AO3 News

Post Header

Published:
2024-03-14 16:40:50 UTC
Tags:

OTW logo with the words 'Spotlight on Legal Issues'

Tennessee's proposal of the ELVIS Act might sound like something fun for fans, but in fact has the potential to create problems for fans engaging in a variety of fannish activities. This legislation is moving forward next week under pressure from Tennessee Governor Lee, but there is still some time to voice concerns and message the governor about how this act will hurt the public interest.

A number of organizations including the American Society for Collective Rights Licensing, Authors Guild, Copyright Clearance Center, National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are sponsoring this act. The proposed legislation creates a new right of publicity “in any medium in any manner” for life + 10 years.

OTW Legal is concerned about the potential impact of this Act, and believes Tennessee fans should be aware of the profound risks posed to both RPF and fictional fanworks that invoke an actor's image. One part of the law is relatively minor: it adds “voice” to the existing right of publicity, which covers commercial uses. But it goes further. There is new, broad liability for anyone who knowingly “publishes, performs, distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to the public” content that includes someone's voice or likeness, with no limitation to commercial uses. This could potentially harm artists, authors who describe an actor (or a character played by a particular actor), vidders, and other fannish creators. There is also broad liability for anyone who “distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available an algorithm, software, tool, or other technology, service or device” whose purpose is to make the replicas.

Because the ELVIS Act establishes liability for both the “user” and the “developer/platform”, it means that – without clear definitions – there could be a legal free-for-all on social media. The act's wording could mean that anyone clicking on an infringing document could be at legal risk. One of the OTW's partner organizations, NetChoice has more information about why the ELVIS Act could put fans at risk just for posting concert photos or for being associated with violations. As their post points out, there could be better laws passed instead to ban deep fakes.
The ELVIS Act is unnecessary as Tennessee law already adequately handles fraud, deception, and misappropriating someone’s likeness. If you are also concerned about this Act, let Tennessee officials know.


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2023-09-19 15:00:42 UTC
Tags:

OTW logo with the words 'Spotlight on Legal Issues'

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) has been much in the news lately, and OTW Legal has been receiving inquiries from understandably concerned users. We thought it would be worthwhile to provide some information on KOSA and also a rash of other bad internet bills that have been proposed around the U.S. It’s been, unfortunately, a busy summer – and now that Congress is back in session it’s time to take action!

The tl;dr is that the OTW and AO3 are not currently implicated by KOSA and many of the other bills because of our nonprofit status (most of the proposed laws only apply to for-profit institutions). This means the operations of the OTW and the AO3 wouldn’t be directly impacted by these bills. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t reason to be concerned just generally about these bills and the internet environment they would create, so, if you’re in the U.S., you can contact your elected representatives. More information below!

KOSA

KOSA is presented as a bill “to protect the safety of children on the internet,” but that’s not what it accomplishes. Instead, the bill would basically make “covered platforms” liable if they fail to design their platforms to prevent users under the age 18 from exposure to a wide amount of content designated as harmful to children. The AO3 is not a covered platform under this bill, but lots of platforms relied on by kids and fans are for-profit and would be affected by KOSA.

There are a number of concerns about the bill:

First, the content that must be kept away from minors is often vaguely defined. This will inevitably lead to censorship as platforms will err on the side of blocking information to avoid liability.

Second, because platforms only have to avoid exposure to minors, this encourages platforms to verify the ages of all of their users – conduct that would detrimentally affect the ability to be anonymous or pseudonymous online.

Third, it isn’t actually the platforms who get to decide whether the content is harmful to kids; rather, the bill would leave this decision up to the Federal Trade Commission and the individual states. Given that many states have begun advancing theories that information about racism, sexism, sexual and gender identities, and reproductive health is all harmful to children, this could result in widespread censorship of such information under this law.

Sponsors and supporters of this bill have stated publicly that they see it as an anti-LGBTQ+ measure and that if it passes,they intend to use it to discourage online communication that would help young LGBTQ+ people.

Finally, it’s likely that the censorship this bill encourages would affect not just minors but all internet users, as age verification is notoriously difficult online and covered platforms might therefore strive to be cautious and censor all such information to avoid liability.

OTW Legal has directly communicated its opposition to this Bill to Congress. But there is more you can do. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has more detailed information about this bill. It also explains how you can oppose it. Teen Vogue also has a good write-up of the bill. You can also read the text of the bill for yourself.

Other Bad Bills Around the Country

This summer has unfortunately been a really active one for states quickly passing a number of troubling internet laws, and there are still more in the pipeline. There are also some other bad proposed federal laws floating around. Many of these laws are briefly summarized below. If you’re a resident of one of the states below, you can also make your voice heard to your state representatives. Bad Internet Bills has a lot of great resources to help you get involved in protesting these bills. Further information is provided below.

  1. Federal EARN IT Act and STOP CSAM Act: The EARN IT Act isn’t really new, in that it first showed up in 2020. It wasn’t popular and it was dropped but now it’s back. The bill claims to be about the sexual exploitation of children, but it is worded broadly in such a way as to threaten online privacy and encourage censorship of marginalized communities. In this way, it is very similar to the STOP CSAM Act. Both bills would impose liability on websites for containing certain material, even without that websites’ knowledge, the acts will encourage the same sort of over-policing and censorship that KOSA would promote, probably aimed at speech about reproductive health, gender identity, and sex and sexuality. Also, since the liability could be imposed even when the websites didn’t know any material was there, it encourages websites to proactively scan all content, creating an atmosphere of surveillance on internet platforms and driving platforms out of business if they can’t afford to do that kind of monitoring. Here, too, OTW Legal has communicated our opposition to these bills, but you can help. You can read more about the EARN IT Act’s problems; the STOP CSAM Act’s problems from the EFF; and you can read the texts of both bills. There is also some information on how you can oppose the EARN IT Act and the STOP CSAM Act.

  2. Federal RESTRICT Act: You may have heard the RESTRICT Act referred to as a “TikTok ban.” Among other things, it provides the executive branch with broad powers to take actions to mitigate national security risks posed by internet services with any ties to foreign adversaries. While the OTW and AO3 do not fit the definition for such a service, fans may be interested in the statute because of the free speech implications on their continuing use of TikTok, for instance. Because the statute is vaguely worded to permit executive prohibition in poorly defined circumstances, its future impact beyond TikTok could be great. Find out how to oppose the RESTRICT Act.

  3. Federal Cooper Davis Act: This act would require social media platforms and other providers of internet services to report to the government certain transactions suspected to involve fentanyl, methamphetamine, and other counterfeit controlled substances. The reporting requirements, which would include user identity and location, kick in when the platform has a reasonable belief that a controlled substance transaction might be planned. In theory, this sounds good. In practice, though, this raises privacy concerns and also encourages platforms to monitor user communications to avoid possible liability for failure to report. Such monitoring would likely place disproportionate attention on the communications of people of color and other marginalized communities. You can find out how to oppose the Cooper Davis Act.

  4. New Jersey A5069: New Jersey is considering a KOSA-like bill prohibiting practices by social media platforms that cause harm to children. While the law would not affect the OTW because of its nonprofit status, it carries similar harmful implications as KOSA. The bill has passed the New Jersey Assembly but is still under consideration in the New Jersey Senate. If you are a New Jersey resident, you can voice your opposition to the bill by contacting your state senator..

  5. Maryland’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act: Maryland is considering a law that would require businesses providing online services not to do anything detrimental to a child. As has been noted, such a vaguely-defined term can be wielded as a censorship tool that stifles online communication. It doesn’t apply to nonprofits like the OTW. If you are a Maryland resident you can contact your representatives about this bill.

  6. California’s SB-680: This proposed bill is similar to KOSA, in that it makes social media platforms liable for designing services that cause harm. Again, this law would not affect the OTW because it doesn’t apply to nonprofits. The bill is currently being debated and has not yet passed. If you’re in California, you can voice your opposition to the bill by contacting your local representative.

  7. California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act: This bill passed last year but has not yet gone into effect. Similar to the Maryland bill described above, it requires businesses providing online services not to do anything detrimental to a child. Like Maryland’s bill, this bill does not affect the OTW as it does not apply to nonprofits. The bill, has been challenged in court.

  8. Utah’s Social Media Regulation Acts: Utah has recently passed a bill that requires social media companies, starting next year, to enact age verification on all accounts, require parental consent for minors under the age of 18 to be on social media, provide parents or guardians full access to all social media accounts held by a minor, and block access by minors to social media between 10:30pm and 6:30am, among other requirements. Obviously this bill has a number of troubling implications, and it can be interpreted to apply to the AO3 (although we would argue that it shouldn’t). The bill has already been passed but Utah is accepting input so that may be something concerned users can participate in.

  9. Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act: This recently passed bill would require social media companies, starting next year, to require parental consent for any user under the age of 16. Like the Utah bill, there are arguments that this bill, if passed, could apply to the AO3. (The bill text starts at the bottom of page 622).

  10. Arkansas’s Social Media Safety Act: Arkansas has recently passed a bill that requires social media companies, starting in September, to require age verification and the consent of a parent or guardian if the account holder is a minor under the age of 18. The OTW is not covered by this bill as a nonprofit. However, it has the same troubling implications as the other age verification bills. A trade association for internet companies including Meta, TikTok, and Twitter has sued in federal court to block this bill from going into effect. The ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have filed a brief in support of blocking the law. (Read more about the lawsuit.)

  11. A bill was proposed in Texas requiring age verification and the prohibition of any minor under the age of 18 being allowed to have a social media account. The bill did not define “social media platform” and so it was unclear who would be covered under this bill. The bill was introduced and referred to committee, but it was not acted upon before the legislature adjourned. Therefore, it has not been passed. We will continue to monitor if the bill becomes active again. (Read the text of the bill.)

You might be wondering why the OTW doesn’t do even more itself to actively oppose these bills right now. As a nonprofit, there are severe limits on how (and how much) the OTW is allowed to engage in lobbying. What we can do is encourage people to oppose these bills by voicing their concerns to their elected representatives! When appropriate, the OTW also participates in amicus briefs, which are briefs in support of positions in lawsuits that would benefit fans and fan creators.

If these bills do pass –- and we hope they don’t! -– we would look for opportunities to work with allies to file amicus briefs and launch other challenges to them. You can read more about OTW Legal’s work, including amicus briefs we’ve filed on our website.


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2023-09-11 15:08:08 UTC
Tags:

OTW logo with the words 'Spotlight on Legal Issues'

With ChatGPT's rapid growth since its launch in late 2022 and many other text, graphic and video AI generative services gaining popularity, AI and copyright has become a heatedly debated topic. The U.S. Copyright Office is now seeking public comment to assess the need for legislative or regulatory steps in copyright law issues raised by the rapid development of AI.

Four main areas surrounding the use of AI systems are currently for public comment, some of these are more closely connected to fannish activities and have a direct impact on AO3 users.

  1. Using copyrighted materials in training AI models, specifically, whether permission from copyright owner is needed, in what form (opt in or opt out), and if compensations is necessary; what type of system for permission and remuneration is feasible, whether records should be retained to identify training materials used, and if they should be available to copyright holders; if requests are not honored, what remedies should be available.
  2. Whether materials generated using AI systems are copyrightable – namely what level of human involvement may be considered sufficient control over the output material for it to be considered human-authored.
  3. Potential liability for infringing works generated with the use of AI systems: how the liability should be apportioned between the developers of the system and the user who provided the prompts.
  4. How to deal with attributes not traditionally protected under copyright law, such as human likeness and artistic styles.

The comment period remains open until October 18, 2023, for written comments and November 15, 2023 for reply comments. Detailed instructions note that short written comments are limited to 5000 characters, longer comments can be uploaded in various formats. Please note that all information and files provided in the submission process will be publicly available.

Visit the comment form to have your say!

Given that the feedback being sought concerns an organization the OTW is not affiliated with, comments have been disabled on this post. Decisions made by the U.S. Copyright Office could impact the OTW and AO3's approach to AI generated works in the future. We thank concerned fans who wish to articulate their opinions on the matter directly with them.


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2022-02-23 23:45:20 UTC
Tags:

OTW Legal is tracking and participating in three current developments in U.S. law that could affect fans: (1) Fan-unfriendly proposals to change trademark law; (2) Attacks on LGBTQ+ expression online; and (3) Proposals to mandate technological copyright filtering on the Internet. We will keep advocating for fans in these areas, and in some cases, there are things you can do if you’re in the U.S.! If you want to know more, read on.

(1) Fan-Unfriendly Proposals to Change Trademark Law

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill with the misleading name of “SHOP SAFE” that would place barriers and restrictions on online marketplaces, including the sorts of marketplaces that fans rely on, like eBay, Etsy, Kickstarter, Patreon, Redbubble, TeePublic, and many others. Although this bill is presented as being about “consumer protection,” that’s not really what it accomplishes – instead, it would reverse long-standing principles of trademark law, would give enormous power to trademark owners to take down fan material from e-commerce sites, and would even force e-commerce sites to try to filter out fan material before it even gets posted. It would harm markets for memorabilia, resale, fanart, and more. Although the OTW is focused on noncommercial fanworks, and this law wouldn’t affect the AO3 (which does not do any commerce at all), it would be terrible for fans on other sites.

Although SHOP SAFE has passed in the House, it is still pending in the Senate. The OTW is actively participating in direct efforts to explain to Senators why this bill would do more harm than good. If you’re in the U.S., you can help by contacting your Senators to do the same! One way to contact your senators is using the EFF’s e-mail tool.

Here are some resources to learn more about SHOP SAFE:

(2) Attacks on LGBTQ+ expression online

We have heard from a lot of members about the (again, terribly mis-named) EARN IT Act, which has been introduced by the Senate Judiciary Committee. This bill, like SHOP SAFE, claims to do one thing, but actually does something very different. On its face, EARN-IT appears to be about curbing the availability of visually-depicted Child Sexual Abuse Material (“CSAM”) online – and if it were actually a tool for doing that, we would support it. AO3 bans the posting or embedding of CSAM (photos of actual children), and bans users for posting such material.

So why does the OTW care? Because EARN-IT is an attack on section 230, which is the law that makes online platforms able to host user-posted material, and it does so in a way that allows U.S. states – many of which can be influenced by powerful anti-LGBTQ+ lobbying groups – to define what constitutes a visual depiction of CSAM. It is also a massive attack on Internet user privacy, that could result in users’ private material being searched. This sort of legal change could have dramatic impacts on fans, fanart, and freedom of expression for LGBTQ+ youth.

EARN-IT would not affect the AO3 directly. EARN-IT is specifically and explicitly limited to visual depictions, and AO3 does not host any visual depictions at all — the only user-posted material that AO3 hosts is text-only. Any and all images visible on AO3 are hosted elsewhere and embedded by users in works. EARN-IT would therefore affect those platforms where the images are actually hosted, not AO3, where the images merely appear as the result of embedding links (the technological difference matters for this bill).

However, the implications of the legislation for fan communities mean that the OTW is monitoring the situation closely, and will take direct action based on how things develop. If you want to get involved yourself, the best way to do so is through our allies at the EFF, which is also monitoring closely and organizing user action. For more information and action items, visit the EFF's EARN-IT action page.

(3) Proposals to mandate technological copyright filtering on the Internet

The U.S. Copyright Office is convening roundtables to explore the imposition of “Standard Technical Measures,” which could require online platforms — like the AO3 — to engage in filtering. Filtering could require platforms to attempt to prevent the uploading of copyrighted material, or monitor or search their networks for copyrighted material — things that do not account well for the sorts of fair uses that fans and AO3 rely on. OTW has long stood against copyright filtering, which is not only harmful to free expression, but also technologically impossible. We have submitted many comments over the years opposing proposals like those contemplated by the Copyright Office, and on February 22, 2022, Legal Committee Member Rebecca Tushnet participated on the OTW’s behalf in this most recent round. We will continue to fight this fight, and will keep you informed as things develop!

The EFF links above also include pointers to email forms that fans in the U.S. can use to contact their representatives to urge them to take a stance against SHOP SAFE and EARN IT.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2022-01-23 16:56:07 UTC
Translations:
Tags:

OTW logo with the words 'Spotlight on Legal Issues'

Right now, Hong Kong is in the process of reviewing and proposing changes to its copyright law, and has put out a public call for consultation. OTW Legal will be submitting a comment in response to this request, recommending that Hong Kong's copyright law be made more flexible to allow more freedom for fans to create and share fanworks.

Here's where you come in! As we've done in many countries, including Canada, Australia, the U.S., South Africa, and New Zealand, we'd like our Hong Kong submission to include first-hand accounts from Hongkongers about the benefits of laws that promote the creation and sharing of transformative works.

If you're in or from Hong Kong and have expressed yourself, gained skills, been part of creative communities, or otherwise experienced the benefits of being able to create transformative works, we'd love to hear your stories. They can be long or short--just give us some specifics about why making and enjoying fanworks matters to you, so we can include those stories in our submission. If you can send your stories in English, that will be even more helpful, since the submission will be in English.

The deadline is approaching quickly! Please send your stories to us by January 30 using our contact form or e-mailing us at legal [at] transformativeworks.org. (Feel free to use a pseudonym if you don't want us to share your personally identifying information.)


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2021-08-06 16:30:34 UTC
Tags:

Spotlight on Legal Issues

We've been getting a lot of inquiries about tumblr's recent announcement that it would be beta testing a feature it is calling "Post+," which allows users to monetize posts by locking them to subscribers.

How does this interact with AO3 policies?

Don't worry, nothing's changing. As always, AO3 is dedicated to noncommercial fanworks, and has a policy against using the AO3 for commercial solicitation. So, linking to your blog or other social media from AO3 is fine. But linking to your Patreon, Ko-fi, Amazon sales page, or other commercial/fundraising site isn't. Letting people know how to learn more about you is fine, but soliciting financial support isn't. So how does this rule apply to tumblr? We know a lot of people link to their tumblr accounts from their AO3 profiles or works, and that's fine! But linking specifically to subscriber-locked material on tumblr isn't, and using AO3 to ask people to subscribe to a monetized tumblr account isn't. And of course, AO3's rules don't govern what you do on other websites.

What about fan activities on tumblr and elsewhere?

We've also gotten questions and seen a lot of concern floating around about how tumblr's Post+ program affects fans on tumblr and on the Internet more generally. The good news is...probably not much. We want to be clear that we have no relationship with tumblr, so we have no control over them or what they do. But here's our take on things, as experienced lawyers.

Making and sharing fanworks has long been a predominantly noncommercial activity, and the OTW celebrates the community that has grown around that noncommercial approach. Also, the OTW's position is that noncommercial, transformative fanworks are fair use under U.S. copyright law, which means that they do not infringe copyright. Importantly, as a matter of U.S. law, commerciality is one of a number of factors that courts consider in determining whether a use is fair use--it's not the whole question. In other words, it is possible for noncommercial things to infringe copyright, and it is possible for commercial things not to. (In fact, all of the major U.S. cases holding that transformative works constitute fair use have been about commercial works.) Generally speaking, the more a work transforms the meaning, message, or purpose of the underlying work, the less a court would care that the work is commercial; and vice versa--the less transformative a work is, the more commerciality would matter.

But all of this talk of courts is very remote. As a practical matter, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act allows copyright holders (publishers, entertainment companies) to seek to have things taken down from the Internet if they think those things aren't fair use, and we know that in general, copyright holders are more likely to seek takedowns for commercial things than for noncommercial things. That doesn't mean those commercial things are necessarily infringing, but it does mean they're more likely to be taken down.

The law does not give Internet platforms (like tumblr) much discretion in determining whether to take things down when they receive a valid request--basically, if a takedown request is valid and the work isn't an obvious fair use, the platform has to take it down, as a matter of law. As a practical matter, then, it's reasonable to expect that monetized tumblr posts are more likely to be the subject of takedown notices than non-monetized ones. But it doesn't mean they're automatically infringing or non-infringing. Fair use is always a case-by-case analysis.

To think about this differently, Internet platforms (including tumblr and YouTube and all the other ones) act as a form of insulation from lawsuits. That insulation happens in the context of DMCA takedown notices--rather than suing an individual poster, the copyright owner just asks the platform to take it down. It's always up to users to decide what to post, and--in the very (very, very!) unlikely event that a copyright holder would decide to sue rather than just relying on the takedown process--users always bear the risk of being sued. If work gets taken down under the DMCA, users always have the opportunity to "counternotify" and ask for it to be put back up, with the understanding that having it put back up might make a lawsuit more likely. In other words, although platforms don't "defend" their users, they do add layer of protection, in a way. Nothing about tumblr's Post+ program changes any of that.

We hope this is helpful information. The OTW and AO3 are dedicated to maintaining space for noncommercial fanworks and fan culture, and we'll continue to do that.


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2021-04-30 17:03:22 UTC
Translations:
Tags:

Spotlight on Legal Issues

Of special interest to German fans, as well as other fans in the EU.

Germany is working on implementing Article 17, which makes significant changes in European copyright law. This has created an exciting opportunity to clarify that fan fiction is legal under German copyright law.

The German government has sent a draft bill to the two houses of Parliament. The final vote is planned for the beginning of May. The government proposal makes clear that nonprofit websites like the Archive of Our Own should not be required to get licenses from copyright owners, as commercial websites like Facebook and YouTube will have to do. The draft bill also proposes to explicitly legalize fan fiction, fan art, and many other transformative works, as part of the EU exception for “caricature, parody and pastiche”.

There is one problem, and one risk. The problem is that the proposal includes language that is not required by Article 17 and that could be confusing and unduly restrictive of the ability to engage in caricature, parody and pastiche. This language restricts caricature, parody and pastiche “to the extent required by the specific purpose,” which would invite second-guessing of an artist’s purpose by courts and copyright claimants. Fan fiction, like caricature, parody and pastiche in general, has its own artistic existence and courts should not ask whether a work of fan fiction takes “too much” of the characters.

The risk is that some lobbyists are asking for a remuneration requirement for caricature, parody and pastiche—including fan fiction and fan art—even if they are not posted on commercial websites. The consequences of a payment requirement would be perverse: it would favor commercial platforms over nonprofits such as the Archive of Our Own and Wikipedia. This is because users could freely upload fan fiction, fan art, memes etc. to YouTube or Facebook, because the commercial platform would already be paying a collecting society through the implementation of Article 17, but the same users would have to pay a collecting society if they wanted to upload the same fan fiction, fan art or memes to their personal website or to a nonprofit website such as Archive of Our Own. In practice, the law would strengthen the big commercial platforms by creating an incentive for internet users to close down their private websites, leave nonprofit platforms such as AO3, and move their activities to a Facebook group instead.

We suggest that German fans should (1) ask Members of the German Parliament (Mitglied des Bundestags) to remove the restriction on the caricature, parody & pastiche exception “to the extent required by the specific purpose” and (2) explain how important it is that this exception should not be subject to remuneration. One easy way to do that is to use the portal abgeordnetenwatch.de, whose page on the Committee on Legal Affairs and Consumer Protection shows those members of parliament who will be in charge of this proposal.

We believe that the law should not add an additional condition, not part of Article 17, to the exception for parody, caricature and pastiche, saying that uses should only be allowed “to the extent required by the specific purpose”. This wording only serves to muddy the waters, because it is very difficult for a user to determine the extent of the use of a work that is “required” for the purpose of fan fiction, fan art, and other transformative uses. Likewise, we believe that the law should protect individual fans and noncommercial websites, and fight against the dominance of Facebook and YouTube, by rejecting a compensation requirement for the exception for parody, caricature and pastiche.

Update 5 May 2021: Based on fan response to this post about Germany's impending copyright reforms, we have created a Change.org petition for fans to use, which may provide an easier way to reach the legislator than submitting individual comments in the form of a question to the website (as suggested in the original post). 


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment

Post Header

Published:
2020-12-22 18:22:02 UTC
Tags:

OTW logo with the words 'Spotlight on Legal Issues'

Since we began in 2007, the Organization for Transformative Works' core mission has included working to promote fan-friendly copyright law. For years, we've submitted testimony and comments to governments, filed briefs in court, and helped mobilize fans to have their voices heard by lawmakers around the world. Recently, one of our big legal advocacy projects has been testifying and submitting comments to the U.S. Senate about the way U.S. Copyright works online under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Today, U.S. Senator Thom Tillis has released proposed legislation that would be bad for the AO3 and bad for fans. OTW Legal will fight for fans against this proposal, and you can help.

Sen. Tillis's proposal is awful. Among other things, it would dismantle safe harbors in the DMCA that protect the AO3 and other fan sites. It would put fanworks at greater risk of being taken down, and make it harder for new fan sites to get started. But here's the good news: it's just one Senator's wish list. Although Sen. Tillis's office has released a proposal, it's not even a bill yet--and if we remember our Schoolhouse Rock, becoming a bill is only the first step on a long, winding road that can involve lots of changes and may go nowhere. And before it starts on any road, the OTW (and you!) will have opportunities to have our voices heard and make a difference in what (if anything) might go in a bill.

OTW's legal advocacy team is on the case. We've been submitting responses and objections to Congress and the Senate, meeting with Sen. Tillis and other lawmakers, and doing everything else we can to continue to support free expression and fair use, promote copyright safe harbors that make it possible for the AO3 to exist, and protect fans from having their works unfairly taken down or commercially exploited by others.

We're optimistic that this wish list will not become law! But we have a lot of work ahead of us, and if you live in the United States, you can help. As things go forward, we'll know more about what specific actions will make a difference, but for now the biggest thing you can do is stand up and be counted. If you are interested in staying informed or getting involved, let us and our allies at the Re:Create Coalition know!.

OTW Legal is here to help! To find out more about the OTW's Legal Advocacy work or how to contact us, visit our Legal Advocacy page.


The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Comment


Pages Navigation