Paul Andrew King
> The good news is that I'm pretty sure that it
> doesn't matter for fan
> websites, so long as the rules for the Informal
> License are met.
> Unless Appendix A says something different, fan
> websites have very
> few restrictions - and none of them say that
> Derivative Material is
> treated any different from Original Material.
But as far as I can see the section that says
"The types of use that are considered to incorporate
or make derivative use of Proprietary
Material include, but are not limited to:...
...To substantially expand previous Proprietary Material (such as a description of a person, place, creature, entity, event, or object)."
doesn't say or imply "except if it's on a web site" does it? Nor can I see any reason why it should - if this is a danger of causing copyright problems, then the means of publication hardly matters. If this is a reasonable limit to impose, then fine, it needs imposing, not sneaking around.
The only difference I can see if that of time delay - since hard-copy takes forever to produce in the first place, a multi-week delay introduced by the need for checking may be reasonable. (I say "may" - I'm not involved in hard-copy production, I don't know). But a delay of more than a day or so in web-site updates is a long time!
If I tell a story at a con, it's only reasonable and fair to non-attendees to expect it to be on my site within 24 hours of the con ending. And while I'm sure Issaries would *like* to be able to check and licence that fast, it's not going to happen, is it?
If I end up publishing stories about some red-haired warrior goddess with a temper who happens to be called Fred until licenced, then such is life. Easy enough to global-edit the name back afterwards. It just seems so silly, and I'm sure there must be a better way.
Jane Williams
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Powered by hypermail