life_wo_fanlib | Fanlib and RIAA

Do you mean the RIAA?

...why wouldn't I?
*Shifty eyes as she edits the original post*

RIAA = Recording Industry Association Of America.

Basically? Record companies. The great multi-corporate monster that's been trying to crack down on mp3's and file sharing since the dawn of Napster. They have no qualms about targetting people who can't afford lawyers to take their cases - even college students.

ok. That's what I thought.

So does that makes AngiPen's point here (http://angiepen.livejournal.com/38593.html?format=light)

You know, this is probably just me being paranoid here but since the TOS prohibits any posting of material which violates someone else's copyright, they could in theory have set up this site to draw in as many fanfic writers as possible with the intention of turning around and smacking all of them for copyright violation, whether that means direct prosecution of people who are writing fics based on properties whose owners are represented on the FanLib board, or sending notification with names and e-mails and copies of stories to the copyright holders who are not associated with the site. I'm just saying.

more likely? Or am I being just as paranoid?

The RIAA's about as vicious as it comes when it comes to "protecting their property" from ev0l file-sharers, so I wouldn't put it past them. I think the only thing that spares most of us is sheer numbers.

I think that, when you couple this discovery with those godawful TOS, AngiePen may have a point.

My two cents, for what it's worth: I doubt that Fanlib was set up to draw in fanfic writers and turn 'em in- that's not exactly a workable business model likely to draw investment capital. Plus, Fanlib has far deeper pockets than us poor lil' fanfic writers, so they'd be the first entity the copyright holders would go after despite their attempt at disclaiming liability.

Frankly, I don't believe it's what they're planning either, and didn't when I wrote that. I was mainly being ironic, but I think the fact that their set-up, including the TOS, would allow them to do that very easily just underscores the fact that this is an incredibly bad situation. :/

Angie

Agreed about this being a dreadful situation. I haven't read your post yet (so much material accumulating on this topic) so couldn't sense the irony from the excerpt I read here. There's something very shady about this whole undertaking.

That I understand, definitely! [wry smile] I think the world's porn production has been cut in half this last ten days or so while we deal with FanLib crap. :P

Angie

Can you give us some sources? Please know that I'm not trying to cast doubts... I have no plans on ever, EVER posting anything on FanLib... I just want to be fully informed.

What do you think the RIAA is planning? How would fanfic have anything to do with them? Or do you think they're trying to track down vidders for unauthorized use of songs?

Man, I'm really regretting that I even made the decision to namesquat over there... although it's not as if TPTB couldn't track me down, anyway.

Unfortunately, there are SO many posts and wank about Fanlib that I can't remember where I read it. If anyone can link to whatever it is I remember reading, I'd love that.

What do you think the RIAA is planning?
I'm not sure, which is really what I am asking, just poorly phrased.

How would fanfic have anything to do with them?
Again, that's what I would like to know, which is why I asked why the connection would matter.

Or do you think they're trying to track down vidders for unauthorized use of songs?
Interesting theory. I don't think that, and even if I did, again, what would Fanfic/Fanlib have to do with it? Unless the RIAA suddenly hates songfic now. Heh.

I think my post over here (http://rez-lo.livejournal.com/87495.html#cutid1) is probably the source. The connection is between Hilary Rosen, who built the RIAA and who now heads the Showtime/CBS-sponsored fansite OurChart.org, and FanLib, whose "test case" for their business model was a project for them (the site is for the television show The L Word).

That connection basically suggests that the big media companies are hoping to duplicate the RIAA's strategy to clamp down on any copyright use that doesn't make them money. I've added a longer reply below. Henry Jenkins (link below) also sums up the fears really well in his current article on the whole thing.

YES! That's where I read it. Thank you.

I've posted a reply (http://community.livejournal.com/life_wo_fanlib/4381.html?thread=40221#t40221) that includes additional sources below, in case it's useful.

Also, you may want to read Henry Jenkins's post (http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/05/transforming_fan_culture_into.html#comments) on the whole issue, if you haven't seen it already. He's a media studies scholar (MIT) and his article includes useful descriptions of what fans are afraid might happen if the FanLib business model did (as seems likely) provoke a lawsuit by some irate copyright-holder.

Apologies if any of this is redundant!

And if I had to sum up (::wince::), what I'd say is: I'm afraid that Hilary Rosen and her buds, who pioneered the RIAA's entire strategy to criminalize Fair Use, are helping the big media companies like CBS to apply that strategy to media fans by (a) setting us up for individual prosecution, for whenever they feel like coming after us and (b) building corporate-controlled fan sites so that they can eventually both legislate and prosecute the fan-controlled sites as illegal. (Henry Jenkins's article explains this better.)

They don't own us yet. They're trying to.

Beyond what folks have said above, the fact that FanLib's fandom-taming services were engaged by a big media company that's set up a fan site headed by the former president of the RIAA suggests that they're misleading us, at best, with their claims of championing fanfic and their assurances that the entertainment companies are "coming around." Which their TOS demonstrates, as

angiepen laid out so well.

In the U.S., the explicit purpose of copyright is to encourage creativity and innovation by allowing creators to profit exclusively from their work for a limited period of time, after which anyone is free to incorporate it into new forms (after the copyright expires, the work is considered "public domain"). The founders thought it important enough that it's written into the U.S. constitution.

There are certain exceptions to the grant of monopoly, though, one of which is traditionally called Fair Use. It broadly, but apparently without much case-law to contextualize it, covers the not-for-profit use/distribution of copyrighted material.

The RIAA has led the well-funded and ongoing attack by big media on Fair Use on a huge number of fronts, many of them legislative, in the U.S. They've succeeded in almost every case in hamstringing new technology and establishing case-law in their favor and at the consumer's expense.

They are also pursuing additional "copy protection" licensing restrictions in the EU. Hilary Rosen, who led the RIAA for over a decade and who is now the president of the CBS/Showtime fan site OurChart.org, is also a founder of the consultancy BermanRosen LLC (I am purposely not linking), "a universally recognized leader in the expansion of international markets for recorded music and in successfully incorporating copyright enforcement into trade agreements."

And yeah, the RIAA is famous for suing grandmothers and college students, and lately they've even pioneered the idea of the pre-emptive money-grab. Their lawyers send out a bunch of threatening letters to individuals and direct the recipients to a website where they can agree to pay a hefty fine rather than going to court, which basically relieves the big media corporations of actually proving each case.

The RIAA is one of the reasons why, in the U.S., the issue known as Net Neutrality (http://mydd.com/story/2006/4/20/161813/254) is so important.

Disclaimer: I'm neither an intellectual property lawyer nor a communications scholar. Good sources for a basic understanding of these issues are:

Copyfight (http://copyfight.corante.com/)
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org/)
Lawrence Lessig's blog (http://www.lessig.org/blog/) (He's both a lawyer and a scholar (Stanford U.) and the originator of the Creative Commons licensing system) and
Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org/), above noted.

More teal deer; sorry, but it's indicative of the part we play, whether we know it or not, in the fight over Fair Use and electronic access and distribution.

Wow, I just clicked the net neutrality link. I knew it was a huge issue, but I'll admit I hadn't been following it as closely as I should have. I was very surprised to find that strong net neutrality laws were voted down by both Republicans and Democrats alike. More than FanLib, that lowered my Faith in Humanity Quotient.

It disgusts me how in each other's pockets all of these companies and politicians are. And how little the public realizes.

It might be a good idea to post, somewhere easily accessible, a complete description and explanation of 'Fair Use'.

Sounds like this might be the start of a media crackdown where the fans are going to need to know, and use, that term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

It's a start. *g*

Fanlib and RIAA

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject