Finding Evility in the FanLib TOS??? Not likely.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

EDIT: I feel compelled, with the various misunderstandings and tangents that the comments have, to preface this post with one fact: I am not defending FanLib in the slightest. I think the fact that they are marketing fanfic as if it is a-ok and legal when the law still says "maybe" is irresponsible and disgusting.

I fully plan on this post being woefully unpopular here, but I stand by it. So, here goes:

The business world can be a dastardly place, indeed, especially when it comes to corporations who have made billions and want to make more billions.

The RIAA connection is FanLib is questionable at best, shady at worst.

But if you guys think that are going to find evility™ in their TOS, you're fooling yourselves.

If you think you hadn't already agreed to similar terms with Livejournal, ff.net, or any of the other countless major journal/fanfic archives, then you're sadly mistaken.

The TOS is designed solely to protect the business. Period. LJ's is no different.

The idea that a website would say "hey, it's not OUR fault user so-and-so infringed on the intellectual property rights of JK Rowling" isn't new and FanLib didn't create it. Here's something from LJ's TOS:

Within the confines of international and local law, LiveJournal will generally not place a limit on the type or appropriateness of user content within journals. Those users posting material not suitable for all audiences must agree that they are fully responsible for all the Content they have posted anywhere on the Service. Should Content be deemed illegal by such law having jurisdiction over the user, you agree that LiveJournal may submit all necessary information to, and cooperate with, the proper authorities;

Devising a structure of 'immunity from prosecution by copyright holders' isn't unique to [potentially shady] businesses who only want to screw communities. Every company will it, or something similar.

LJs:
You agree to indemnify and hold LiveJournal, and its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, co-branders or other partners, and employees, harmless from any alleged claim or demand, including reasonable attorney fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of your Content, your use of the Service, your connection to the Service, your violation of the TOS, or your violation of any rights of another, whether you are a registered user or not. The user is solely responsible for his or her actions when using the Service, including, but not limited to, costs incurred for Internet access.


Myspace has it.
Facebook has it.
Google has it. <-- hell, how many @gmail.com do I see from LJ users?? Tonnes. AND THEY ARCHIVE EMAILS!!!!!

Everything, you send, receive, save is on a server. And, guess what, you've agreed to it by agreeing to their TOS, which has everything FanLib's has plus a couple extra things specific to their business needs. Now, so far Google has been pretty 'fuck you' to FBI and CIA when it comes to handing over records. That's a fact that has helped public opinion, but don't think in a way that, should their policy change, you'll be able to sue or protected from it or whatever... you won't be.

Now, that's not to say not to keep looking...

But, if you think that FanLib with its 'intellectual might' would put something blatantly in print that proves that they are evil Evil EVIL, you'll be looking for a long time. TOSs are about as neutral as possible they are designed to be, they NEED to be.

My opinion on their intentions is that they would like to throw fees on fanfiction. Publishers and authors will sign up for PIAA or something (change 'recording' to 'publishing') and publishers will sign up for it, much like labels do. Then, in order to write fanfiction, you'll have to have a license (sign-up fee at FanLib will probably give you a license). Publishers can't afford to go after every fanfic archive spot, just like labels couldn't. But PIAA would be able to... just like RIAA was. Publishers agree to some system of payment with the service fees FanLib will start charging and will have to be happy with that.

And they will be.

Because $1000 a year for 'fanfic fees' is better than nothing, after all.

Let's take the ASCAP and BMI thing as an example.

Jukeboxes became big. Radio started sprouting up everywhere. Dancehalls. Speakeasies. Concert halls.

All of these places where music was being heard and played, but aside from the Dj or owner buying the material, no fees where taken. Somehow, someone got Congress (always bastions of intelligence) to believe that if I as a concert hall owner have a dance and charge -- or don't charge -- then I, as the concert hall owner should pay a fee for the music -- again.

But how to deal with the accounting madness!!! Surely it'd cost too much to even deal with the nightmare!!!

In comes ASCAP/BMI. They'll handle it on behalf of the artists. Artist signs up, pays an annual fee (of course), and receives a check, their portion of the big pool of fees collected.

Okay, that problem is solved. But, how to make sure concert halls, dancehalls, juke-joints, et. al. pay these fees?

That's where county, city, state, and federal law comes in.

You want to open a concert hall? You have to have the right licenses. Of them include either ASCAP and/or BMI fees. Viola.

Of course there was resistance.

Guess who won?

It only makes sense that they [the evil 'they'] go after words. If they can go after the internet (and they will most likely win that, too) then they'll go after words. And, much like music, it'll take probably 20 years for the public at large to think nothing of it.

And, indulge in my paranoia a bit, if they can go after words, then thoughts aren't far behind.

Am I paranoid? Sure.

I've decades of reasons to be paranoid. The government has proven that, when in doubt, they'll default to the businesses. The business, as expected, will default to their pocketbooks.

But this sort of attack (and I do consider this an attack) isn't going to be written out in a TOS. In fact, the ultimate goal of a TOS is that it is translatable under any law. They won't define 'copyright infringement', they'll let the laws do that. They won't define 'child pornography', they'll let the laws do that. Their intentions, no matter how clever or dastardly or against the grain of democracy, won't be spelled out in their TOS.

The best thing to do is to pay attention to any proposed changes of law, Congress, blogs dealing with the FanLib subject, and especially anything that has to do with someone challenging them to an interview (and their acceptance). Our time and energy shouldn't be wasted picking apart their TOS, especially when we freely use a service with a much similar one.


ADDENDUM-1: synecdochic does a wonderful analysis of LJ's ToS and FanLib's. The post can be found here. And I -- as well as others -- thank her (?) for the time taken to do this. However, one of the main issues that synecdochic has is the clause in FanLib's 'indemnity'.

You agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless FanLib,

Basically, via 'defend', the clause allows FanLib to pass on any court case/fees to you, the author. When it was brought up that LJ could do similar by suing authors for 'breach of contract', synecdochic points out that they wouldn't because of the CDA, DMCA, and the 'safe harbour'. S/he then goes on to say:

(I know how LJ enforces things. I don't know how FanLib plans to.)

Which is well and good to know, but the fact that s/he had to pull information and add 2 and 2 from other sources other than the ToS merely proves my point: that you cannot determine intentions or 'evility' of a company by their ToS. You simply cannot. S/he's even had to pull information from outside the ToS to illustrate why s/he knows that LJ would never sue someone. But someone reading their ToS would not know this unless they were versed in the DMCA and what safe harbor means and she admits that she's worked 5 years in the industry. 98% have not.

The other issue that she had was with the difference between LJ's 'asking you to edit material' or FanLib having the right to 'remove your material without warning'.

Again, this is a cosmetic difference, and should definitely be a determining factor in whether or not you chose to host your fic there. But, it's not proof of shade, people. It's just how they'll handle fics that start to cause them problems. Apparently, there was a similar hooplah over ff.net when people found their fics suddenly gone... But again, this isn't unique. Myspace has this. We agree to this all the time. I count count how many times I logged on to Myspace to find a picture in my profile removed. Of course, they sent me an email saying why, which was nice of them, but they let it be known that they didn't have to even do that.

The reason why I make this addendum is because even now, people are pointing to her post as proof of Evility. They're practically saying "See? FanLib's ToS isn't the same as LJ's! EVIL!!!!" And, of course, that's a fallacy. LJ's ToS is different because: a) they're a different service and have different needs and b) they have other protections afforded to them from other documentations that are not provided by their ToS or even really mentioned. Regardless, their ToS acts like everyone else's ToS - THEIR PROTECTION. Not yours.

The ToS proves only that FanLib isn't the best place to host your fics and you shouldn't sign up for it. It proves nothing else. No evil plot, no dastardly deeds (tho' I do think there's something shady going on in the Publishing/screenplay/scriptwriting world... but it's not because of any I see in FanLib's ToS)

The point of this post wasn't to go tit-for-tat on LJs ToS versus FanLib's ToS. It was to prove that their ToS is pretty standard (it is) and nothing too unusual (it isn't).

That isn't to say I like 'em. I don't. Even if they were angels, there were no ulterior motives, and they didn't have the former president of RIAA as one of their top dogs, I would still prefer to host my fic here on LJ and other standard places where they're already at rather than host it at FanLib.

If this post has done anything, I hope it's gotten you to at least realise that you need to READ -- REALLY READ -- the ToS for everything: free webservice, Myspaces, Bulletin Boards, etc. Because that tells you where your protections END. [end addendum]

Comments

[almostnever.livejournal.com]

I appreciate the thought you've put into this post. Could you LJ-cut it, though, please? It's kind of long.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

well, other long ones weren't lj-cut'd, but yeah... fascist!!!

;)

[impysh.livejournal.com]

I think one of the main issues with the TOS of FanLib is that although they have very similar clauses to many other sites, they present themselves as being legitimate. So that those who haven't read about copyright law or studied the TOS can be lead to believe that fics they post are absolutely safe and legal because FanLib is working with the copyright holders and specifically encouraging posting fics.

At LJ and other sites they prohibit infringing copyright without saying on the homepage, "Hey, come write about this copyrighted material with the support of its creators!"

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

that is a very good point. but their TOS doesn't lead to that assumption. there MARKETING certainly does.

and, because of their TOS, which is not ambiguous in that instance, you wouldn't be able to use that excuse in a lawsuit.

still, the TOS isn't the problem.

[alyndra]

No, studying the TOS just makes it clear how much their marketing differs from reality. Which is an important point to make, as LJ et al. don't have the same gulf between ads and reality on this point.

[msilverstar]

Except, who reads the TOS? 99% of the time, people just click on it and don't think about it.

[mitsuhachi.livejournal.com]

1. Thanks for the cut. :)

2. I'm not a lawer, but I think you're missing one important detail in the difference between lj's TOS and fanlib's. This isn't to say that they're evil or anything, simply that they've included provisions for a possibility that I find problematic, and would hate to see a less-careful reader of the TOS get smoked by.

Fanlib: VII. INDEMNIFICATION
You agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless FanLib, its parent corporation, officers, directors, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, damages, obligations, losses, liabilities, costs or debt, and expenses (including but not limited to attorney's fees) arising from: (i) Your use of and access to the Website; (ii) Your violation of any term of these TOS; (iii) Your violation of any third party right, including without limitation any copyright, property, or privacy right; or (iv) any claim that one of Your Submissions caused damage to a third party. This defense and indemnification obligation will survive these TOS and Your use of the Website.

ELJAY: You agree to indemnify and hold LiveJournal, and its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, agents, co-branders or other partners, and employees, harmless from any alleged claim or demand, including reasonable attorney fees, made by any third party due to or arising out of your Content, your use of the Service, your connection to the Service, your violation of the TOS, or your violation of any rights of another, whether you are a registered user or not. The user is solely responsible for his or her actions when using the Service, including, but not limited to, costs incurred for Internet access.

The difference is at the beginning there: fanlib requires us to- besides just "indeminify and hold harmless" their company if we individually get sued (which is what lj's TOS is saying) but to actively defend them, which means that if THEY were to get sued because of our works, (not by us, like LJ, we can't sue them, but by an irate third party, who certainly can) they could turn around and sue US individually, for damages.

Which is, I think, the largest problem that people have with this particular section. I mean, since they're knowingly exposing people to greater risk of litigation, one might hope there would be some assurance of protection in court, but I don't think anyone was suprised it wasn't there. This though... They've obviously left the possiblity open on purpose- you'll note, through comparisons, it's not exactly common-- so I see no reason why, in the right situation, they wouldn't absolutely use it.

And I say, look. If you're doing something of dubious legality (profiting from fanfiction, note, not ff in general), and then shoving it in the faces of the IP owners, don't try to curtail your risks by screwing the little guy, is all.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

The difference is at the beginning there: fanlib requires us to- besides just "indeminify and hold harmless" their company if we individually get sued (which is what lj's TOS is saying) but to actively defend them, which means that if THEY were to get sued because of our works, (not by us, like LJ, we can't sue them, but by an irate third party, who certainly can) they could turn around and sue US individually, for damages.

if LJ is sued because of your work, they will most certainly hand you over.

and you agreed to it later in their TOS with:

You agree that you must evaluate, and bear all risks associated with, the use of any content, including any reliance on the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of such content.

the end result is the same:

"hey, they put it on the site... I, Lj(FanLib), had nothing to do with it..."

the difference is, maybe, the name on the suit... the end-result is the author getting sued.

[mitsuhachi.livejournal.com]

So, what (I think) you're saying is, if LJ gets sued because of your work by a third party, they will point at you so that that third party will also sue you.

Um, maybe, maybe not. The company may not even bother suing you, cause most of us here are broke as hell, and they'd just waste a bunch of court-fees and not get much. But you're right, it's entirely possible. The more likely situation, however, is that you get a C&D, while the guys with money get sued.

However, if FANLIB gets sued because of your work by a third party, not only can that third party still decide to sue you or not, but when the guys with money get sued, they are within their rights- as livejournal is not- to turn around and sue you for part of the damages they were sued for. Even if you are also being sued by the third party.

This may not be an important distinction to you, but it definitely is to me.

[that_mireille]

To me, the difference is this:

LJ is not actively encouraging us to post fanfic. (LJ now doesn't care if I take my toys and go home, in fact, because as a permanent account holder, I've given them all the money I'm ever going to, and I never see their ads.) LJ would not care if we all just talked about our cats forever. Gmail doesn't care if all I do is send chatty e-mails to my friends, free of fannish content.

FF.net is not actively courting the attention of the various copyright holders who might, at some point, be inclined to sue.

But FanLib is actively encouraging the posting of fanfiction, *and* they're courting that attention.

No, it doesn't make their TOS that much worse than anyone else's (although that passage quoted elsewhere in the comments is somewhat distressing), but they are a place where having that kind of TOS should be a red flag to fans that this is a place to avoid. (Okay, I have an account. I'm just namesquatting and don't intend to post fic.)

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

namesquatting!

i love that!

maybe i should do that too!

i totally agree with you that their marketing practices are SHADY!

and, the fact that very few people read TOSs means that someone would be like "sued?!?! i thought you guys said it was legal!?"

"we never said that"

"well, you certainly fuckin' implied it!!"

the legality of fanfic is something i hope people that have interviews scheduled will bring up.

[quicksilvereyes.livejournal.com]

I could definitely see the FanLib fee happening. They have the advantage of industry connections that fan-run sites do not. In order to get to that point however, they would need to send out C&D's until they found someone who would fight. Then we'd have the definitive ruling on fanfic that we've all been dreading/hoping for. With FanLib in existence, the ruling could very well be in the copyright holders' favor.

As for the paying attention to the law, today someone linked me to the April defeat of strong net neutrality laws. That set of some major sirens in my head.

[mitsuhachi.livejournal.com]

can you link?

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

Had a panel on the neutrality laws at PR. It is terrifying what is happening.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

In order to get to that point however, they would need to send out C&D's until they found someone who would fight.


absolutely not.

they don't need a lawsuit to implement a fee system.

the lawsuit is ONLY to strengthen the parameters of the CURRENT LAW.

if they could get an ASCAP-like fee structure in place, that could be part of a NEW law that gets approved and would amend or supersede to the old law.

that's why i say we have to look at both Congressional responses as well as court cases. if we look just at court cases, then we can miss the slipping of a new LAW which would make the need for a court case a non-issue

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

Myspace has it.
Facebook has it

absolutely true. the difference is that they aren't trying to make money off of fandom's derivative works, thereby exposing everyone to copyright/intellectual property rights lawsuits. the insult to the injury is that the writers of the fics don't get a share in whatever FanLib makes, if they ever get that far of course.

Fanlib isn't teh ev0l. they're teh stupid. they're stumbling around in a society that they know absolutely nothing about, doing so for the most crass of reasons, and being bloody arrogant about it. there's a reason that fandom polices itself so rigorously - to the point of wank at times - fandom recognizes that they exist in a deeply gray area and here comes Fanlib intentionally trying to pull fandom into that gray area on purpose. fandom [the vast majority] doesn't want to make money off the creative endeavors of others; fandom just wants to play in the worlds those others create.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

absolutely true. the difference is that they aren't trying to make money off of fandom's derivative works, thereby exposing everyone to copyright/intellectual property rights lawsuits. the insult to the injury is that the writers of the fics don't get a share in whatever FanLib makes, if they ever get that far of course.

the other places do have a clause about making money off of derivative works... and, if they COULD make money from derivative works (that structure doesn't lend to it very well), then they'd be perfectly willing and able.

hell, the whole INVITE thing is basically you and I being ADVERTISERS for them and marketers... I have 3000 friends, at least 10% of them signed on because I invited them specifically. Where's my check?

Where's my check every time I wear a shirt with ADIDAS on it? Or a polo shirt?

and, if the money issue is the problem, then don't sign up and you won't have to worry about it. this issue was NOT the point of my post. my whole point as i've stated is that the TOS isn't going to reveal the Big Bad of FanLib. It simply won't.

Do I think they are out to make money?
Well, they told us as much.

Do I think something shady is going on?
You bet.

Do I think we should be using the TOS as proof?
No.

Because the TOS, NO MATTER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT, is designed to stick it to the little folk.

Even LJs.

Fanlib isn't teh ev0l. they're teh stupid. t

no no no

make absolutely no mistake about one thing: they are not stupid. and we shouldn't lull ourselves into thinking their marketing miscalculation as stupidity. there is something far more dastardly happening.


there's a reason that fandom polices itself so rigorously - to the point of wank at times - fandom recognizes that they exist in a deeply gray area and here comes Fanlib intentionally trying to pull fandom into that gray area on purpose. fandom [the vast majority] doesn't want to make money off the creative endeavors of others; fandom just wants to play in the worlds those others create.

of this we're in agreement.

it's just you're not going to find evidence of this within their TOS. and we shouldn't be distracted by it. because their TOS means nothing, and everyone's TOS has the exact same end-result: don't blame me, blame the end-user.

LJ wasn't set up to defend privacy rights... and, unless some new law comes in that directly affects the majority of their money, they won't defend it. we shouldn't expect them to. LJ's TOS is set up to do the exact same thing: stick it to you if they can/have to.

[darkrosetiger.livejournal.com]

The idea that a website would say "hey, it's not OUR fault user so-and-so infringed on the intellectual property rights of JK Rowling" isn't new and FanLib didn't create it.

No one is claiming that it's new. The issue is that FanLib is actively seeking content that they know may be considered copyright infringement. Is there such content on LJ? Absolutely--but the purpose of LJ is not to post fanfiction. FanLib is not only inviting fans to come over and post work in fandoms where they do not have any agreement with the copyright holders; they're acknowledging that there is risk involved and waving it off with "we assume it's legal" and "they'll come after us first."

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

FanLib is not only inviting fans to come over and post work in fandoms where they do not have any agreement with the copyright holders; they're acknowledging that there is risk involved and waving it off with "we assume it's legal" and "they'll come after us first."

okay, at this point, we're going in circles because you're simply wanting to treat the post as if i'm implying that FanLib is a great cool new tool and arguing against it.

and that's not the case at all.

so, for the last time, i'm saying that their intentions -- or their foul play, evilness, or shadiness -- will not be found in their TOS.

if you look at the TOSs of every fanfic archive, message board, myspace, facebook, you'll see the same protections. the goal of the TOS is to be able to stick it to you -- the end-user -- should something happen.

do i think FanLib is 'evil'...? yes, i do in the respect that i think this is the start of a war against words.

do i think they're marketing was shaaaaady?
hell yeah! giving false impressions that fanfiction is 100% legal or that they'll be protected because Yahoo like fanlib when the law is still ambiguous is .... well... that almost seems lawsuit-worthy to me. but that is a problem with their marketing strategies, not their TOS.

do i think the TOS proves it?
no
a thousand times no.

if you're pissed because they want to make money?
so am i.
don't sign up.

problem solved.

there's a much bigger fight going on and, in the end of the battle their TOS will have had nothing to do with it.

that's all i was saying.

i guess i'm just reminding people not to be lulled into the thought that the TOS is going to be anything more than what it is.

[caidentity.livejournal.com]

There's really not a lot I can say on this (as I'm the one just reading what everybody else is saying and forming my own thoughts and keeping quiet ^^;), but what I do want to say is this:

The TOS doesn't lay it out in simple terms. What they're wanting, I mean. It's just what you said--it's them protecting their asses, and sure, nearly every (if not all) other TOS has the same thing. My personal problem with this is that FanLib wants us to put our works on display, for all~ the world to see. And if I happen to post an Anne Rice fanfic up, then it's RIGHT THERE in the open. Big-time; they're wanting everyone to know about this. And then I get sued, despite the fact that they've been saying that they've been making these deals with publishers and whatnot.

And even then, hey, hey, sure. That's my fault, because I know Anne Rice is against that. I shouldn't have been stupid enough to post it, right?

The kicker, for me, is actually in the TOS. It's not anything about them taking me to court, or me being obligated to protect them (well, not in a direct sense, at least), it's this:

In connection with Submissions, You affirm, represent, and/or warrant that You own or have the necessary rights or permissions, either from third parties, or through an ultimate determination of fair use under copyright law, as applicable, to use and authorize FanLib to use the Submissions in the manner contemplated by the Website and these TOS.

(bolding mine)

Fanfic, for the most part, is us not having said rights or permissions. And let's be honest--how many of us are going to go to JK Rowling and say, "Hey. :D I want to write about Harry and Uncle Vernon smexing it up. That's all right with you, yes? And, uh, hey! :D Do you mind if I get it in writing, too?"

That is my big problem. I mean, they're covering their asses, but when they are purposely drawing attention to fanfic writers, who are doing something that many people automatically think is illegal (I found that one out today when I was rambling on the subject...), and they expect us to pay for them if they get into trouble over this... well, look, buddy. You're the ones who invited us onto this site; you're the ones that told us it was all well and fine. :\ Thanks so much. Now I get a lawsuit, whereas if I had just stayed in my little LJ or ff.n niche, I probably could have avoided it.

But of course, I'm planning on staying here anyways. ^^; I just don't like the website itself and probably wouldn't have gone over there even if there hadn't been all this.


And wow, I rambled. XD; Sorry if I jump around between thoughts too much--I've gotten really bad at writing with organization.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

That is my big problem. I mean, they're covering their asses, but when they are purposely drawing attention to fanfic writers, who are doing something that many people automatically think is illegal (I found that one out today when I was rambling on the subject...), and they expect us to pay for them if they get into trouble over this... well, look, buddy.

yeah, then your problem is with their marketing, not their TOS.

see what i mean?

all my post was was simply a reminder after reading comments after comments of "see, look at their TOS -- they're EEEVIL!!!"...

their marketing is questionable, borderline deplorable. (sue-able, i wish)

their TOS? not so much.

so, perhaps we should focus on what's actually deplorable.

that's all.

not saying YOU were focusing on that, of course...

[tassosss.livejournal.com]

I've read your post and the comments here and on the TOS update post. I think you make a very good point about the TOS and covering their asses and that all companies/sites so this. I also agree that the TOS is not the be all and end all of this debate.

I guess the sticking point for everyone is why create a site set up in such a way that everyone* will likely violate your own terms of service?

It's not just the shady legal/illegal position of fanfic, but also the terms in the inapropriate use section including (1) to store, publish, distribute, or otherwise disseminate unlawful material or information including, but not limited to: threatening, harassing, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, indecent, hateful, objectionable, tortuous, libelous, deceptive, or fraudulent information and materials, or information and materials that constitute or give rise to claims of an invasion of another's privacy;

This may just my unfamiliarity with things like this, but in practice are statements like this in other TOS regularly enforced, by say patrolling or user reporting, or are they just having a cigarette until the Worst Case Scenario comes by for the company?

This is perhaps taking this beyond what you meant to get across in the post, but what the hell. I've read about the person who's fic was upgraded from 13+ to Adult for swearing, which I consider to be in the category of vulgar. Other adult material such as explicit sex could be described at as indecent and obscene(from the clothed majority). Are stories with these in them in violation of the TOS? Are they only in violation when someone wants to throw the book at you? Do they only count if you lob them around at people on the forums or in review and not the stories? Do they only count if courts are involved?

FanLib's own behavior seems to be in violation of their terms of service by providing a space specifically for content that is "inappropriate" behind their adult filter (which I don't think they should be deluded into thinking that kids/teens/dogs don't know how to lie to get through.) What are we supposed to think when their behavior and their TOS don't agree? I think this rolls out into a more chicken-and-egg dilemma but I still think it's something we can call them on.



*'Everyone' is probably harsh since I know a lot of people who write genfic that is well within FanLib's 13+ limits, and that people can choose or not to post whatever fic there. But I also feel that having limits at a place that is supposed to be THE embodiment of fanfic defeats the purpose of fanfic. This of course then neatly segues into your point of Nefarious Plans and True Purposes for the site in the first place from the Puppeteers.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

It's not just the shady legal/illegal position of fanfic, but also the terms in the inapropriate use section including (1) to store, publish, distribute, or otherwise disseminate unlawful material or information including, but not limited to: threatening, harassing, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, indecent, hateful, objectionable, tortuous, libelous, deceptive, or fraudulent information and materials, or information and materials that constitute or give rise to claims of an invasion of another's privacy;

well, even if they were absolutely on the side of fanfic and were pure angels and had no ulterior motives, they'd probably still have that in there... and i understand that.

This is perhaps taking this beyond what you meant to get across in the post, but what the hell. I've read about the person who's fic was upgraded from 13+ to Adult for swearing, which I consider to be in the category of vulgar. Other adult material such as explicit sex could be described at as indecent and obscene(from the clothed majority). Are stories with these in them in violation of the TOS? Are they only in violation when someone wants to throw the book at you? Do they only count if you lob them around at people on the forums or in review and not the stories? Do they only count if courts are involved?

well... probably not.. altho' that is a good point and a solid concern. but, Adult isn't considered 'vulgar'. Vulgarity has a completely different meaning legally, as does 'obscene'. There's no way they could consider swearing 'vulgar', so this is an instance of our definitions of 'vulgar' and 'adult' are different from their legal definitions.

but giving it ADULT is awfully ... i dunno... like using a bazooka to get rid of a mouse??

[ysgawen.livejournal.com]

If you honestly can't see the difference between the LJ TOS and that of the Pit of Weasels, you should read this: http://synecdochic.livejournal.com/131502.html

He knows what he's talking about.

[house-illrepute.livejournal.com]

the main reason their ToS is different is because they are a different TYPE of service. they are strictly a SUBMISSIONS-based service, LJ is not -- they merely accept that they will be used as such and their ToS reflects that.

every music dj-based submission service and demo/musicians submission site (ie. DEMOSTREAMS.COM) have similar clauses in their ToS. Myspace had a simiilar one, saying that they had the right to use your profile in any way to advertise their site... that's how they can advert Myspace with pictures of people's profile. When Tom sold it, the Viacom folks used their standard ToS, which immediately got people in an uproar because theirs was more liberal with their submission clause and they immediately went back to the original Myspace one that talks solely about advertising the site.


the 'defend' part is something that, if you siphon through the comments, is also not unique to FanLib. and, when the point was brought up that LJ could sue people for breach of contract, in order to answer that, synecdochic had to point to outside documentation (namely the CDA) when she said this:

Except again, if enforced as the ToS is written, LJ is protected under the CDA, and FanLib likely wouldn't be.

(I know how LJ enforces things. I don't know how FanLib plans to.)

i don't recall seeing that on the LJ ToS... it's nice that S/HE knows how LJ works, but their ToS doesn't tell US that.

i didn't want to bring it up because i'm tired of arguing the point but my point stands...


the ToS is nothing but a protection for any and all businesses. it is designed to, in the event of them getting sued, they can stick it to someone else.

you're not gonna find evidence of foul play in a ToS.

no matter how much you hate them, how much they suck, and how many souls they sold to the devil.

you want to find evidence of shade?

look to their marketing... look to the previous jobs of the people who started it and run it. THAT is where you'll find The Big Bad... not their ToS.


The only thing that this proves -- and this again is my point -- is that FanLib isn't a desirable place to host your fanfic and you shouldn't SIGN UP FOR THEM... it does not prove anything other.