Copyright and the like.

[Bramblethorn]

As I noted on another thread, the Fair Use doctrine doesn’t even apply to the writing of fiction. Here’s the identification of what Fair Use applies to in American copyright law, straight off the U.S. Copyright Office Web site:

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

“Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair.”

However, that "such as" seems to be interpreted very broadly: in Campbell v Acuff-Rose Music, Inc (the 2 Live Crew "Pretty Woman" case) the USC ruled that a commercial rap cover of a Roy Orbison song could be 'fair use' as defined under Section 107.

 

[sr71plt]

However, that "such as" seems to be interpreted very broadly: in Campbell v Acuff-Rose Music, Inc (the 2 Live Crew "Pretty Woman" case) the USC ruled that a commercial rap cover of a Roy Orbison song could be 'fair use' as defined under Section 107.

Apples and oranges. That's not fiction. I'm not aware of that case or of how/why it would apply to written fiction. Similar uses for written fiction are protected under various parody law interpretations, which provide the bulk of what case law is available. Fair Use was written for research work, not erotica.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Apples and oranges. That's not fiction. I'm not aware of that case or of how/why it would apply to written fiction.

In brief: 2 Live Crew released a rap parody cover of "Pretty Woman". Acuff-Rose (holders of Orbison's copyrights) sued 2LC and their record company. The district court ruled that as parody, it was fair use under 17 U.S.C. 107 (the same law we've been discussing here).

The Court of Appeals reversed that decision, ruling that it failed to qualify as 'fair use' because it was a commercial work, it had taken too much from the original, and it was harmful to the market for the original. But the US Supreme Court reversed again, finding that commercial parody could constitute fair use.

If I was trying to interpret § 107 for myself, based solely on the wording of the legislation, I'd come to the same conclusion as you. To me, the wording certainly makes it look like it was intended solely for research and similar uses, and based on that I'd have assumed that fiction doesn't qualify for fair-use protections.

But the findings of the US Supreme Court and district court make it clear that fair-use is NOT restricted to "research" - whatever the 2LC version may be, research it ain't. (Skimming the decision, I think they're interpreting "comment" or "criticism" to encompass parody.)

With that interpretation shot down, I don't see where we can conclude that parody fiction - say, something like "Bored of the Rings" - would be ineligible.

Non-parody fanfic might have a lot more difficulty pleading fair use. (OTOH, depending on how it's handled, it might not need to; not all elements of a work are covered by copyright in the first place.)

 

[PennLady]

If anyone is interested, here is the Wiki page on Campell v. Acuff-Rose, with links to the court decisions at the bottom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell_v._Acuff-Rose_Music,_Inc.

 

[sr71plt]

With that interpretation shot down, I don't see where we can conclude that parody fiction - say, something like "Bored of the Rings" - would be ineligible.

Non-parody fanfic might have a lot more difficulty pleading fair use. (OTOH, depending on how it's handled, it might not need to; not all elements of a work are covered by copyright in the first place.)

This is all tied up with parody fiction--which could come (and apparently did come) under "comment/critique" in the Fair Use laws at a stretch. I think that trying to extend it to erotica that wasn't parody wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Thus I still say that Fair Use is not meant for erotica (unless it's parody).

 

[Bramblethorn]

This is all tied up with parody fiction--which could come (and apparently did come) under "comment/critique" in the Fair Use laws at a stretch. I think that trying to extend it to erotica that wasn't parody wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Thus I still say that Fair Use is not meant for erotica (unless it's parody).

I generally agree with you, with one exception. Probably not an important exception in the context of Literotica stories, but what the hell, I'll mention it anyway.

There are other ways for a piece of fiction to meet the "comment/critique" requirement without being actual parody. As an example, Ursula Vernon recently wrote a piece of fiction that retells the Narnia books from Susan's perspective, and so highlights just how horrible Lewis' attitudes to Susan are.*

I wouldn't consider it "parody" (to me that implies humour) but it's certainly "comment" and "criticism".

*I already thought he was rough on her - the "problem of Susan" has been discussed for a long time - but Ursula V's version made the point that it's even worse than that.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

Okay so, I am not sure where exactly I should have asked this, but Meh, here we go.

I'm just basically wondering, when it comes to writing free fiction (Fan-Fiction) on a website like this, what exactly are the rules when writing? Are there some things we cant touch? or since its free and for no gain are we able to write whatever we want?

We could write about Angelina Jolie, but could we perhaps write about Lara Croft? The Lara Croft story universe? Could we write stories set in the storyline of a game? or even use characters from games?

While there are those who say I crossed the line, I wrote several CSi stories. I did considerale research into the characters to make sure that I kept them true to form, but I added in the sex that the seres only hinted at. I have received a few very positive comments, by the way. I say a few only because this is not a heavily trafficked cat.

I don't think there are any "rules" regarding celebrity stories. At the worst it's a longshot that anyone associated with them would even know that they are posted here. And maybe, just maybe, you might be asked to remove said stories. An easy thing to do.

Write what you want to write. Let the others fight out the legality issues which will most likely never come to be. If they disagree with me, well, I've written in the Celebrity cat before, and they haven't

And just in case you're intersted...

http://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=479657&page=submissions

Look for my five CSI stories if interested.