Home » special topics and responses » Weekly Reading Response

Copyright is In Bed with Satan

A I wrap up Jenkins’ book, my mind is swimming with ideas and ramifications (much as it has been since I started it). What strikes me on a grand scale is the desperate need to reconsider, redefine, and recontextualize copyright and usage laws as we go further into convergence culture. Creative Commons is an excellent start but does not even begin to address the kinds of fan wanking (and I really do mean that in a good way) that Jenkins discusses. The Harry Potter chapter really crystallized this for me. Here we’re talking children not only wanting to read– but to write and participate with their own fictions and imaginations. How is this doing anything but good (silly fundamentalists aside)? You’d think anything that encouraged kids to explore their imaginations and creativity would be championed . . . then again, I suppose there are some groups (well hello again fundamentalists and conservatives!) who do sometimes see creativity as a dangerous thing.

I’m not a lawyer and admit a lot of ignorance in this matter. But the Star Wars franchise is not taking financial knocks from fan creations that appropriate its images and mythology. Now, there are better arguments to make about P2P file sharing programs when it comes to music downloads and the such. But even those arguments can fall apart fairly easily and probably just signify even more how the music industry desperately needs to redefine its business model. Never quite as cynical about so-called “mass culture” as some, I do decry the long standing movement of equating quality and success with financial merits of a piece. So do copyright laws really remain the same based on creators fears that someone else could profit on their creations? I suppose it’s a reasonable fear, but I’m not sure it holds up.

I suppose canon is another concern. Recently at the start of the LOST alternate reality game, fans started to create websites that were confusing players because they mirrored the purposefully vague and non-corporately labeled official sites from ABC. As narratives begin to span into other media (and purposefully try to look amateurish at times) there could be issues of canon worth exploring. However, most fan creations are obviously identifiable as such (which is not a criticism of quality). I can’t see many people watching a Harry/Snape slash video and thinking: “Wow, what is Rowling thinking? I shall never read a Potter novel again!” If that were possible I could understand fears of financial loss.

This all said, I really want to understand copyright and its history a little better. Can anyone suggest some reading materials to begin such a journey?

Submitted by mark p on Mon, 2007-03-19 19:35.
mark p's blog

Satisfying narrative desire
Amylea's picture
Submitted by Amylea on Tue, 2007-03-20 10:49.

Mark
In response to: "So do copyright laws really remain the same based on creators fears that someone else could profit on their creations? I suppose it’s a reasonable fear, but I’m not sure it holds up."

I think what the Real Authors (or at least their publishers) fear is that fans will no longer need the legitimated, official, published texts because they will write their own; narrative desire will be satisfied through fanfic instead of the physical book (or DVD). Why buy HP and the Deathly Hallows when Checkmated.com has at least three good novel length versions of Book 7 that satisfy not only our desire to kill of Voldy, but will also satisfy more ...ahem...adult desires as well?


But what if I desire Coke?
Adryan's picture
Submitted by Adryan on Wed, 2007-03-21 10:25.

I remember reading a Sci/Fi series in my youth in which each book was written by a different author. I hated that. One author wrote good characters, one wrote good smut and one just sucked. So now my question becomes, in a convergence culture, where the authority of authorship is being questioned, how can we retain the quality assurances of a brand name? This is bigger than just the author and publishers not having money. If anyone can cheaply produce Cola and call it Coke, how am I to be assured a refreshing, heart-attack-inducing, labor-union-squelching beverage on par with what the multi-billion dollar company's research and development team has always provided?


Wait, isn't the Author Dead Anyway? Pomo Rulz!
mark p's picture
Submitted by mark p on Wed, 2007-03-21 16:31.

Good question, here's my off the cuff answer. I have faith that these concerns will work themselves out democratically. Here's what I mean. Could be wrong here, but I think we're still a long way from most people going to read fan-fiction or the alt versions of Harry Potter 8 like Amy mentions. Most people have the brand and are happy with it. Remember, part of convergence culture is also the brand itself slipping and stretching across multiple mediums of canon (ala the matrix). I also think the full Potter novel thing is rare (could be wrong again, Amy?). A lot of these texts, like slash movies or fic, are offshoots that play with the world-- never threatening the supposed purity of the brand. I see more play then attempts to be the same or better than the "original" piece. Finally, crap is crap, right? In other words, creations that aren't embraced by an audience will get no attention and the author may just write for themselves, which is also cool.


Down with authorship!
Adryan's picture
Submitted by Adryan on Tue, 2007-03-20 09:59.

If by "Satan" you mean the radical deconstruction of stable selves. Shiva will return us to the primordial soup of true creativity devoid of consumption, competition, waste and death. Yeah. I said it.

Production motivated by pleasure instead of profit? Consumption motivated by pleasure instead of coersion?

No wonder those fundamentalists are worried.

(The above post, while worded vaguely, is intended as serious theoreticcal critique. I'm having an Adorno day.)