Our BetterMost Community > Creative Writer's Corner
Taking Chances, by E. L. Van Hine and L.H. Nicoll
louisev:
--- Quote from: souxi on November 21, 2006, 12:19:04 pm ---So only another 50 to go then Louise? ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;D
--- End quote ---
are you trying to kid a kidder, there, Souxi?
Lumière:
Hello Everyone!
I have let Dear Ol' Cousin JULIA out of the vault for an hour to celebrate our 100 chapters occasion!
Everyone! Please, be NICE to her!! ;D
If you are good, you can have a few ..
..to celebrate ..
Lumière:
And the Laramie Lexicon continues to grow .. ;D
to Leslie: the reader in question brings all of his/her begging and pleading and sometimes even bribery, to bear, to increase the local "schmoop" factor in a given chapter or plot element to the desired level.
to Souxi: the reader in question takes leslie-ing to a whole other level with a fair amount of weeping, wailing, howling, .. practically anything to get what he/she wants. Souxi-ers have been known to be downright relentless and they usually get what they want.
to June: to squee.
to fistulate: To undergo a period of enforced sexual abstinence, of at least one week's duration, while at the same time getting married.
to Dupreeciate: The phenomenon of a minor character in a work of fiction increasingly absorbing readers' attention until the character threatens to overtake or equal their interest in the nominal main character(s).
Haha..I love it! I think I have one ..
to Tooeyminate: To have an uncharacteristically large appetite for muffins. When observed in their natural habitat, tooeyminators are hardly seen without a box of muffins close at hand. Infact, some have been known to leave behind a trail of crumbs.
;)
MaineWriter:
I have another, Lucise....
to westify: an act of civil disobedience, performed as a protest
Usage: "I am westifying with the marriage license, Ellery, but it's cause Edna n me believe you two boys should be able ta be married."
Leslie
merrobot:
--- Quote from: louisev on November 21, 2006, 07:06:53 am ---For those of you who are wondering, or bewildered, as to why I voiced complaints about some of the "parodies" and "fanfiction" stories that were published on Livejournal and were subsequently removed:
--- End quote ---
This does not actually answer why you voiced complaints – unless, of course, your reason is simply “because I can”. Furthermore the suspension of the journals was related entirely to the LS fanfiction “A Ghost of a Chance” and in no way to “Parody” entries.
--- Quote --- the Terms of Service in Livejournal do specify that the the use of another user's proprietary content, copyrighted material, ideas or subject matter, is not permitted on Livejournal.
--- End quote ---
Which does, of course include copyrighted material from the short story Brokeback Mountain by Annie Proulx. “Fanfiction” is copyright theft.
--- Quote ---The original content of the Laramie Saga, while it does not carry a copyright, does qualify as proprietary content, and as such, falls under the provisions in Livejournal's Terms of Service.
--- End quote ---
And under the Bern Convention (1971 revision, Article 12): “Authors of literary or artistic works shall enjoy the exclusive right of authorizing adaptations, arrangements and other alterations of their works.” Therefore, Annie Proulx has legal rights to the Laramie Saga (if she doesn't choose to sue on the grounds of copyright violation). She’d also have rights to A Ghost of a Chance.
--- Quote --- The rules regarding the proper method of parody do NOT involve the reuse of the specific characters, plots, and ideas of a person's original fiction, or copying of its text - and this is recognized under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Anyone who would like to use any of my proprietary content, may do so only with permission, and those same rights extend to all fan authors, whether they know it, or not.
--- End quote ---
I think the issue here is not whether fan authors know that they have some claim to their own works but rather whether any of them would actually challenge another fan author over the issue of copyright. It seems obscenely narcissistic and hypocritical to me.
--- Quote ---The reason why some websites were suspended had nothing to do with me:
--- End quote ---
That is untrue in the case of Kelpersmek and notthekelps livejournals. These accounts were suspended following a report filed to the LJ Abuse Team under the following terms:
“We have received a report, properly formatted under the provisions set forth by
United States law, indicating that your entries located at **** and **** violates the copyright of another”
--- Quote ---if Livejournal requires removal of content, and it is not done by the user himself, they will suspend the account and do it themselves as an enforcement measure.
--- End quote ---
Actually, what happens is that you have the option of deleting the offending entries or filing a counter-notification which “indicates that you are willing to defend yourself in court against a charge of copyright infringement, and you may be bound by civil and possibly criminal penalties if you are found liable.”
During this period, your account is suspended pending court proceedings. From the LJ FAQ section on copyright: “Following receipt of a counter-notification, the original notifier will be provided with a copy of the counter-notification. Access to the content will remain disabled. Unless the original notifier informs the LiveJournal Abuse Team that an action has been filed seeking a court order to restrict access to the content, the content will be replaced after 14 business days.”
If the content is not removed and a counter-notification under the “fair use clause” is not sent to the LJ Abuse Team, the journal is permanently suspended. At no point does Livejournal remove content from users’ journals.
--- Quote ---Just in case anyone was wondering.
--- End quote ---
I wasn’t. I know exactly what is going on here but I thought I would clarify for the benefit of others.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version