Showing posts with label copyright infringement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label copyright infringement. Show all posts

Thursday, October 10, 2024

An Authorized Fanfic Re-Visioning of NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR

Last week Cory Doctorow posted a review of JULIA, by Sandra Newman, which coincidentally I've just finished reading.

Novel-Writing Machines

Newman's novel is an authorized retelling of Orwell's dystopian classic from the viewpoint of Julia, the protagonist Winston Smith's lover. As Doctorow mentions, Winston thinks of the Party as omniscient and omnipotent -- "Big Brother is watching you." Viewing this society through Julia's experience, we realize it's as corrupt and inefficient as the bureaucracy of any other dictatorship. She knows how to take advantage of cracks in the system, for instance with bribery and tricks such as getting a break from her job by signing out under the category "Sickness: Menstrual." (After all, nobody checks up on that excuse.) As a mechanic who maintains novel-writing machines in the Fiction department of the Ministry of Truth, she has the skills to fix other things as well, e.g., the perpetually clogging lavatories in her dormitory. She's valued for her abilities and enjoys her work. She also enjoys frequent sexual flings despite her membership in the Anti-Sex League. I wondered how women who take those risks, aside from the danger of getting arrested for sexcrime, avoid pregnancy given that contraception is illegal. Well, there's a dodge for that, too. Many single women who suspect they're in the early stages of pregnancy seek artsem (artificial insemination). If they've actually conceived already, they're covered; if not, the procedure didn't "take." And it seems to be common knowledge that some women volunteering to bear children for the Party are already pregnant. Newman's perspective flip opens up Orwell's fictional world from these and many other angles. Everybody knows the proper behavior, language, and facial expressions necessary to stay out of trouble, and for most of them it seems to be mainly an act. In one of the few relaxed scenes, workers joke about the intricacies of Newspeak. Julia excuses her linguistic mistakes with the claim that she isn't a bit intellectual, which is true. Winston's fascination with forbidden political, philosophical, and literary topics bores her, although she maintains a facade of enthralled interest.

JULIA answers questions many readers of NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR may puzzle over. Why does she initiate a love affair with Winston, a rather stuffy man twenty years her senior? Does Big Brother, as an individual, literally exist? (Yes.) Is there really an anti-Party underground, and was its demonized alleged leader, Goldstein, a real person? (Yes.) Is Oceania really at war? Yes, we witness the bombed sections of London, though we never find out if the enemy is Eurasia, Eastasia, or neither. We also learn about the lives of the proles, including the thriving black market with which Julia regularly deals. Newman's work delves into potential features of Orwell's fictional world that he either didn't consider or deliberately left outside the frame of his narrative.

Cory Doctorow reasonably classifies this type of novel as fanfic, or as he defines it, "writing stories about other stories that you hate or love or just can't get out of your head." Whether an amateur or professional publication, fanfic expresses the drive to explore shadowed or underdeveloped areas of canonical works, or speculate on how the world of the original looks from the perspective of a different character. ROSENKRANTZ AND GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD, which he also mentions, is a prime example of the latter.

Similarly, WIDE SARGASSO SEA, by Jean Rhys, a prequel to JANE EYRE, creates a personality and a backstory for Bertha, Rochester's deranged first wife. In Rhys's re-imagining, Bertha isn't even the name she goes by; Rochester calls her that for the sake of respectability. They arrive in Britain near the end of WIDE SARGASSO SEA. Rhys explores the question of whether she was ever in fact "mad" before being taken from her Caribbean home to England and relegated to nearly solitary confinement in a suite of upstairs rooms (not, contrary to popular impression, the attic).

Doctorow also refers to THE WIND DONE GONE, which a court decreed to be a "parody" of GONE WITH THE WIND. It really isn't, but that classification served as a defense against a charge of plagiarism. When I read THE WIND DONE GONE, I was mildly surprised that Mitchell's estate claimed copyright infringement at all. Alice Randall's book doesn't literally retell the classic novel. It tells the story of the enslaved narrator, Cynara, mixed-race daughter of Mammy and half-sister of Scarlett, with transformative references to the events of GONE WITH THE WIND. None of the white people from the latter are named in THE WIND DONE GONE. Cynara gives Mitchell's characters satirical nicknames, e.g. "Planter" and "Lady" for Scarlett's parents, "Mealy Mouth" for Melanie, "Dreamy Gentleman" for Ashley (I love that one). Scarlett is simply "the Other" or "Her."

Then there's GRENDEL, by John Gardner, wherein the monster reveals his side of the events in BEOWULF. Of course, creating variations on works in the public domain doesn't risk legal problems.

My own all-time favorite professionally published fanfic, the book I'd always wanted to write, is Fred Saberhagen's THE DRACULA TAPE (1975), a retelling of DRACULA in which the Count himself sets the record straight.

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

Saturday, May 21, 2022

For Art's Sake

For the purposes of today's blog, Art is not an alien god, although, given the evolving meaning of the word "icon", Art could be synonymous.

My title might also allude to Aestheticism..."art for art's sake", also to a line in the romantic song  Art For Art's Sake by 10cc. 

For some weeks, I have been accumulating copyright-related legal blogs to discuss Art Rights (not for the first time), and the Davis vs Pinterest result is a good hook. Pinterest is a great place to display ones cover art; I believe that I have also seen it used by book pirates to advertise their allegedly ill-gotten "collections".

Spoiler: Pinterest won the copyright infringement lawsuit brought against them by a photographer. 

Nevertheless, as with many stories (such as a romance novel), one knows how the story will end almost immediately; the interest lies in how the protagonists get there. 

Likewise, the summary of the court's reasoning in dismissing the photographer's suit, as provided by legal bloggers Frank D. D'Angelo and Marwa Abdulaziz for the multi-service, international law firm Loeb & Loeb LLP, is complex and interesting.

Original Link: 
 
Lexology Link:  

Possibly, and this is merely an opinion, the plaintiff was a tad too dog-in-the-mangerish.

In Europe, the courts are looking at (but have not resolved) the question of whether cloud services create duplicate copies of copyrighted work, and whether they have any responsibily to copyright owners depending on how cloud storage is used.

It appears that a cloud storage provider is covered by a sort of safe harbor where a lawful owner or licensee stores a copyrighted work for private use. The wrinkle emerges if the cloud product is used for "sharing" copyrighted works. 

Legal bloggers Patricia Ernst and Christiane Stuetzle for the law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP summarize the recent ruling of the European Court of Justice, and what it means for private copies stored in a cloud, and whether or not cloud storage providers might have to pay a levy for storing copies of copyrighted works... and who should decide how rights holders might be compensated for the reproductions of their works.

Original Link:  
 
Lexology Link: 

For a comprehensive, entertaining and thorough explanation of Art rights in the USA, I recommend the Q and A format shared, apparently exclusively, on Lexology by art-dispute expert Gabrielle C, Wilson,  looted-art specialist Yael M. Weitz, international litigator Lawrence M. Kaye, and the probably-storied* Howard N. Spiegler for Park Avenue law firm Kaye Spiegler PLLC

 

The team explains how a copyright owner proves ownership for the purposes of suing for copyright infringement; whether or not a copyrighted work of art can be displayed without the copyright owner's consent; whether or not copyrighted artwork can be copied for publication in catalogues and advertisements without the copyright owner's permisison... and much more.

Some of the Q and As are merely fascinating, others can be extrapolated to be useful advice to authors and bloggers.

*I opine "probably-storied" because the bio reminds me of at least one Daniel Silva novel sub-plot.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™