Links Roundup 11 July 2011

Here’s a roundup of stories that might be of interest to fans: articles about professional fanart, technology meant to control fans, interactive fan sites, erotic fan fiction and sexuality, new models for fan-TPTB collaboration, and fans as transmedia specialists, all beneath the cut!

* Just Don’t Call It Fanart. Salon did a fascinating article on an ongoing art show called “Crazy 4 Cult” which features artists making work based on movie stills. The show is patronized by the likes of Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarentino, Samuel L. Jackson and others. But, Salon warns, “Just don’t call it ‘fan art.'” (It sounds to us a lot like fan art.)

* Who Controls Your Camera? The Electronic Frontier Foundation recently posted about the implications of Apple’s new patent: a camera that can be turned off by a third party. The idea is to stop fans from, say, capturing “illegal images” at a rock concert. The EFF points out that this repression of fans is bad enough, but also asks us also to imagine how that technology might be used in an era where portable cameras have been used to document and publicize civil rights abuses and spread important news all around the world. Who gets to decide what you can record?

* Interactive Sites Before Pottermore. There have been many stories these last few weeks about Pottermore, J.K. Rowling’s new interactive Harry Potter site, but here’s an article about some other explicitly pro-fanfiction and pro-interactivity authors who have put together creative sandboxes for their fans.

* Elmer Fudd vs. Miss Marple? This review of A Billion Wicked Thoughts, a book which uses erotic fan fiction and other online materials to draw conclusions about human sexuality, critiques the book on many fronts, but most notably from a lesbian perspective: “Is the near total silence about this quadrant of human desire because the authors couldn’t fit lesbians into their thesis?”

* No Endorsement; Endless Possibilities: Cory Doctorow, thinking through the implication of creating “ODOs” or On-Demand Objects, imagines a world where creators and owners could give fans a “no endorsement” license to make and sell derivative (not transformative!) works. The maker would automatically cut in the creator/owner for a stipulated percent of any profit.

* Transmedia 2: Electric Bugaloo: Henry Jenkins has posted footage from all four panels of this spring’s Transmedia Hollywood 2 conference. There was discussion of fan culture and works throughout the conference, with many panelists believing that fans have acknowledged expertise in transmedia storytelling, and others debating how best to engage fans in this new multi-modal world. (OTW Board Member Francesca Coppa was on the second panel to talk explicitly about fan works and characterization.)

We want your suggestions! If you know of an essay, video, article, event, or link you think we should know about you can submit it in three easy ways: comment on the most recent Link Roundup on transformativeworks.org, LJ, or DW, tag a link with “for:otw_news” on Delicious or give @OTW_News a shoutout on Twitter. Links are welcome in all languages!

Submitting a link doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a roundup post, and inclusion of a link doesn’t mean that it is endorsed by the OTW.

Links Roundup for February 1, 2011

Here’s a roundup of recent stories that might be of interest to fans.

* The New York Times ran a skeptical editorial upon hearing that the Conan Doyle Estate has commissioned a new, “authorized” Sherlock Holmes novel, since the Holmes stories are out of copyright in the UK and mostly out of copyright in the U.S. As the article notes, “there is no reason why an ‘official’ 21st-century Holmes story will be any better…than an ‘unofficial’ one,” and concludes, “We shudder to think what the Shakespeare Estate might be endorsing now.”

* In Japan, the supreme court has ruled that a service which transfers TV to overseas viewers is illegal. This reverses earlier rulings that the service did not violate copyright law.

*Political remixer Jonathan McIntosh has put together an HTML5 video demo using Mozilla’s Popcorn.js framework in order to create an annotated remix: that is, a version in which remixers can cite sources or add footnotes. McIntosh, who believes that a transparent citing of sources might strengthen fair use claims, also offering his code, skin, and design files to anyone who wants to use them.

We want your suggestions! If you know of an essay, video, article, event, or link you think we should know about you can submit it in three easy ways: comment on the most recent Link Roundup on LJ, IJ or DW, tag a link with “for:otw_news” on Delicious or give @OTW_News a shoutout on Twitter. Links are welcome in all languages!

Submitting a link doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a roundup post, and inclusion of a link doesn’t mean that it is endorsed by the OTW.

German court opinion reinforces growing gap between liability faced by US and European web hosts

Written by Tanaqui

German courts have indicated that they may force video hosting companies such as YouTube to proactively search out and delete music videos that infringe copyright, rather than requiring copyright holders and rights collection agencies to submit takedown notices before videos are removed.

This comes on top of the conviction last February of three YouTube executives in Italy where the ruling of the Italian court included a clear implication that every hosted video should be pre-screened.

Although German rights collection agency GEMA may have lost an application for an emergency order at the end of August 2010 asking for access to certain videos to be blocked, this is small comfort for German web hosts. The ruling was made only on the basis that an emergency order in itself was inappropriate, as GEMA had known for a long time that the videos were available on YouTube. The presiding judge in the case invited GEMA to ask for a ruling in regular proceedings, indicating their claim was likely to be successful in that event. He is reported as stating that “There are some good reasons to think that YouTube indeed has some duty to take care of detecting illegal uploads.”

GEMA indicated at the start of October 2010 that it does plan to file a new suit.

According to some legal observers, the opinion of the German court appears to be the latest of several examples of an emerging gap between the way similar laws are being interpreted in Europe and the US, where YouTube and other companies are covered by the “safe harbor” provisions of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). Web hosts based in Europe appear to be at greater risk of being held liable for users’ actions prior to receiving takedown notices.