I'm pretty agnostic on the whole thing but I respect the DLP community's choice of standards to observe writers' ownership (in the Bill & Ted "be excellent to one another" sense, not the legal sense) of their fanfiction creations. Myself, I tend to ask permission even if borrowing a plot bunny and I do appreciate when folks ask my permission to take over one of my stories (permission I always grant, though I do ask the borrower that they reference the original work as a courtesy).

In the few cases where someone has taken one over without permission, I just roll with it. Chances are they aren't going to get nearly the same exposure and if they do, it's pretty obvious by the time stamp who originated the work.

 

I don't see the equivalence. FF is not published authors writing other published author's works. We're not taking money from the author's pocket, nor putting money in our own, which would be no Less Wrong than stealing.

On the other hand, trading off other FF works (and I'm not talking about paying homage with a quote or the like) is taking someone else's work on the same level, and building it for yourself without their approval. It gains you a ready made audience that isn't yours, because you're trading on a name or story that you didn't create, but are equal to (both FF authors).

 

I see nothing wrong with fanfiction of fanfiction - as long as it's distributed without copying someone else's work. So, the following is okay in my opinion:

"what if story: x happened differently in chapter 42 of [link]", no content has been copied.

On the other hand, copying someone's work and uploading it as a whole fic is a major dick move if permission has not been explicitly granted.

 

I just wish people wouldn't be cunts, but that's asking a lot on the Internet.

 

I think the "no answer = yes" was probably born out of authors that have abandoned fanfiction all together. It's not about stories that have laid dormant for a year, but ones that have been for 5+ and the author is unreachable.

Still just continuing a fic is probably the wrong thing to do anyways. Just borrow the ideas you like and tell the story you want around it.

 

I believe that in the Fanfiction community, ideas and concepts should be free and uncontrolled. This is, in essence, one of the core selling points Fanfiction has over published fiction to me. You can see similar concepts implemented again and again, being polished over time and with slightly different executions until something pops out the end as a masterpiece.

I think it's completely reasonable that someone else can come along and write a virtually identical attempt at the same story without your permission. If it's better than the original, then the whole community has benefited. Hell, even if the summary is something as blatant as "This is another take on Jarik's fic", I don't really see any problem with it. I would say if they're marketing it like that, there's a good chance that the fic is worse than the original, but I still call it fair.

Fanfiction of fanfiction, such as a work that may reference another story and call itself an alternative ending/scene/continuation/etc, also seems perfectly reasonable to me. The fanfic community is a competitive market, and if the derivative of the original story is more popular than the original, the whole community is again, better off for it. Regarding Definitely Not Taure's post on creative control, the derivative work would still need to reference the original and it's pretty clear they are still separate works (no different than writing a fanfiction sequel to an ongoing series while awaiting the next book).

Where it becomes a clear no-no is any instance where the actual writing is copied into a new work. The writing isn't just ideas or concepts, but the direct product of labour and work. Republishing any bits of writing without the permission of the original author (even if they are referenced) is clear plagiarism and completely unreasonable.

Of course, with all this in mind, I think it is a polite to ask for permission, but I still don't think it should be considered unreasonable not to (just maybe a bit rude).

My two cents anyway.

 

To the best of my ability to discern, DLP forbids "fanfiction of fanfiction", even that which does not use any text of the original story.

Would appreciate some clarification, but I'm pretty sure that's what's going on.

 

Ok - I was always under the impression that story continuations were forbidden because they were derivative without permission, not because they copied text straight from the other author's story. This never really made much sense to me, given the basic premise of fanfiction, but I understand having a community norm in that direction - it is one of basic politeness.

 

I think its a bit more complex than that. The fanfiction community is built on mutual courtesy. One of "The Rules" is that you dont adopt someones story without permission.

You can say there are elements of hypocrisy in regards to continuations of JKR's work, but I wouldnt agree. JKR is not in the community, and she has given a general endorsement regardless.

 

I always saw it that way:

Fanfictions a derivative work, but it doesn't pretend it's the original. The continuations we speak of do. And straight out copying text is lame (unless you have permission and the originals missing).

But I'm not an author or anything, so what do I know ...

 

I dislike how this discussion reeks of hypocrisy. For me, fanfiction is always a derivative work, and it would naturally follow that any other derivative works of the derivative works are fine - even without permission.

After all, if you can write a SOIAF fanfic, because the film version doesn't have the stance of Martin, you'd better keep your dislike of the derivatives of your fanwork to yourself.

Personally, I understand and want to see one thing - and one thing only - it is polite to ask before using anything directly.

Directly is the most critical word here. Want to have something similar to my plot? Want to have a story set after my work? As an alternate path of my work? I have no ground to stand on to forbid that. The second I start screaming thief - I'm being a hypocrite - because I'm the one who stole the setting and used the setup of canon universe.

The way it is phrased now, there's not a clear line on this, however you look at it. There are no cases differentiated, only the general stance of forbidding everything, unless explicitly given the permission. It's, perhaps, too narrow minded.

If someone wants to write a continuation, and goes for me for permission - I am expecting a continuation - and not a repost of my stuff with a new 1000 word chapter. Because that's what continuation means for me - writing new things that are based on my works.

This is even what I'd support, in general - people taking old, unfinished works as a base, and without using copying scenes from them - writing a continuation. Yet - the stance seems to be hostile on that front - and the courtesy requires to ask. (Even if you never got anything resembling permission from G.R.R. Martin to make fun of Sansa, I have to get your permission to write a chapter using your OC, who I found interesting? What?)

If you want to repost bits of my story, ask not for a continuation, but rather. "Can I use your scene X in my fanfic, that's about your characters?". This hasn't happened yet, and I would probably agree without much thought.

The question of "Can I repost your whole story X as story Y and add 1000 words to it?" begs a no, but I am still unsure what is my moral ground to stand there. (If you give me credit, I see no way to stop you there, beside complaining really loudly.)

With all fanfiction, I feel that whenever I'm writing words to the internet - the moment they leave my personal computer or cloud storage and become public - I lose the rights to keep these contained. You don't post stupid pictures of yourself hoping that no one would spread them? Don't post anything you don't truly own and expect it to be protected.

People do, though. It's surprising, if I can understand the reasoning behind it.

In the end, there are three points I wanted to make with this mess of a post:

First, it would be better not to have hard stances against derivative work, and it would serve everyone good to get our heads from the superiority clouds. While writing fanfiction we have stolen scenes, ideas, names and places - sometimes even phrases to hint at canon universe. Don't restrict that of which you are guilty of. Don't pretend you have more rights than the original creator.

Second, yes, by all means, if you wrote a fanfic, feel free to forbid the copying and plagiarism of your work - but only the things that are directly used and copied.

Third - if you want to write a continuation of fanfiction, learn what the word continuation means. Write a derivative work of derivative work of a derivative work - but do not steal. Do not copy. Do not pretend you wrote something you didn't. Keep that in mind, and I don't think there's anything anyone can do about it - except to ban you from DLP, I guess.


This is all my opinion, and as the current ruling is directly at odds with the Third point as written, I'd appreciate a clarification on the definition of continuation.

As written, it follows that:

but...

and

Is this true, in the end?

The quoted discussion implies that the intent of the ruling is to forbid copying parts of the story, and then continuing from where it ended, not simply forbidding all continuations and derivative works.

Does intent even cover me writing a spin off, on, (example here) Wand and Shield, starting at the current point in the story? As in, writing on Avengers with the addition of Harry and Peter Parker - only ever referring to events in the past, but essentially writing a new adventure, say fighting of another alien invasion?

Would I get banned, or would the only consequence be that Roarian stopped speaking with me in good terms, because I didn't ask for his permission before throwing his version of Harry Potter at the aliens?

How about including the actual definition of continuation in the ruling?

Continuation as far the default definition goes, does not cover neither copying nor plagiarism - only the fact of a derivative work - which is either an oversight, or a policy I cannot support in good faith. I will abide by the rules, however.

So, there won't be a Wand and Shield: Nauro's Edition.

In short:
Continuation is not copying by definition. Forbidding continuations is a bad ruling, in my personal, subjective opinion, while direct copying should be punished - and even then, within bounds of reason.

 

Lord Ravenclaw's post talked about a zero tolerance policy with a lifetime ban. A zero tolerance policy which, through the course of these two pages of discussion, people have interpreted differently.

It seems like this is something where specifics need to be ironed out. Especially given that "promoting" a work that potentially infringes on these nuances also constitutes a ban, so it won't always be possible to err on the side of caution if you feel you may be in the grey zone.

 

The sig Jon. It works perfectly....I hate you for that.