Question from Livejournal

A fellow by the name of Josh (catastrophicj) made a post in the Livejournal
community "feist_fans" saying...

"I did have a question about the notation in the profile of the comm: Mr.
Feist himself has requested that fanfiction not be written? Or just not
posted to public forums? Or not publicly shared at all? I also follow the
Harry Potter series and love that Jo Rowling encourages her readers to write
fanfiction. She even reads some of it and posts comments anonymously. She
finds it all amusing and fun because she gets great insight as to how
readers are interpreting some of the mysteries in her story. Fanfiction
fascinates me, so I'm sad to know that Mr. Feist doesn't have the same
appreciation, but I also just want to get confirmation of what he looks down
on."

And I was wondering what Mr Feist's reasoning is behind the no fan fiction
request?

In article <UEB4e.9507$Fy3.718140@news20.bellglobal.com>, Lone Bard
<barry.k.DeleteThis@sympatico.ca> wrote:

 > A fellow by the name of Josh (catastrophicj) made a post in the Livejournal
 > community "feist_fans" saying...
 >
 > "I did have a question about the notation in the profile of the comm: Mr.
 > Feist himself has requested that fanfiction not be written? Or just not
 > posted to public forums? Or not publicly shared at all? I also follow the
 > Harry Potter series and love that Jo Rowling encourages her readers to write
 > fanfiction. She even reads some of it and posts comments anonymously. She
 > finds it all amusing and fun because she gets great insight as to how
 > readers are interpreting some of the mysteries in her story. Fanfiction
 > fascinates me, so I'm sad to know that Mr. Feist doesn't have the same
 > appreciation, but I also just want to get confirmation of what he looks down
 > on."
 >
 > And I was wondering what Mr Feist's reasoning is behind the no fan fiction
 > request?
 >
 >

It's a complex question, and unless you have a keen appreciation of
intellectual property issues, occasionally difficult to understand.

The first reason is that as the creator of a body of work, I am legally
and morally entitled to control that work in all its aspects, including
what is known in copyright law as "derivative works," which is what fan
written fiction is.

The second reason is quality control. While you might think most
people are smart enough to get that the original author isn't
responsible for what fans write, it often isn't the case. I know
authors who have gotten flaming mail from irate people of "that stuff
you wrote on the internet!" Both from the point of view of quality
and content, I am concerned. Really bad prose is bad enough, but badly
written Pug/Tomas "slash" fiction? I don't think so. I also suspect
if Joanne Rowling read any of the Harry Ron "slash" or the erotic Harry
and Hermione, she might completely change her stance.

The last reason is legal. Copyrights are not like trademarks, i.e. you
can't lose them by not protecting them, but you can, in some cases,
lose certain aspects of control by not defending them, in areas such as
"derivative work." It can create situations where you can win if you
go to court, but the problem is, you have to go to court. Having made
lawyers rich in my divorce, I have no wish to be suing chuckleheads who
don't have enough imagination to go out and create their own worlds.
The case of Chelsea Quinn Yarborough and the case of Marion Zimmer
Bradley both illustrate why, IMHO, it's better to err on the side of
caution regarding control than to be generous. There's an old saying,
"You can't unring a bell."

I hope that sums up my position clearly.

Best, R.E.F.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->