paraka | Question

Question

So, I've spent most of the day reading up on what people are saying about the OTW are saying. Mostly from non-fandom people, and it's kind of making me want to shoot things, but I was wondering:

What do you think about the OTW? Would you like an archive? A written fannish history? A wiki (OMG, I can't tell you how much I'd like a wiki for fandom, although I can see it being vandalized a lot)? Do you think it's a good idea to have a legal defense fund? If the OTW were ever to go to court, would you support them?

I'm planning on making a post sometime about how I feel about it, but I'm really curious as to what other people on my flist think about it. I think so far only one person on my flist has really written about it, but I spent a couple months away so could have totally missed something.

Also, I am having a bitch of a time working on a mysql database, any one know enough about setting up eFiction to want to help?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

That's good to know. It does bother me a bit how some people are saying they aren't being included, but aren't trying to be included either. Or those say they don't *want* to be included to the OTW should just fuck off.

My problem with saying that is...I don't necessarily want to be included (like I said, I haven't decided yet). But if they're misrepresenting my segments of fandom, I'm going to speak up as long as they claim to be representing those segments.

IMO, they should cut RPF out of their legal/advocacy stuff (it's on much firmer legal ground than FPF, for the most part, so it doesn't NEED to be included there) - welcome it on the archive and in the wiki, but so far I'm not seeing much understanding of the legal issues RPF does face, and I'm...undecided on whether I think they seem willing to learn. They listened to us whiners about "media fandom != all of fandom", but I'm still not convinced they're really listening, you know? Like, they changed that one thing but from where I'm sitting they're still making mistakes that say to me they missed our broader point, that RPF and media-based fandom aren't the same thing and can't be accurately represented using solely the terminology of one of those.

I've been told by an OTW committee member OTW isn't so much about "LOOK AT MEEEEE" as "if you're already looking this way, lemme turn on the light so you can see right"...but regardless, by their nature they'll be getting attention from outside sources, and if they're presenting inaccurate information about fandom, are they really serving their purpose well?

So whether or not I ultimately want to be involved with the organization, I don't think it's unfair of me to correct misinformation when I see it. I do think, however, there's a difference between correcting misinfo and bitching, and yeah, people whose comments boil down to "how dare you not do this this and this exactly my way, not that I'd be interested even if you did" would probably benefit from just taking their ball and going home.

BTW, how has the response to your "bitching" been? (Links are fine, since you said you had made some metafandom posts, which I will probably get around to *some time* when the holidays aren't taking up all my time). I'm curious as to how the OTW is handling things, since, for the most part, I've only had a chance to read a few people's reactions to all this.

From the actual OTW staff, it's generally been...pleasant, but somewhat dry and corporate. Lots of somewhat-meaningless PR babble and "I'll get back to you later with an official response". Which isn't all bad - it feels odd in a fannish space to be interacted with on a business level, but it certainly could be worse.

While I'm aware it's somewhat unfair of me to judge the organization by its supporters, I would like to mention the response from many OTWers has been...well, I mentioned in a friend's LJ my big problem with the OTWers I've had the more frustrating arguments with is it never seems to be enough to say "this language feels exclusive; were I coming upon this for the first time today, 'x' would leave me thinking I wasn't included", people expect justification, factual backup, fandom credentials, links to usage of x with intention to exclude, on and on and on to the point it feels less like an argument about the inclusivity of x and more like me on trial - as if my exclusion is somehow my fault.

I'll get you links...at some point, lol. I think I have a list saved somewhere :)

Or those say they don't *want* to be included to the OTW should just fuck off.
...hmm, it looks like I was thinking faster than I was typing when I wrote that, what I actually *meant* to say was the people who say they don't want to be part of the OTW and the OTW should fuck off (not that I think the people who don't want to be included should fuck off, that kind of goes against what I was saying before...).

But if they're misrepresenting my segments of fandom, I'm going to speak up as long as they claim to be representing those segments.
Yeah, I can't really claim to beleive that the OTW totally knows all of fandom. The part that really gets me is that they say fandom is a female thing. And I can see where you'd get that impression if you're a slasher, but there are plenty of guys in fandom, they just move in different circles.

IMO, they should cut RPF out of their legal/advocacy stuff
Wow, is that ever a bad idea.
Can you imagine if the OTW went out there saying "We're here to help should there be legal troubles... unless you're into RPF, then you're SOL"

I think people really misinterpret the legal side of things. When they say they are proactive on the legal side of things, they mean they're doing the research, and building a case now in the hopes that they never have to go to court. And they're going to be taking things one problem at a time. They're not out to revolutionize copyright law. When I asked at the meeting last night, they even said they might not be able to take some cases on, depending on the chances, resources and people involved. The last thing they want is to go in and *lose*.
Someone also asked last night about how they plan to treat RPS on their legal side, but I'll admit, I don't really remember the answer, but it should be in the transcript once they post it.

...hmm, it looks like I was thinking faster than I was typing when I wrote that, what I actually *meant* to say was the people who say they don't want to be part of the OTW and the OTW should fuck off (not that I think the people who don't want to be included should fuck off, that kind of goes against what I was saying before...)

Haha, I hate when I do that.

Wow, is that ever a bad idea.
Can you imagine if the OTW went out there saying "We're here to help should there be legal troubles... unless you're into RPF, then you're SOL"

I think it depends how they approach it. There are a couple reasons I think OTW would benefit from cutting RPF out of legal/advocacy work:

- the culture of RPFandom where it doesn't have a community that comes mainly from media fandom is different than the culture of media fandom (this is a hugely broad statement, I know, just liberally apply "for the most part"s all over, lol). To me, misrepresenting that culture - as they have done several times - is worse than saying "At the moment, we don't feel our knowledge of RPFandom is extensive enough to represent it properly in our advocacy work. RPF will always be welcome in our archive, and RPFers are of course welcome in the Organization, but while we work with members of RPF communities to broaden our understanding, we will refrain from advocating something we don't feel we understand fully."

- The legal issues surrounding RPF are very different from those concerning media-based fandom, and I haven't seen any evidence they understand those. I know they're not after changing laws or being revolutionary, but if they're offering any sort of legal help I'd feel more comfortable if I felt they understood what the specific issues were. And again, it's all in how they handle it. "Of course we want to help any and every one in fandom who may run into legal trouble, but we offer this help with the admittance that, being mainly media fandomers ourselves, our knowledge of the legalities surrounding RPF is somewhat limited. We are always working to educate ourselves further, and we will absolutely not turn away anyone looking for help, but we want you to be aware RPF is not our area of expertise."

So not necessarily cutting it out fully (although, really, I'd be far more comfortable if they DID cut RPF out of their advocacy work because already I've seen bloggers referring to fandom-as-a-whole with "media fandom", and ARGH), but even just admitting their limitations would make me a happy camper.

Ok, I don't really have time to reply properly to your comments, since I'm going to be leaving in a few minutes to spend New Year's at a friends, but here's the but of the transcript that applies to the RPF legal stuff (I've edited out some extra stuff like who was leaving the chat room and mod commands):
Hi! My question, shockingly, is also on
the legal side of things.
first, i want to applaud you guys for
having a big-tent approach to fannish work. it seems
like it would be easy to say, "we're here for fic
because we think we can win with fic, but the vidders
are on their own," etc.
however, RPS in particular seems to have
its own set of legal issues, yet i've only seen
comment so far on the fanfic/fanvid side of things.
are you guys working on specific
messages/defenses for RPS/RPF?
I will start by saying that probably we
will set up a chat with Rebecca Tushnet, our head of
Legal, who can give the really correct answers to all
the legal questions
well, from a CommRel perspective, as well.
not being a lawyer, I will say that my
understanding from our discussions is that RPS/RPF are
on much more solid and understood ground
legally speaking
with respect to libel?
we definitely *are* concerned about them
in terms of caring about RPS and RPF
and wanting to protect them too
libel/defamation/slander you are totally
safe as long as it is clear the work is fiction
in my nonlawyer understanding!
right.
are there other legal aspects for RPF
that you are specifically concerned about?
since RPF pushes a good number of people's
squick buttons pretty hard, is OTW going to work on a
"message" about why it's legit?
and why it's included?
let me actually answer this more
generally -- we are not looking to judge squick/squee,
period. that is, we have zero desire as an org to get
into the business of deciding what is "worthy" or
"good" and don't think it is our place
we're going to include everything that
our legal team tells us we can that does not risk
getting us sent to jail :>
ha ha, awesome. thanks.
(Anything else, Lottelita?)
not at the moment!

Ok, back from holidays, but only on my lunch, so I probably won't be able to respond to everything.

"At the moment, we don't feel our knowledge of RPFandom is extensive enough to represent it properly in our advocacy work. RPF will always be welcome in our archive, and RPFers are of course welcome in the Organization, but while we work with members of RPF communities to broaden our understanding, we will refrain from advocating something we don't feel we understand fully."
Well, the impression that I got from the chat is that they are acknowledging that they don't know all the legal ins about outs involved with RPF, but they don’t know all the legal ins and outs of FPF either, but they are going to invest time into learning those ins and outs in case anything ever comes of it in court.
I also got the impression that if it does ever go to court, they’re going to do whatever to win that specific case, and they’re not going to try and make it about *all* fanfiction. It might be used as precedence in a case later, but they’re not going to try and mash all fandom in as one thing.

if they're offering any sort of legal help I'd feel more comfortable if I felt they understood what the specific issues were. And again, it's all in how they handle it. "Of course we want to help any and every one in fandom who may run into legal trouble, but we offer this help with the admittance that, being mainly media fandomers ourselves, our knowledge of the legalities surrounding RPF is somewhat limited. We are always working to educate ourselves further, and we will absolutely not turn away anyone looking for help, but we want you to be aware RPF is not our area of expertise."
Except… they’d end up saying that an awful lot.
So far, most of the focus has been on fanfic, media fanfic if you’d like, but they’re offering their services for all fanworks, this includes things like vids, and artwork made, it includes fan videos (scripted acts) and manips. It includes book fandoms, TV fandoms, movie fandoms and the RP fandom (and probably more that I can’t think of at the moment).
The main lawyer they have on the board is American. What if it’s an Australian that needs legal help? Are they to put a warning up that they only know American law?
The purpose of the legal side of things is to *build* a case, any knowledge that they bring to the table now is just a bonus. And they want to develop a network of contacts so they can have people to call on in case something is beyond their current abilities, but that being said, if the lawyers that are on the board are professionals, then I would think they’d be professional enough to take what’s given to them. Each case is going to need it’s own research, each case is probably going to need outside help, it’s just a matter of where to go for that outside help.
So yeah, I don’t think the RPF writer is much less represented than a Canadian vid maker (like me).

Well, the impression that I got from the chat is that they are acknowledging that they don't know all the legal ins about outs involved with RPF, but they don’t know all the legal ins and outs of FPF either, but they are going to invest time into learning those ins and outs in case anything ever comes of it in court.

Mm, I think that section of the chat was good to hear.

they’re not going to try and mash all fandom in as one thing

But by claiming they intend to use "transformative" as a defense for RPF, they're doing just that. Rather than ask about it - and I know multiple people have given them the name of someone who's done a ton of legal RPF research - they chose to assume and just mash it in there. I suppose time will tell if that changes, but that's where my feeling they're not necessarily willing to learn comes from - times where they have chosen to assume rather than learn.

The main lawyer they have on the board is American. What if it’s an Australian that needs legal help? Are they to put a warning up that they only know American law?

Point taken.

So yeah, I don’t think the RPF writer is much less represented than a Canadian vid maker (like me).

In essence, you're right. But from a language sense, they've been very careful to keep their language inclusive of all types of fanworks - ficcing, vidding, art, etc. - while the first time anyone said "um, your language isn't so much making with the including RPF" the reaction was...less than good. But, yeah, you're right.

Well, I don't really know that much about RPF and the OTW reactions, so in this case I'm going to have to bow to your experience.

Dah! That was me, I forgot that I had deleted my cookies and would have to sign back in. Sorry about that.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Question

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a

Re: OTW Part 1a