Talk:Guidelines for fan art
Jamie and I reserve the right to do anything with any fan content that we want to, including telling you "That's inappropriate; take it down and knock it off."
Isn't this contradictory to the CC license under which the comic is released? Specifically, how can you reserve the right to have fan material taken down if Erfworld has already been perpetually licensed to them due to the nature of CC licensesc.f. by-nc-sa legal code, section 3? Similarly, wouldn't you have to get explicit permission from the fan in question to use the material commercially, since normally (due to the NC-SA license) they would only be permitted to license their fanart back to you for noncommercial use?
Don't get me wrong, I totally understand the reasoning behind these guidelines. I'm just worried as to how they interact with the rights and regulations you've already proscribed. Menlo Marseilles 21:39, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 more to come?
This page is 7 months old and still more or less just an "under construction" sign. You lay out some conflicting goals and principles and say "don't worry, I'll make this make sense later," but the page is still rather short on details and specific guidelines and rather long on vague and precatory statements. Perhaps the community could contribute to an explanation of the creative commons license here, but as Menlo Marseilles points out above, your statement that you'll go after "trademark dilution" doesn't seem particularly consistent with offering people your work under a CC license that doesn't forbid derivative works—which you seem to be encouraging. $.02 126.96.36.199 03:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Just because you don't understand what trademark dilution is, doesn't mean that that what they are saying is conflicting with a CC licence. (Justyn 04:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC))
- Disclaimer: MisterB777 is not a lawyer, nor does he play one on TV, but he's used CC licenses for years and has a good amount of experience with them. The Erfworld comics are licensed under the Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike License, which says that you can't make money off of fan art, you have to license your work in the same way as the original, and you have to say who the original artists/writers were. Furthermore, CC licenses have nothing to do with Trademarks. They are covered under separate laws in the United States and Canada (which, if I am not mistaken, are the two most pertinent jurisdictions). Section 3 of the License does not cover trademarks, and the creators are well within their rights to protect themselves from people who use their Trademark (i.e., the word "Erfworld" and potentially character names) in a way that is degrading to the value of those marks.
- They can't stop you from reworking the images of the actual comic, or the text, but they can keep you from trying to publish an e-book of "Sizemore Rockwell and the Love Golems" Erf-rotica novella if it (a) violates the CC license, which it would if you charged for the e-book, or (b) makes it seem like "Erfworld" and "Sizemore Rockwell" are your idea and not theirs, violating their trademark. You can, however, theoretically, write and distribute your opus of golem/caster love for free as long as you make it absolutely clear that it is a fanfic and not canonical text.
- The point is, there is not really a conflict here. There are plenty of companies that release stuff under open source and CC licenses that also vigorously enforce their trademarks because, lets be honest, the branding and naming rights on this stuff is how they can still make money when they give things away for free. --MisterB777 17:55, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Yeah yeah, this is a little confusing to me as well, I understand the 'prevent commercial use and copyright violation' but the phrase "Jamie and I reserve the right to do anything with any fan content that we want to, including telling you "That's inappropriate; take it down and knock it off." doesn't seem quite right. If the comic is liscenced under the BY-NC-SA then by the terms of the copyright, I can make any Non-Comercial derivite work I want, and Rob can't tell me to knock it off. Similarily, by sellecting the SA clause, he has mandated that I re-release the comic under BY-NC-SA, which means that by default, Rob doesn't own my fan work, and can't do anything with it he wants (he is bound by the copyright liscence, namely the NC portion). Of course he can contact the fan author and ask them to reliscence the work to him for comercial use, but that's besides the point. The phrase "Jamie and I reserve the right" seems to be implying that Rob is trying to claim rights outside of the CC liscence. (Like the right to say that me drawing Erf-rotica is nasty, and should stop, or the right to include my fan-art in a book he is selling). I am not a lawyer, but by using CC-BY-SA-NC Rob is explicitly giving up these rights. -User:bigmacd24
- I know that this discussion is 2 years old, but I thought I'd weigh in on the issues raised by bigmacd24.
- 1). I agree completely that the "we can do anything with fan content that we want to" is not exactly in line with CC-BY-SA-NC. There are clear limits to what they can do with fanart, as indicated by the license itself, since all fanart be licensed CC-BY-SA-NC. You are right that they can't include your fan art in a book that they are selling, as that is a commercial use.
- 2). With regards to our Erf-rotica example, they CAN tell you to stop using the terms "Erf", "Erfworld" or "Sizemore Rockwell", since those should fall under trademark law, not copyright. They can also make a strong case that anything that seems illegal in any jurisdiction (I dunno, underage love-golems or something could be considered illegal in Australia, or Wanda threatening the life of a world leader) could damage their trademark and they could, theoretically, take someone to court over it. These are extreme cases, but they do allow them to demand fan art be taken down.
- So, I still don't see anything contradictory with the second part of the statement, but bigmacd24 makes a good point about Rob, Jamie and Xin not being able to use fanart for commercial uses without the permission of the artist. --MisterB777 20:23, 16 September 2011 (EDT)