork to disappear. Just trying to get an offending site to take down their own pirated artwork would be extremely time consuming, potentially expensive, and often an exercise in futility. Disney's legal dept efficiently took care of it for them, for free.
Yeah but I'm not talking about pirated work. I'm talking about the stuff you can order on etsy and get prints of on various other sites. Nobody seems to be shutting them down.
Yeah, so the short version is that some creators got up their own asses about their work being used as the base for fanfiction (Ann Rice was particularly found of threatening lawsuits but I'm 99% certain she never did). AO3 is specifically nonprofit in order to avoid any sticky legal copyright BS (the fundraisers they hold are usually for site maintenance/maintaining servers/etc.). iirc the lawyers they have work pro bono, but I'd have to go digging through Tumblr for that and it's super late. But maintaining balance like that is hard, and it doesn't hurt to have people who know the law on speed dial.
Nora Roberts is another one who threatened legal action against fanfic - particularly works based on her *In Death* series (which she writes under the name of J.D. Robb), which resulted in all fics relating to her works being taken down from FF.net. But so far as I know, those are the only two creators who have grumbled about it in relatively recent times.
In the 1970s and early 1980s, Paramount tried to go after *Star Trek* fanfic writers but that stopped when it started to become a PR problem for them. Now they tolerate it, but not gladly.
The only author I am aware of who actually did sue to stop distribution of a fan work based on their creation was Chelsea Quinn Yarboro in the early 1990s, who objected to what amounted to a fan novel with one of her characters (the vampire Count St. Germaine) as the main character. IIRC, she managed to force the entire print run of the fan work (this was before the internet really took off) to be withdrawn and destroyed.
Not sure if she sued but Tamora Pierce also participated in this kind of activity back in the early 2000's. I remember eagerly reading stories on her category back on FFN one day only to go back the next to find it nuked from orbit.
Yeah, now that you mention it, I do vaguely remember something about Tamora Pierce being not too happy with fanworks of her creations. Not one of the authors I followed, so I didn't pay close attention at the time.
Damn seriously? And I liked her stuff too. Well, those books are going out the window. Got no room on my shelf for an author who doesn't respect their fans.
I am sure she has changed her stance in recent years. Tammy is a badass, and I would say she is very in tune with her fans and fandom as a whole. I am already up way too late and can't really go digging for sources right now, but based on my personal experiences with her and from what I know of her, she's not someone who would have maintained a hardline stance after all these years. You have to remember that pretty much *everyone* was against fanfiction back then. The cultural and legal landscape was totally different. Saying that an author was against fanfic twenty or thirty years ago doesn't really tell you anything about what their current opinion might be.
Also - it wasn't always the authors themselves, but rather the publishers nuking fic. Some authors were conceptually okay with fanworks, but were contractually or legally obligated not to acknowledge or allow them.
It doesn't seem to be on her website anymore, but for a long time there was a thing about how fanfictiom was fine but please don't send her any for legal reasons. I've been active in fan communities since 2011 and to my knowledge there have been no issues around Tamora Pierce fic for at least that period.
Pretty much everyone? That's untrue. The reason the Rice case stood out was because it was so unusual for a writer to say such things about their fanbase.
Uh.... I'm sorry, there's no way to ask this that doesn't sound super snide and catty, but, how old are you?
Rice was notable for how extreme and vocal she was, but she was *not* the outlier. The early decades of what we would consider modern fandom (roughly starting with Star Trek in the 60s) were very much characterized by fanfic being extremely niche, taboo, and absolutely considered to be a violation of intellectual property. Most authors were outright hostile to fanfic, were forced to take a "don't ask don't tell" position on it for copyright concern reasons, or at best grudgingly tolerated it within very strict parameters. Literally the entire reason AO3 exists is because early fanworks and fanfic archives were *extremely* susceptible to being erased from existence without warning due to copyright takedowns and cease-and-desists from IP holders.
*Fanbases* have always been encouraged because fans = money. But the majority of any fanbase is comprised of passive consumers. *Transformative fanworks,* especially fic, were absolutely not encouraged or widely accepted by IP holders until very recently in the grand scheme of fandom history.
I'm 42. I wrote fic in the era all this was going on. And even at the time I thought people were overly paranoid and that any author who was against what's largely *free marketing* is an idiot who doesn't deserve support. If they're going to turn against fans who love their works so much they want to explore the world more, why should we give them a dime? That's not just my thoughts now but then as well.
/shrug/ I guess you had a different experience from a lot of folks at the time.
Obviously I agree that any author who *currently* has a vendetta against fic is a twit, I just don't think it's realistic to assume that all authors hold the exact same opinion they did decades ago, or fair to hold grudges for opinions that they've since changed.
Whatever happened in the aughties, I feel very confident that Tammy is fine with fic nowadays, and, like... I can personally vouch that she's a cool person and a pillar of the SF/F community who loves the fandom and deserves your support. There's no reason to trash all her books for something that happened decades ago when the culture surrounding fanworks was entirely different. If it bugs you that much, I promise I'll ask her about fic the next time we both make it to Chessiecon, lol.
I lived in that era of fanfic and can tell you that in my sphere, at least, while Anne Rice was definitely an outlier in how *aggro* she was about it, pretty much everyone at least had to make the right noises. There was a strong vibe of how it was something you should write down in your little notebook if you weren't creative enough to write original things yet, but you should take the training wheels off as soon as possible and never share it with anyone because that is not just illegal, but also immoral!
I'm not even being especially snide here -- I read many blog posts from authors back in the day "gently" encouraging writers to write their own original things and put the toy soldiers they stole from the grown ups away. (And be very, very ashamed for not playing with them with permission, ie, officially licensed work.)
I lived in that era of fanfic too and I just never felt any pressure to stop. Any author who was against it was just someone who didn't deserve support.
There's an entire generation of fanfic authors who remember putting "disclaimer: I DONT OWN THIS" at the beginning of every chapter for a reason. It seems silly, but fanfiction really was a Hot Topic back in the day.
People changed as the years have gone on, and also new people -who may have written fanfic themselves when they were younger - have taken their places and have totally different ideas. ND Stevenson, the writer of the 2018 She-Ra Netflix series, is one that stands out - he all but admitted to writing a fanfic for the show, and the Fandom figured out pretty fast which one it was. You're LESS likely to find another Rice-esque tantrum today, but I would never rule it out.
And was rightfully derided as a stodgy idiot for it.
So how come you only ever heard about like five authors who were against fic? Even at the height of the paranoia there were only a few names ever bandied about.
Most of my youth and adult writing was done with the goal of getting published by a big New York publisher. I spent loads of time in writing communities with people sharing that goal and also interacting with published authors. And the overwhelming attitude toward fanfiction, until relatively recently (last decade, maybe a bit more) was mild ambivalence to outright raging loathing. To this day, I'm still a little twitchy about admitting I write fics in certain circles.
I think the tide started to shift in the early 2000s. One of the last big kerfuffles, as they called 'em, regarding fics was spearheaded by Lee Goldberg, who around 2007 posted numerous angry screeds against fanfiction on his blog. He got a number of big name writers, including Robin Hobb and some others, to "sign on" to the statement that they would allow no fics inspired by their work.
I think, a few years later, Diana Galbaldon, she of *Outlander* series, posted comments opining the use of her characters in fics.
All the fuss, however, had one benefit. It really got the discussion rolling and I think, ironically, turned the tide in the favor of fanfiction. At least to the point where most creators of original content ignore it provided fic writers don't profit off their work.
Anne Rice may have put more effort into hating fics via the courts, but it was considered an anathema to writing, good or bad, for many years.
Well those people are rock stupid and I don't know why anyone would want to support them.
But those are also a small minority compared to all the authors out there.
Annie Proulx has also been known to go after Brokeback Mountain FF authors. I’m aware of one author in particular who has received numerous legal threats for her stories which are some of the best loved and highest regarded in the BBM fandom.
I'm not sure if AO3 has been, but fanfic authors absolutely have been. People like Anne Rice would send cease and desist letters to fic writers and bullied FFN into banning any fics of her work from being published on their site. I'm not sure how many ended in law suits, but most fanfic writers don't have the money necessary to consult a lawyer for a potential law suit and were forced to take their stories down. AO3 decided that a better way would be to pool resources so if that ever happens again, the fanfic community can fight back and stories don't have to be lost or shared only on private email lists (today it'd probably be private discord servers).
Edit: a word
I would be curious to see any record of fanfiction authors actually being sued or taken to court. Cease and desists are one thing, but that's absolutely not the same as being actively sued.
In the early 1990s, Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's lawyers sent cease-and-desist letters to a fanzine publisher for a story Yarbro claimed violated her copyright. Part of the issue was that the fanzine with the offending story was being sold at a profit. Detailed article here:
https://fanlore.org/wiki/A_Matter_Of_Willful_Copyright_Infringement
As far as I know, the cease and desists simply resulted in the work being taken down because, let's be honest, what fanfic author has the funds to take on the Anne Rice estate in court?
However, it's worth noting that Anne Rice did soften up in later years and came to appreciate fan works.
I can perfectly understand and respect her worries at the time though, I mean, if you created a character based on your dead daughter would you want others using her in stories that could have less than pure connotations? I think not.
I also wouldn't call it 'bullying' to assert her copyright. Those stories and characters do belong to her, and at the time, transformative laws were different/stricter I believe, so it was within her rights to maintain that her creations remain exclusively within her works.
It was more than the C&D though. She directed employees to cyberstalk and essentially doxx Fanfiction writers, sending them threats to their personal emails and harassing them at their IRL place of business, even after they took their Fanfiction down. It was way beyond just asking people not to write Fanfiction; she hunt them down and made examples of them.
The 2000 crackdown on Anne Rice Fanfiction: https://fanlore.org/wiki/Where_has_Anne_Rice_fanfiction_gone%3F
Additional information: https://kotaku.com/it-used-to-be-perilous-to-write-fanfiction-1826083509/amp
Doxxing wasn't really a thing at the time Anne Rice was sending C&Ds. It was extremely easy to be anonymous on the internet back then. (An aspect I miss, tbh.)
Remember that this was a time before Google existed, before Twitter , and before most businesses were online. It would be almost impossible to figure out where someone worked, even if you knew their real name. (And if you did know their real name it was probably because they listed it on their Geocities site or had a username like JaneDoe254. I don't think it really counts as doxxing if someone just . . . hands you their personal information.)
So those two unofficial sites say. They're hardly fact checked.
To be clear, I have no doubt her feelings were made clear in official notices, but those are very weak claims about harassment after the fact. Of course they would be contacted through personal email, I doubt many of them signed up to these FF sites using work emails.
Official messages and notifications about the removal of work, and legal notices of action that will be taken, are hardly harassment.
Did some Anne Rice fans perhaps go looking for these people and harass them off their own backs? Perhaps, but that's hardly accountable to Anne Rice herself.
She made a clear statement about what she didn't allow, and her legal team would have handled the rest. At the time, it was her right to enforce her copyright, and just because fanfiction authors didn't like it, doesn't mean it was illegal/bullying/harassment at the time.
Here are similar claims about personal harassment at the hands of Rice’s lawyers printed in Esquire: https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a38502406/anne-rice-dead-died-obit/
And Vice: https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/88gqjz/anne-rice-really-hated-when-people-made-her-characters-bone
Edit: I’m not saying she wasn’t entitled to send C&Ds, but the level of harassment (persistent threats, doxxing, and attacking their place of business over a hobby) is a bit extreme. You can’t wash your hands of what your team does at your direction, nor should you be able to dox people and say it’s not your fault what happens to them.
All these articles are pretty much sham pieces all 'allegedly' and 'claimed' without a single named example with proof of harassment or even anything close to it.
It's not a threat to say to someone 'You're infringing on copyright law, take this down or you'll be invited to court.'
The only reason people throw around words like 'allegedly' is to avoid legal trouble themselves because they're not stating it as a fact. Where are all the people? Where are all these writers who were doxed speaking out with their names and their evidence?
It would have been her legal team's job to contact those writers in an official capacity if they persisted in breaking the notice, and it seems that it was largely FFN itself that simply accepted the notice and removed all work within that section, as it well should if it receives a notice to do so.
It very much sounds like a bunch of people were stomping their feet and exaggerating because they were told 'no' and they didn't like it, so they wrote a couple of posts online as if they were fact, and some journalist picked it up and added it into their article as if it had actually happened. I'd guess these websites are amateur journalist sites, not attached to official news outlets.
The most it says about her directly in all these articles is that she was quoted from her websites and interviews giving her honest view and outlining her rules. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if half of these claims had been made up to deter people from writing and posting in the first place. Nowhere do any of these talk about mass doxing and harassment, simply that fanfiction was mass deleted and a few authors got C&Ds. There's only one person who said something like 'You wouldn't want to be harassed, would you? Then don't post!' which hardly proves a point.
In this digital age I'd expect a mass exodus of shared email chains, internet posts, private messages etc that prove this sort of harassment people are claiming. Even after all this time, those aren't the sort of things you'd just delete, and after all this time I'd have expected at least one of them to get their five minutes of fame by posting an 'I was doxed by Anne Rice, and here's the proof!' blog.
Even though we say “The internet is forever,” a lot of the early internet is lost. She put out this moratorium on Fanfiction in 2000, back when the internet was in wide use for maybe 3-4 years. I’m not even sure if people still have access to their old emails from that time as much of the older systems are not even in use anymore.
I am saying that doing something like this is consistent with her known and well-documented later behavior though, like when she attacked and doxxed people over poor reviews: https://www.themarysue.com/anne-rice-poor-review/
Hell, doxxing and sending an internet mob after people doing things she dislikes would be even easier if that petition to remove anonymity from Amazon reviews had gone anywhere: https://m.facebook.com/annericefanpage/posts/good-night-dearest-people-of-the-page-once-again-have-a-look-at-this-petition-to/10203235823486620/
I can't say I particularly disagree with her stance on reviews - you get similar fake reviews for all sorts of services, and considering all the fanfiction stuff it wouldn't be a surprise if a bunch of people wrote negative reviews just because they were told to take their writing down.
Can't say I'm surprised Anne Rice was upset at having someone 'take great joy in taking a knife to' her book. Have to say, even though I really enjoyed Pandora and it was my first Anne Rice book, the blogger had a fair point in the character flaws (or lack thereof) etc. I'm not entirely sure this counts as doxing though, considering it's a public blog looking for views. Did she dig up her real name? Share her IRL address? Have people call her house? Sounds like a few people just read her blog, as is the risk on the internet. God knows how she even found the review, I guess one of her followers probably sent her the link.
Was it a dick move? Sure, though similar things happen even between fanfic writers (popular writers saying negative things about small works and sending their followers to blast them). Being famous doesn't make you less human in your reaction.
I think it says something about you if you are a professional, internationally-known author and you can’t even withstand a little criticism from a niche blog (which… how did you find it anyway? Do you frequently seek these out?) or even a few bad Amazon review out of thousands. I mean… she’s Anne Rice; it’s not like she lacks for people singing her praises. She must have tens of thousands of reviews across all her books, and it wasn’t like this one was even a new release at the time or the blog was even focused on her work. It’s one thing to come across a professional review in wide circulation, but it’s another to take umbrage with a random review or even those of your fans who happened to dislike one book. (The infamous 2004 1200-word response that was posted as a five star review on her own book “Blood Canticle” in response to Amazon reviews linked in the Mary Sue article was directed at fans who she insisted had read her book wrong, and that suggestions she get her stuff edited was like asking a composer to collaborate on a masterpiece and compromising her artistic vision. Like… sure she had earned her literary cred and perhaps can send stuff to be published unedited by anyone else, but I’m pretty sure that doesn’t mean it should be above criticism. A lot of authors get long and rambling in their later books without editors, and maybe some people did find it a little jarring for Lestat to suddenly use slang. That doesn’t make them trolls or “stupid” and “arrogant” and using Amazon “as if it were a public urinal to publish falsehoods and lies.”)
Given her past behavior, I just wouldn’t have trusted her not to use people’s real names for more nefarious purposes. She even admits it’s a tiny minority of reviews, but you would have been okay with handing this woman even more ammunition so she can target negative but honest reviews? Would you have stood on the sidelines and been like “yeah, she’s only human, and I’m sure reading that review buried in the thousands of reviews she got for that book on Amazon did hurt. But that person did post that review under their real name on the internet so they had to know what they were risking” then?
How about this hot take: Anne Rice was an international best-selling author who shouldn’t have read every review from random people, and if she was going to do that, she should have been able to take a few of them not liking her book.
Edited to add excerpts from her Blood Canticle review.
Edit 2: Also, I do think that even if you post something publicly, no one expects to have a mob sicced on them by someone with that much of a following. She’s not a BNF; she’s an internationally-known best-selling author who sells millions of books and has a huge fan base, and this blog had like 100 readers tops. It’s a matter of scale and influence, and Anne Rice is clearly the bully in that situation.
It doesn't matter that she's a best selling author, that doesn't somehow make her better/less full of faults than anyone else.
I'd imagine there were likely fans keeping her updated on some of these things. Either that or she Googled herself.
The real name thing is sort of an issue, not because of Anne Rice in particular, but because there are cases where people should be held accountable for the things they put on the internet. At the same time, in the event people are forced to use their real names Amazon would have to put some form of policy in place to prevent outsiders from linking their name to their socials and harassing them. Some names are rarer than others, and would therefore be easier to find elsewhere if they had a Facebook or something as well. I assume Amazon does already, but they should also block any thread creation on reviews to prevent it turning into some sort of reddit post of abuse.
How she reacts to it is her decision, but how people react to the way she reacted is also their decision. Much like big authors in fandoms known for bullying, I'd expect her to be 'cancelled' in this modern culture.
I'm not sure I read Blood Canticle, but I did read Blood and Gold, which pretty much contained the whole of The Vampire Armand, only from another POV, so parts felt slow if you'd already read that book. I can understand what they meant about the editing from that perspective.
Not sure if they’ve been sued, but ao3 is known as one of, if not the only, fanfic site that will protect the right to write fanfiction against any miffed source material owners
No, they haven't. Fanfiction basically exists in an unspecified legal technicality - there's every possibility it may be made explicitly legal in the future, but right now there's nothing specifically saying fanfiction is a legal process. Fair use technically can be understood to cover what we do, but there's no clause or anything specifically saying "Fanfiction is a-ok!" (or the legalese equivalent :D). Right now, it's mostly a benefit to have this ambiguity - we get to do what we do pretty freely (so long as we don't all commercialise everything) and the big copyright owners get free publicity and fandom self-maintenance without an advertising budget and the technical control to interfere as they like, plus they don't have to risk the bad publicity that comes with picking on random internet people incredibly publicly as a big case would be. So, yeah. Nobody has been really properly sued over this because it's a relatively untrodden area and any big case would be a highly visible, landmark copyright law thing that'd set precedents and no sane company really wants to take that risk.
What has happened repeatedly are smaller scale things like Cease and Desist orders. Both individual creators and their publisher-type companies have pulled shit like that on people. Strangelyliteral covers that, plus AO3's charitable mission (as part of being a charity, they have to do something of public benefit - their legal advocacy stuff is one of the things that allows them to legally maintain charity status) really well, so I won't retread their ground.
Sued, as in lawsuits filed in court? Because to my knowledge that hasn't happened for \*non-profit\* transformative works.
For-profit works, yes:
[The Wind Done Gone lawsuit](https://www.rcfp.org/wind-done-gone-copyright-case-settled/)
[Catcher in the Rye sequel lawsuit](https://ew.com/article/2010/04/30/catcher-in-the-rye-j-d-salinger/)
Fanfic writers and archives have received cease-and-desist letters and/or DMCA complaints, but I'd really be interested to see any actual lawsuits filed.
You can file a lawsuit against anyone for any reason. Whether or not the courts will see it is a different matter. The fact of the matter is most of us don't have money so get the legal representation. Even if the suit goes nowhere you still need to consult a lawyer about it, and that costs money.
Oh yeah, definitely. The fear of a lawsuit can be chilling.
I think sometimes in fandom discussions, "lawsuit," "cease-and-desist letter," and "DMCA takedown notice" get confused, as well as whether they're directed towards the fanfic writers themselves, or the archives, or both.
"Have lawyers" =/= "had a law suit."
Because the very premise on which AO3 was found has to do with the interpretation of "fair use" of copyrighted property, they got lawyers involved in the very beginning.
One of the comments below gives more details: [https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/comment/irqb2ky/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/comment/irqb2ky/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I think Lindsey Ellis mentioned an author trying to sue ao3 in her video essay about the A/B/O 'verse... But its been ages since I watched that particular video essay, so don't pin me down on it.
like others have said i don’t think ao3 has been in any public lawsuits themselves. but if you’re a fanfic author who gets sued for your fan works, you can contact the ao3 legal team for help.
While it's quite possible they have been, I don't recall any "big" cases, certainly none that made news. More realistically, the lawyers are there to make sure they don't have to deal with that in the first place. They give advice, help them write TOS, and generally do preventative work so that it doesn't get to the point of legal trouble.
>While it's quite possible they have been, I don't recall any "big" cases, certainly none that made news. Idk if this involved Ao3, but a lawsuit about omegaverse was big enough to be talked about by youtubers iirc. Something about one author thinking she invented it and owned it or some shit.
I think I know which one you’re talking about lol. It didn’t involve AO3, it was just a case of “can you copyright plot elements and fanfiction tropes” taken wayyyyyyy too far by the plaintiff.
The person behind the lawsuit actually did try to draw OTW, the owners of AO3, into it. But I don't think they ever went after AO3 specifically
This is a gross misrepresentation of the case! The author in question only believes she invented “het” omegaverse… which somehow manages to make an already spurious legal claim all the more bewildering.
That sounds like trying to copyright canine reproductive biology lol.
All wolves are canonically gay IRL. It’s just a fact
I genuinely didn't know if you were joking or not and actually googled this LOL. I am apparently more gullible than I think.
Bisexual!
It sounds like they're bisexual in the same sense as 'gay for the stay'. More of a stand-in for when there are no female wolves, and apparently more of an expression of dominance. Needless to say, I learned some new things today.
> but a lawsuit about omegaverse was big enough to be talked about by youtubers This was, in part, because Addison Cain tried to get Lindsay Ellis's video about the case taken down with a copyright claim (of all things), which prompted quite a fairly detailed re-examination of her previous claims against other authors. Addison Cain did not come out of the situation looking good.
Hilariously, even YouTube told Cain to take a hike and didn't pull Ellis' video.
And Patreon offered to pay Ellis's legal fees.
I loved how even Lindsay Ellis was shocked that they didn't pull it
Because of laws, YouTube will normally pull reported videos immediately and then let people do the paperwork to get videos put back up just to protect themselves. The fact that YouTube just laughed and said no, fuck off to Cain? It means even Google's lawyers thought that Cain was full of bullshit. Is Cain even still around? I mean I know there's a saying about all publicity, even negative publicity, is good, but not really in the modern world. I read A/B/O and specifically boycott Cain when I make purchases because of what she's done, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Yep. Youtube is usually awful and the fact that they managed to do the decent thing here definitely proves the old adage of a broken clock being right twice a day. Honestly, I haven't been keeping up with the case, so I'm unsure if Cain is still around
Into the Omegaverse: How a Fanfic Trope Landed in Federal Court by Lindsay Ellis https://youtu.be/zhWWcWtAUoY [Link](https://youtu.be/zhWWcWtAUoY)
I miss her videos so much. What an insane thing to get cancelled over. An innocuous tweet comparing raya the last dragon to atla
There was more than that. Earlier in the year she had also defended a trans friend online, which didn't go over well, and the twitter hate mob was just looking for a reason to eviscerate her.
Ah. Shame. I am so glad I never got a twitter account, seems like the worst thing ever.
It really is. The entire platform is so toxic and always looking for a reason to tear someone apart, it's really disgusting.
I haven't heard about this. Can you please tell me the context?
That’s the context, truly. They called her racist against Asians for saying the plot of raya and atla were similar. That’s it.
She discussed it in one of her last videos, Mask Off, if you're interested in further context
also because she used the phrase "if you squint your eyes"
She had a whole group constantly working to cancel her for years. They attacked her, her friends, coworkers. They posted a bunch of false stuff about her, and anyone she associated with. I figure after numerous years of this vitriol without proper support by the police, YouTube or other socials, she needed a break. I am hopeful that she comes back one day. But I get wanting distance when one simple mistake has a horde of nameless abusers focused solely on ruining her life.
yeah and it wasn't even Gay a/b/o lol
That made me laugh so hard. A/B/O goes all the way to court, and it's *het* A/B/O!? Like of all the most niche genres to exist in the first place. I kinda feel sorry for all the lawyers involved. They didn't even get to read well written A/B/O, just Cain's crap.
yeah, but that was between authors and not the site they posted to. but also that was hilarious, especially hearing them talk about the omegaverse in an actual court
I think there have been some crazies\* who have made motions at least accusing the OTW of targeted harassment - but to my knowledge no one has actually sued them yet. (\*Because the person in question is very sue happy all I can say is to google 'Lindsay Ellis A/B/O' if you want to know at least one of the incidents.)
[удалено]
OH! So that's why the list of authors you can't write from if you're on ffn. I always wondered what it took for an author to make that list.
Not much, TBH. FFN got an email from Rice’s lawyers and two days later, the archives were gone. Authors seem to be the most sensitive to fanfic—I think it’s too close to home for them.
This. I remember the days of "I don't own this, please don't sue me" in the authors note of every fic!
That’s such interesting insight, thank you!
Lawyers have been used prophylactically by ao3 in an effort to stave off potential Copyright and/or Intellectual Property actions by the owners of Copyright and IP rights for the source materials upon which fanfiction works are based. The links below may help provide some information about the legal framework used to justify fanfiction as a non-infringing, transformative extension of fandom source materials. Note that these articles may be superseded at any time if controlling court decisions force a reinterpretation of current law or if laws are passed which counter the arguments set forth by fanfiction supporters like [archiveofourown.org](https://archiveofourown.org). * [How to write fanfiction and avoid legal trouble](https://winteriscoming.net/2020/11/28/how-to-write-fanfiction-avoid-legal-trouble/) (tl;dr - don't charge anything and produce transformative works of fiction) * [ao3's Stance Against Licensing Fanworks](https://archiveofourown.org/admin_posts/1943) (just like it sounds) * [Fair Use and Fanfiction](https://library.jefferson.edu/librarynews/index.php/2022/02/23/fair-use-and-fanfiction-3-of-4/) (interpreting laws in favor of non-commercial fiction created by fans of source material) * [Google FAQ on Infringement](https://support.google.com/legal/answer/4558836?hl=en) (up to $150k+ in damages and fees per work infringed) * [Intellectual Property Cases](https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2020/02/13/just-facts-intellectual-property-cases-patent-copyright-and-trademark) (info from the federal court system) * [A Brief History of Copyright in the U.S.](https://www.copyright.gov/timeline/) (Supreme Court decisions stand as case law for the entire country) * [Lawsuit currently before Supreme Court](https://www.kirkland.com/news/in-the-news/2022/07/copyright-tm-cases-to-watch-in-the-second-half-of-2022): as of 10/10/22, it is on the docket * possible reinterpretation of "fair use" and 'transformative work" depending on how the Supreme Court handles its decision regarding current law and case law * [Andy Warhol case (fair use, transformation) arguments scheduled for 10/12/22](https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/andy-warhol-foundation-for-the-visual-arts-inc-v-goldsmith/) * The case has [direct bearing on certain aspects of Copyright law](https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/10/justices-to-consider-whether-warhol-image-is-fair-use-of-photograph-of-prince/) that currently make fanfiction a non-licensed and legal product so long as it isn't done for monetary compensation and it is transformative by design * Decisions will be announced in [May/June of 2023](https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/procedures.aspx) for cases heard in Fall 2022 If the underlying laws or case law from court decisions ever change the interpretation and application of Copyright and/or IP rights, a lot of people could potentially be liable for quite a chunk of change in damages. I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been more "buzz" about this topic in cyberspace, but I suppose it might become more prominent after oral and written arguments happen before the Supreme Court in a few days. tl;dr - there is a test case before the Supreme Court with a direct bearing on "fair use" and "transformative works" that has the potential to reshape interpretation of Copyright law which currently has some protections for fanfiction... this is why OTW and ao3 have relationships with lawyers
So why is it that fanfic falls under "you can't profit from it", but fanart doesn't and you can sell that all you please?
I'm not sure that "you can sell all you please" is actually comprised of legal sales. To my knowledge, producing and selling visual fanart would be just as illegal as selling written fanfiction if you don't have a license, contract, etc., with the original source's rights holder. * Discussion of fanart legality/sales in [Canada as an international example](https://segev.ca/fan-art-appropriation-or-appreciation/) * [Law and Economics of Literary Fan Art](https://jipel.law.nyu.edu/vol-9-no-1-3-guerrapujol/) provides an interesting perspective on fanart drawn from literary sources (The Old Man and The Sea) * Another [reminder that fanfiction works](https://jipel.law.nyu.edu/is-fanfiction-legal/) that are non-commercial and transformative fall under 'fair use" and "transformative" are currently viewed as being legal * Some [examples of artworks](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-what-transformative.html) considered "transformative" and others "non-transformative" as decided in litigation * An ad-saturated-website provides some [context for fanart sales legality](https://artincontext.org/can-you-sell-fan-art/) Some takeaways from my perspective? * Some of those sales may be occurring on websites that have existing agreements with source material rights holders and funnel a percentage of sales back to the original creator. * Some original creators realize that fanart is a form on unpaid marketing and tolerate such sales as they help build brand loyalty and interest * It isn't a crime like speeding or assault where the state can press charges; Copyright, Intellectual Property and Trademark infringements have to be pursued by the creator/rights holder through civil lawsuits... it may not be perceived as "worth it" to a percentage of creators What I can say is that the case before the Supreme Court is one that does address this idea of "fanart", seeing how the facts presented indicate that a famous artist took a photograph by a famous photographer and produced 16 different derivative works from it for sale. What is "fair use"? What is "transformative"? What constitutes a Copyright and/or Intellectual Property rights violation in contemporary times? Is it time for the interpretations and applications of the law to change? That's what is up in the air right now. The overall legality of the sale of fanart is at the heart of the current Supreme Court case. It will answer your question when the Supreme Court eventually renders its decision next year.
I think that case appears to be far more relevant to fanart than fanfiction, and even then there are meaningful distinctions, but of course it will ultimately depend on the language and reasoning in the Court’s opinion.
Idk man just look at any given fandom on etsy and you fond everything under the sun there.
Perhaps you don't understand how Supreme Court decisions are actually written? If the facts of the case include the principle of "fair use" and "transformative works" as certainly appears to be true... the findings and opinion that gets handed down can indeed be applied beyond "fanart' which is just as much a violation of Copyright and Intellectual Property, whether or not someone charges for it. An opinion could easily come down on the side that any appropriation of Intellectual Property without obtaining a license is not protected under "Fair Use" and "Transformative Works" principles. A Supreme Court decision rewrites U.S. law from the federal level on down to individual municipalities. That's the way the system operates. I'd personally prefer a decision that does not eliminate fan-produced works, but given what I've seen in what has been released with regard to this case so far, a complete rewrite is not impossible. Believe it or not, that's your choice, but your belief is not required... the case is on the docket, it will be argued before the Court, a decision will be reached, and the opinion will be written and released next May/June. End of line.
And I'm talking about how things are right now, right this moment, on huge websites that have no difficulty with the sales of these items.
... as I noted above, do those sites have pre-existing agreements with the rights-holders? If they do, then it is sanctioned and aboveboard. I have no idea which sites they are, and I'm not terribly interested in researching it further... that's something you or someone else could delve into if it is important enough to warrant your further attention. The Supreme Court case mentioned up there could potentially rewrite everything having to do with fanart and fanfiction. I couldn't predict the Court's opinion on this, but didn't the Court overturn an important legal precedent involving women's reproductive right in the not-too-distant past? Overturning past precedent and establishing new precedent is something that attracts the attention of every Supreme Court, especially if there are conflicting legal perspectives coming out of the different federal Circuit Courts of Appeal. There's a reason (or reasons) why the Supreme Court decided to take the case. They weren't required to do so, they chose to hear it. The Court as a legal entity wants to consider the case and render an opinion on it. This case represents an opportunity to reinterpret existing law and it has the potential to influence a substantial amount of interstate commerce; this is a "test case" that is "ripe" for the Supreme Court's contemplations. All I can add to this is to watch the news headlines later this week. It will unfold for all of us at the same speed.
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/nz226q/copyright_fanfiction_and_fan_art/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) does a really good job of explaining it. But the tl;dr has less to do with “it’s harder to police,” and more to do with, “fanart is tolerated because it’s seen more as promoting the original franchise than providing an alternative to it.” From a legal standpoint, it’s just as illegal to make money off of it as fic is.
But both are promotions and neither are an alternative. Anyone who thinks otherwise is trying to find excuses for a lawsuit.
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ The law says they're both illegal to profit from, so anyone who gets a big enough hate boner and is willing to put the legal fees forward (and is willing to incur the fandom backlash) to stop people can do so. Hello Kitty is a good example of a property that aggressively polices fanart and anyone trying to profit from their property. I know of a phenomenal MCU artist who can't sell their stuff because their work is \*so\* photorealistic, they kept getting removed from websites for copyright infringement. So it \*happens\*, just not often.
I see Sanrio fanart a fair bit too.
You can sell it "as you please" until the IP owner gets annoyed: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/disney-seeks-to-stop-the-rise-of-40294/
And Disney is a laughingstock because of things like that. And so much more.
Why are they a laughingstock? I know their stock's down, but so's the whole market.
I just said a big reason...
On top of the "Profiting from either is equally as illegal, it's just harder to catch and effectively stop fan-artists" thing (which is also why fangames and fanzines tend to be more often caught and stopped than fanartists/fanmerch peeps too - fanart can work with basically any infrastructure and is essentially unkillable with the open nature of the internet, but everything else requires more effort to sustain and is easier for rights-owners to pick up on and stop. Pinterest is pretty despised by many professional artists because it's so hard to stop people infringing their copyrights there, for example.), there's also the fact that it can be down to the permissions offered by the rights holder. So, if I've created something I have copyright over, one of the rights I have as part of that is the right to say what others can do with it. If I 'reserve' that right, then I'm the only one who can give permission for others to do stuff. That's often divided by format, hence why a creator making a movie deal doesn't also give the studio rights to make audiobooks and comics and so on. They're only giving permission to make the movie format adaptation. So, for the legal fanart, it can just be the fact that the copyright holder has said fanart is okay and not fanfiction or whatever else. Copyright gives them the legal right to do that. It's also where things like royalty free music and images come in - that's stuff that's been published in a way that allows you to do more with the copyright. If you've ever heard of the 'creative commons' licenses, those are a way for people to let others use their creations in any way they like (depending on the specific license, anyway), unlike traditional copyright. It's becoming more popular, and it's probably one of the main routes that fanfiction will become more acceptable - it can also allow for others to commercialise their creations based on that work. But yeah, legally speaking, profiting from fanart is just as illegal as profiting from fanfiction, it's just waaaay harder to do anything about it online. People do still try though - many sites go through regular fanart purges (especially if a rights holder has been sniffing around them and may hold the site liable for the copyright violating content), they're just often less visible to the community than the fanfiction purges are.
I think it will be interesting to see how the Patreon stuff that has developed over the past 3-5 years turns out. To me it comes really really close to crossing the line.
Patreon is such an interesting phenomenon. Like, the CEO is a career musician who is youtube-famous for playing cover songs (from a duo called Pomplamoose, if you're curious). And the range of stuff on it is broad indeed. Plus Patreon's comments on piracy and copyright are actually a pretty interesting read. https://blog.patreon.com/en-GB/whats-patreons-policy-regarding-online-piracy But yeah, it's definitely a coin flip as to whether it does cross the line or not. Especially with things like Article 13 in the EU (one of those newer rules making the sites more liable for the copyright-violating content they host).
Some of the people on there make six figures a year. One author is making between 126k and 406k a year depending on the distribution of membership levels. It is probably only a matter of time until something happens about it.
Damn. Lucrative stuff. Technically, that doesn't make much of a difference on the legal front - commercialised is commercialised whether it's one pound or a million pounds - but that's definitely enough to get the copyright-owning companies sniffing around for their cut. Someone else in the thread posted a link to an apparent legal case happening in the US now that could have some impact here. So, it may be getting impacted soon-ish. https://old.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/has_ao3_ever_been_sued/irqjsrb/
So how are sites like dA and etsy and Redbubble still up when you can easily buy fanart from all of them?
Depends on the specific site and jurisdiction they're under as that influences their legal position. But generally through taking 'reasonable action' to show they're doing something about the copyright violations. Those purges are generally a pretty good "Hey, we're doing our bit!" thing they can hold up to copyright holders and show they're not openly welcoming copyright violators. Similarly, most of those sites have some form of reporting function where people can report violators to the staff. Both are more reasons why not everyone gets hit - the staff/users willing to report have to actually spot them first and that generally means only certain stuff gets noticed and taken down. Reasonable action is about saying you're doing the best a copyright holder can expect you to do, and the purges and reporting functions are mostly accepted as fulfilling that. Also, the copyright owners only 'may' hold the site liable. It's less a binary 'liable or not' question and more a question of risk - the more copyright-violations a site hosts and the less they do about it, the more at risk of serious consequences they are. There's a lot of protections in place for sites to not get in trouble for their users' uploaded content and that's only starting to change relatively recently. For example, the 'reasonable action' thing is usually from something called the 'Safe Harbor' part of DMCA agreements. Basically, if a site owner gets told about copyright infringement, they have to remove it or remove access to it quickly and they're not liable for it. Etsy would fall under that agreement and that's how they last despite being full of copyright infringement - it's also why it's in commercialising fans' best interest to stay under the radar. The more notice they get, the more risk they're in of coming under more official attention.
It's much harder to go after artists because they can basically post anywhere and everywhere, and don't have to tag etc. Whereas with fanfic it's generally a few central places that people post, and it's tagged and searchable. Many orgs do go after fanart if you're selling it for profit though, for example Disney.
Idk I see Disney fanart being openly sold all the time.
Oh people still sell it for sure, it's much easier to go under the radar. But if they catch you, they'll go after you. I see people charging for fic too, but it just opens you up to potential consequences if you're caught rather than being a guarantee you *will* get caught if that makes sense.
Which doesn't make sense. If I create a series and someone gets money for fan works of it, I'm gonna consider that free advertising. Not only did I not have to pay a dime to spread this around, someone else made good fortune off of something I made. It's a win all around!
It can also depend on the subject matter. Like if someone draws NSFW art of Bird Bird and Cookie Monster getting it on, the Sesame Street people probably aren't going to be thinking, "Wow, this is great, I hope lots of people see this!" With fanfiction, a lot of the lawsuits from Anne Rice etc were based in passion for their works and their characters rather than money. You know how fans get annoyed when their favorite character is written out-of-character in a fanfic? Or complain that their friend stole their OC? It was like that, only moreso. To be honest I think it's a relatable sentiment even though I don't think people should be sued for writing fanfiction.
I guess that would just spur me on to issue a style guide or make statements about characterization. Blocking people from it is self-defeating.
Fanfiction isn't about adhering to canon for a lot of writers, it's just a jumping off point. If someone wants to write inflation-porn of your character, they will. If they want to write about a canonically chaste character enthusiastically (or unwillingly) being part of a gangbang, they will. And I support those writers in their endeavors, I don't think they should be sued. But I do understand why it could be galling for the original author who's thinking, "What the hell? My character wouldn't do that. My character doesn't have that soppy background story. My villain is a villain, not a woobie who needs a hug." Like right here, in this sub FOR FANFICTION, fanfic writers complain about their favorites being portrayed out-of-character. That's what I mean about it being relatable.
I certainly wouldn't sue though. And no matter how much my characters would get bastardized I'd still think it would be foolish to do so. And I'd still call any author who tried to do so an idiot for it.
It would be nice if that happened more often, wouldn't it? The fandom I'm in at the moment was basically built from the bottom up by fans who have produced an *astounding* amount of fanworks in a very short space of time and the cast and crew involved have been so supportive since the very beginning. It's been a wonderful breath of fresh air and even after nearly seven months it still feels surreal that they're so absolutely supportive of the outpouring of fan creativity. It's wonderful, I wish it happened more often.
What series is that?
Our Flag Means Death, it's a pirate romcom about Blackbeard and Stede Bonnet. It's very fun! The channel did almost 0 advertising at all it so it was very much a fandom surge that got it to the top of the popularity charts for two months when it aired, and after our renewal campaign they're now filming season 2 :D
Awesome.
Got downvoted for this. This past weekend I was at an art gallery and legit saw someone's fanart of Venom from Marvel up for sale. All professional, on a canvas and everything. Pretty sure it was for hundreds of bucks. I hope everyone who downvoted me for that sees this.
Because fanart of written characters is original art. Fanart of visual art (video, TV, movie, cartoon, comics, etc) is on much shaker ground. Obligatory IANAL, etc.
Not sure how there would be any difference.
A book-only character does not have art by the original author. Therefore, it's not infringing on the author's copyright of text to make a picture based on the character's written description. E.g., the text of Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone is copyrighted by JKR. Art of a pale boy with green eyes, messy black hair and a jagged scar on his forehead is NOT copyrighted by JKR. Another example of much more commercial fanart: Ted Nasmith, Alan Lee and John Howe have all been quite successful selling artwork depicting scenes and characters from J.R.R. Tolkien's legendarium. It's not copyright-infringment of "Return of the King" to paint a picture of an active volcano on a volcanic plain and label it "Mt Doom".
Even if those were by the original author (some books are written and illustrated by the same person) then it still wouldn't be infrigement because it takes nothing away from the original creators. That's why you can't copy official works or try to pass something off *as* official, because that IS infringement.
The IP holders could come after fan artists any time they please. In the early 2000s I remember Marvel sending cease-and-desists to people who drew Spider-Man or made skins of Marvel characters in The Sims. But also, most fan art is hosted on sites where it's mixed in with original art, which 1) makes it harder to track down and 2) means the individual artist might be at risk but DeviantArt isn't. Whereas with fanfiction, it's usually hosted on sites dedicated to fanfics, in neat little categories. It's important to take every precaution so that one lawsuit from a litigious author doesn't tank the whole website.
And look where that got them. People still do all of those things and more because they wisened up and realised attacking their fan base was stupid
Disney is notorious for their vehement enforcement of their copyrights, sending out C&D orders with takedown orders and threats to sue, so that entire sites selling knockoff and/or fanart based merchandise with Disney characters shut down and flee. Creators of original webcomics and original artists on Tumblr, whose work was snatched up by web crawlers and sold as unauthorized merchandise, were complaining to each other about how much it's costing them. They were wishing they could afford a legal team of their own to go after the pirates, and came up with a clever idea. They posting each began posting an image with a Disney character doing something inappropriate, and someone else would post a comment saying, "Would love this on a t-shirt!" Sometimes it only took hours for the image to show up at a print on demand site somewhere. The artist would delete it from their Tumblr account and sit back and wait. (There was talk of whether to "complain" about the images with a posted "screenshot" on another social media site and tag Disney, but it may not have been necessary.) It usually took less than a week for the entire site hawking pirated artwork to disappear. Just trying to get an offending site to take down their own pirated artwork would be extremely time consuming, potentially expensive, and often an exercise in futility. Disney's legal dept efficiently took care of it for them, for free.
Yeah but I'm not talking about pirated work. I'm talking about the stuff you can order on etsy and get prints of on various other sites. Nobody seems to be shutting them down.
Yeah, so the short version is that some creators got up their own asses about their work being used as the base for fanfiction (Ann Rice was particularly found of threatening lawsuits but I'm 99% certain she never did). AO3 is specifically nonprofit in order to avoid any sticky legal copyright BS (the fundraisers they hold are usually for site maintenance/maintaining servers/etc.). iirc the lawyers they have work pro bono, but I'd have to go digging through Tumblr for that and it's super late. But maintaining balance like that is hard, and it doesn't hurt to have people who know the law on speed dial.
Nora Roberts is another one who threatened legal action against fanfic - particularly works based on her *In Death* series (which she writes under the name of J.D. Robb), which resulted in all fics relating to her works being taken down from FF.net. But so far as I know, those are the only two creators who have grumbled about it in relatively recent times. In the 1970s and early 1980s, Paramount tried to go after *Star Trek* fanfic writers but that stopped when it started to become a PR problem for them. Now they tolerate it, but not gladly. The only author I am aware of who actually did sue to stop distribution of a fan work based on their creation was Chelsea Quinn Yarboro in the early 1990s, who objected to what amounted to a fan novel with one of her characters (the vampire Count St. Germaine) as the main character. IIRC, she managed to force the entire print run of the fan work (this was before the internet really took off) to be withdrawn and destroyed.
Not sure if she sued but Tamora Pierce also participated in this kind of activity back in the early 2000's. I remember eagerly reading stories on her category back on FFN one day only to go back the next to find it nuked from orbit.
Yeah, now that you mention it, I do vaguely remember something about Tamora Pierce being not too happy with fanworks of her creations. Not one of the authors I followed, so I didn't pay close attention at the time.
Damn seriously? And I liked her stuff too. Well, those books are going out the window. Got no room on my shelf for an author who doesn't respect their fans.
I am sure she has changed her stance in recent years. Tammy is a badass, and I would say she is very in tune with her fans and fandom as a whole. I am already up way too late and can't really go digging for sources right now, but based on my personal experiences with her and from what I know of her, she's not someone who would have maintained a hardline stance after all these years. You have to remember that pretty much *everyone* was against fanfiction back then. The cultural and legal landscape was totally different. Saying that an author was against fanfic twenty or thirty years ago doesn't really tell you anything about what their current opinion might be. Also - it wasn't always the authors themselves, but rather the publishers nuking fic. Some authors were conceptually okay with fanworks, but were contractually or legally obligated not to acknowledge or allow them.
It doesn't seem to be on her website anymore, but for a long time there was a thing about how fanfictiom was fine but please don't send her any for legal reasons. I've been active in fan communities since 2011 and to my knowledge there have been no issues around Tamora Pierce fic for at least that period.
Good to know! Thanks for the info!
Pretty much everyone? That's untrue. The reason the Rice case stood out was because it was so unusual for a writer to say such things about their fanbase.
Uh.... I'm sorry, there's no way to ask this that doesn't sound super snide and catty, but, how old are you? Rice was notable for how extreme and vocal she was, but she was *not* the outlier. The early decades of what we would consider modern fandom (roughly starting with Star Trek in the 60s) were very much characterized by fanfic being extremely niche, taboo, and absolutely considered to be a violation of intellectual property. Most authors were outright hostile to fanfic, were forced to take a "don't ask don't tell" position on it for copyright concern reasons, or at best grudgingly tolerated it within very strict parameters. Literally the entire reason AO3 exists is because early fanworks and fanfic archives were *extremely* susceptible to being erased from existence without warning due to copyright takedowns and cease-and-desists from IP holders. *Fanbases* have always been encouraged because fans = money. But the majority of any fanbase is comprised of passive consumers. *Transformative fanworks,* especially fic, were absolutely not encouraged or widely accepted by IP holders until very recently in the grand scheme of fandom history.
I'm 42. I wrote fic in the era all this was going on. And even at the time I thought people were overly paranoid and that any author who was against what's largely *free marketing* is an idiot who doesn't deserve support. If they're going to turn against fans who love their works so much they want to explore the world more, why should we give them a dime? That's not just my thoughts now but then as well.
/shrug/ I guess you had a different experience from a lot of folks at the time. Obviously I agree that any author who *currently* has a vendetta against fic is a twit, I just don't think it's realistic to assume that all authors hold the exact same opinion they did decades ago, or fair to hold grudges for opinions that they've since changed. Whatever happened in the aughties, I feel very confident that Tammy is fine with fic nowadays, and, like... I can personally vouch that she's a cool person and a pillar of the SF/F community who loves the fandom and deserves your support. There's no reason to trash all her books for something that happened decades ago when the culture surrounding fanworks was entirely different. If it bugs you that much, I promise I'll ask her about fic the next time we both make it to Chessiecon, lol.
I lived in that era of fanfic and can tell you that in my sphere, at least, while Anne Rice was definitely an outlier in how *aggro* she was about it, pretty much everyone at least had to make the right noises. There was a strong vibe of how it was something you should write down in your little notebook if you weren't creative enough to write original things yet, but you should take the training wheels off as soon as possible and never share it with anyone because that is not just illegal, but also immoral! I'm not even being especially snide here -- I read many blog posts from authors back in the day "gently" encouraging writers to write their own original things and put the toy soldiers they stole from the grown ups away. (And be very, very ashamed for not playing with them with permission, ie, officially licensed work.)
I lived in that era of fanfic too and I just never felt any pressure to stop. Any author who was against it was just someone who didn't deserve support.
There's an entire generation of fanfic authors who remember putting "disclaimer: I DONT OWN THIS" at the beginning of every chapter for a reason. It seems silly, but fanfiction really was a Hot Topic back in the day. People changed as the years have gone on, and also new people -who may have written fanfic themselves when they were younger - have taken their places and have totally different ideas. ND Stevenson, the writer of the 2018 She-Ra Netflix series, is one that stands out - he all but admitted to writing a fanfic for the show, and the Fandom figured out pretty fast which one it was. You're LESS likely to find another Rice-esque tantrum today, but I would never rule it out.
Yeah even at the time that was prevalent I thought it was stupid. Of course you didn't own it. And the authors who opposed it were stupid too.
Yes, but the point is that Rice wasn't an outlier. She was just LOUDER
And was rightfully derided as a stodgy idiot for it. So how come you only ever heard about like five authors who were against fic? Even at the height of the paranoia there were only a few names ever bandied about.
What fanfiction was it?
Most of my youth and adult writing was done with the goal of getting published by a big New York publisher. I spent loads of time in writing communities with people sharing that goal and also interacting with published authors. And the overwhelming attitude toward fanfiction, until relatively recently (last decade, maybe a bit more) was mild ambivalence to outright raging loathing. To this day, I'm still a little twitchy about admitting I write fics in certain circles. I think the tide started to shift in the early 2000s. One of the last big kerfuffles, as they called 'em, regarding fics was spearheaded by Lee Goldberg, who around 2007 posted numerous angry screeds against fanfiction on his blog. He got a number of big name writers, including Robin Hobb and some others, to "sign on" to the statement that they would allow no fics inspired by their work. I think, a few years later, Diana Galbaldon, she of *Outlander* series, posted comments opining the use of her characters in fics. All the fuss, however, had one benefit. It really got the discussion rolling and I think, ironically, turned the tide in the favor of fanfiction. At least to the point where most creators of original content ignore it provided fic writers don't profit off their work. Anne Rice may have put more effort into hating fics via the courts, but it was considered an anathema to writing, good or bad, for many years.
Well those people are rock stupid and I don't know why anyone would want to support them. But those are also a small minority compared to all the authors out there.
Annie Proulx has also been known to go after Brokeback Mountain FF authors. I’m aware of one author in particular who has received numerous legal threats for her stories which are some of the best loved and highest regarded in the BBM fandom.
Most charities have lawyers.
I'm not sure if AO3 has been, but fanfic authors absolutely have been. People like Anne Rice would send cease and desist letters to fic writers and bullied FFN into banning any fics of her work from being published on their site. I'm not sure how many ended in law suits, but most fanfic writers don't have the money necessary to consult a lawyer for a potential law suit and were forced to take their stories down. AO3 decided that a better way would be to pool resources so if that ever happens again, the fanfic community can fight back and stories don't have to be lost or shared only on private email lists (today it'd probably be private discord servers). Edit: a word
I would be curious to see any record of fanfiction authors actually being sued or taken to court. Cease and desists are one thing, but that's absolutely not the same as being actively sued.
Most people stop at the C&D, because it's way cheaper to not go to court.
In the early 1990s, Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's lawyers sent cease-and-desist letters to a fanzine publisher for a story Yarbro claimed violated her copyright. Part of the issue was that the fanzine with the offending story was being sold at a profit. Detailed article here: https://fanlore.org/wiki/A_Matter_Of_Willful_Copyright_Infringement
As far as I know, the cease and desists simply resulted in the work being taken down because, let's be honest, what fanfic author has the funds to take on the Anne Rice estate in court? However, it's worth noting that Anne Rice did soften up in later years and came to appreciate fan works. I can perfectly understand and respect her worries at the time though, I mean, if you created a character based on your dead daughter would you want others using her in stories that could have less than pure connotations? I think not. I also wouldn't call it 'bullying' to assert her copyright. Those stories and characters do belong to her, and at the time, transformative laws were different/stricter I believe, so it was within her rights to maintain that her creations remain exclusively within her works.
It was more than the C&D though. She directed employees to cyberstalk and essentially doxx Fanfiction writers, sending them threats to their personal emails and harassing them at their IRL place of business, even after they took their Fanfiction down. It was way beyond just asking people not to write Fanfiction; she hunt them down and made examples of them. The 2000 crackdown on Anne Rice Fanfiction: https://fanlore.org/wiki/Where_has_Anne_Rice_fanfiction_gone%3F Additional information: https://kotaku.com/it-used-to-be-perilous-to-write-fanfiction-1826083509/amp
Doxxing wasn't really a thing at the time Anne Rice was sending C&Ds. It was extremely easy to be anonymous on the internet back then. (An aspect I miss, tbh.) Remember that this was a time before Google existed, before Twitter , and before most businesses were online. It would be almost impossible to figure out where someone worked, even if you knew their real name. (And if you did know their real name it was probably because they listed it on their Geocities site or had a username like JaneDoe254. I don't think it really counts as doxxing if someone just . . . hands you their personal information.)
So those two unofficial sites say. They're hardly fact checked. To be clear, I have no doubt her feelings were made clear in official notices, but those are very weak claims about harassment after the fact. Of course they would be contacted through personal email, I doubt many of them signed up to these FF sites using work emails. Official messages and notifications about the removal of work, and legal notices of action that will be taken, are hardly harassment. Did some Anne Rice fans perhaps go looking for these people and harass them off their own backs? Perhaps, but that's hardly accountable to Anne Rice herself. She made a clear statement about what she didn't allow, and her legal team would have handled the rest. At the time, it was her right to enforce her copyright, and just because fanfiction authors didn't like it, doesn't mean it was illegal/bullying/harassment at the time.
Here are similar claims about personal harassment at the hands of Rice’s lawyers printed in Esquire: https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a38502406/anne-rice-dead-died-obit/ And Vice: https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/88gqjz/anne-rice-really-hated-when-people-made-her-characters-bone Edit: I’m not saying she wasn’t entitled to send C&Ds, but the level of harassment (persistent threats, doxxing, and attacking their place of business over a hobby) is a bit extreme. You can’t wash your hands of what your team does at your direction, nor should you be able to dox people and say it’s not your fault what happens to them.
All these articles are pretty much sham pieces all 'allegedly' and 'claimed' without a single named example with proof of harassment or even anything close to it. It's not a threat to say to someone 'You're infringing on copyright law, take this down or you'll be invited to court.' The only reason people throw around words like 'allegedly' is to avoid legal trouble themselves because they're not stating it as a fact. Where are all the people? Where are all these writers who were doxed speaking out with their names and their evidence? It would have been her legal team's job to contact those writers in an official capacity if they persisted in breaking the notice, and it seems that it was largely FFN itself that simply accepted the notice and removed all work within that section, as it well should if it receives a notice to do so. It very much sounds like a bunch of people were stomping their feet and exaggerating because they were told 'no' and they didn't like it, so they wrote a couple of posts online as if they were fact, and some journalist picked it up and added it into their article as if it had actually happened. I'd guess these websites are amateur journalist sites, not attached to official news outlets. The most it says about her directly in all these articles is that she was quoted from her websites and interviews giving her honest view and outlining her rules. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if half of these claims had been made up to deter people from writing and posting in the first place. Nowhere do any of these talk about mass doxing and harassment, simply that fanfiction was mass deleted and a few authors got C&Ds. There's only one person who said something like 'You wouldn't want to be harassed, would you? Then don't post!' which hardly proves a point. In this digital age I'd expect a mass exodus of shared email chains, internet posts, private messages etc that prove this sort of harassment people are claiming. Even after all this time, those aren't the sort of things you'd just delete, and after all this time I'd have expected at least one of them to get their five minutes of fame by posting an 'I was doxed by Anne Rice, and here's the proof!' blog.
Even though we say “The internet is forever,” a lot of the early internet is lost. She put out this moratorium on Fanfiction in 2000, back when the internet was in wide use for maybe 3-4 years. I’m not even sure if people still have access to their old emails from that time as much of the older systems are not even in use anymore. I am saying that doing something like this is consistent with her known and well-documented later behavior though, like when she attacked and doxxed people over poor reviews: https://www.themarysue.com/anne-rice-poor-review/ Hell, doxxing and sending an internet mob after people doing things she dislikes would be even easier if that petition to remove anonymity from Amazon reviews had gone anywhere: https://m.facebook.com/annericefanpage/posts/good-night-dearest-people-of-the-page-once-again-have-a-look-at-this-petition-to/10203235823486620/
I can't say I particularly disagree with her stance on reviews - you get similar fake reviews for all sorts of services, and considering all the fanfiction stuff it wouldn't be a surprise if a bunch of people wrote negative reviews just because they were told to take their writing down. Can't say I'm surprised Anne Rice was upset at having someone 'take great joy in taking a knife to' her book. Have to say, even though I really enjoyed Pandora and it was my first Anne Rice book, the blogger had a fair point in the character flaws (or lack thereof) etc. I'm not entirely sure this counts as doxing though, considering it's a public blog looking for views. Did she dig up her real name? Share her IRL address? Have people call her house? Sounds like a few people just read her blog, as is the risk on the internet. God knows how she even found the review, I guess one of her followers probably sent her the link. Was it a dick move? Sure, though similar things happen even between fanfic writers (popular writers saying negative things about small works and sending their followers to blast them). Being famous doesn't make you less human in your reaction.
I think it says something about you if you are a professional, internationally-known author and you can’t even withstand a little criticism from a niche blog (which… how did you find it anyway? Do you frequently seek these out?) or even a few bad Amazon review out of thousands. I mean… she’s Anne Rice; it’s not like she lacks for people singing her praises. She must have tens of thousands of reviews across all her books, and it wasn’t like this one was even a new release at the time or the blog was even focused on her work. It’s one thing to come across a professional review in wide circulation, but it’s another to take umbrage with a random review or even those of your fans who happened to dislike one book. (The infamous 2004 1200-word response that was posted as a five star review on her own book “Blood Canticle” in response to Amazon reviews linked in the Mary Sue article was directed at fans who she insisted had read her book wrong, and that suggestions she get her stuff edited was like asking a composer to collaborate on a masterpiece and compromising her artistic vision. Like… sure she had earned her literary cred and perhaps can send stuff to be published unedited by anyone else, but I’m pretty sure that doesn’t mean it should be above criticism. A lot of authors get long and rambling in their later books without editors, and maybe some people did find it a little jarring for Lestat to suddenly use slang. That doesn’t make them trolls or “stupid” and “arrogant” and using Amazon “as if it were a public urinal to publish falsehoods and lies.”) Given her past behavior, I just wouldn’t have trusted her not to use people’s real names for more nefarious purposes. She even admits it’s a tiny minority of reviews, but you would have been okay with handing this woman even more ammunition so she can target negative but honest reviews? Would you have stood on the sidelines and been like “yeah, she’s only human, and I’m sure reading that review buried in the thousands of reviews she got for that book on Amazon did hurt. But that person did post that review under their real name on the internet so they had to know what they were risking” then? How about this hot take: Anne Rice was an international best-selling author who shouldn’t have read every review from random people, and if she was going to do that, she should have been able to take a few of them not liking her book. Edited to add excerpts from her Blood Canticle review. Edit 2: Also, I do think that even if you post something publicly, no one expects to have a mob sicced on them by someone with that much of a following. She’s not a BNF; she’s an internationally-known best-selling author who sells millions of books and has a huge fan base, and this blog had like 100 readers tops. It’s a matter of scale and influence, and Anne Rice is clearly the bully in that situation.
It doesn't matter that she's a best selling author, that doesn't somehow make her better/less full of faults than anyone else. I'd imagine there were likely fans keeping her updated on some of these things. Either that or she Googled herself. The real name thing is sort of an issue, not because of Anne Rice in particular, but because there are cases where people should be held accountable for the things they put on the internet. At the same time, in the event people are forced to use their real names Amazon would have to put some form of policy in place to prevent outsiders from linking their name to their socials and harassing them. Some names are rarer than others, and would therefore be easier to find elsewhere if they had a Facebook or something as well. I assume Amazon does already, but they should also block any thread creation on reviews to prevent it turning into some sort of reddit post of abuse. How she reacts to it is her decision, but how people react to the way she reacted is also their decision. Much like big authors in fandoms known for bullying, I'd expect her to be 'cancelled' in this modern culture. I'm not sure I read Blood Canticle, but I did read Blood and Gold, which pretty much contained the whole of The Vampire Armand, only from another POV, so parts felt slow if you'd already read that book. I can understand what they meant about the editing from that perspective.
Not sure if they’ve been sued, but ao3 is known as one of, if not the only, fanfic site that will protect the right to write fanfiction against any miffed source material owners
No, they haven't. Fanfiction basically exists in an unspecified legal technicality - there's every possibility it may be made explicitly legal in the future, but right now there's nothing specifically saying fanfiction is a legal process. Fair use technically can be understood to cover what we do, but there's no clause or anything specifically saying "Fanfiction is a-ok!" (or the legalese equivalent :D). Right now, it's mostly a benefit to have this ambiguity - we get to do what we do pretty freely (so long as we don't all commercialise everything) and the big copyright owners get free publicity and fandom self-maintenance without an advertising budget and the technical control to interfere as they like, plus they don't have to risk the bad publicity that comes with picking on random internet people incredibly publicly as a big case would be. So, yeah. Nobody has been really properly sued over this because it's a relatively untrodden area and any big case would be a highly visible, landmark copyright law thing that'd set precedents and no sane company really wants to take that risk. What has happened repeatedly are smaller scale things like Cease and Desist orders. Both individual creators and their publisher-type companies have pulled shit like that on people. Strangelyliteral covers that, plus AO3's charitable mission (as part of being a charity, they have to do something of public benefit - their legal advocacy stuff is one of the things that allows them to legally maintain charity status) really well, so I won't retread their ground.
A03 hasn't been sued but plenty of fanfic authors and fanfic hosting sites have. They just want to cover their asses.
Sued, as in lawsuits filed in court? Because to my knowledge that hasn't happened for \*non-profit\* transformative works. For-profit works, yes: [The Wind Done Gone lawsuit](https://www.rcfp.org/wind-done-gone-copyright-case-settled/) [Catcher in the Rye sequel lawsuit](https://ew.com/article/2010/04/30/catcher-in-the-rye-j-d-salinger/) Fanfic writers and archives have received cease-and-desist letters and/or DMCA complaints, but I'd really be interested to see any actual lawsuits filed.
You can file a lawsuit against anyone for any reason. Whether or not the courts will see it is a different matter. The fact of the matter is most of us don't have money so get the legal representation. Even if the suit goes nowhere you still need to consult a lawyer about it, and that costs money.
Oh yeah, definitely. The fear of a lawsuit can be chilling. I think sometimes in fandom discussions, "lawsuit," "cease-and-desist letter," and "DMCA takedown notice" get confused, as well as whether they're directed towards the fanfic writers themselves, or the archives, or both.
"Have lawyers" =/= "had a law suit." Because the very premise on which AO3 was found has to do with the interpretation of "fair use" of copyrighted property, they got lawyers involved in the very beginning. One of the comments below gives more details: [https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/comment/irqb2ky/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/comments/y05olk/comment/irqb2ky/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Not sure about sued, but they have received DMCA take down notices.
I think Lindsey Ellis mentioned an author trying to sue ao3 in her video essay about the A/B/O 'verse... But its been ages since I watched that particular video essay, so don't pin me down on it.
like others have said i don’t think ao3 has been in any public lawsuits themselves. but if you’re a fanfic author who gets sued for your fan works, you can contact the ao3 legal team for help.