Amazon Wants To Sell Fan Fiction With It, Originator And FanFic Author All Sharing Profits
from the interesting-move dept
Here's an interesting one. Amazon is getting some buzz today for launching Kindle Worlds, a setup by which authors of fan fiction can effectively profit from their works without fear of legal repercussions. Obviously, there's a ton of fan fiction out there, and while most copyright holders don't mind it (with a few notable exceptions) as long as nothing is being sold, Amazon seems to be trying to take it to the next level. They're basically licensing the copyrights from certain popular works (at this point, mostly TV shows, it appears), such that fans can write their own fanfic, have it sold via Amazon (of course) and the profits get split up. For works over 10,000 words, the fanfic author gets a 35% cut. For shorter works, it's 20%.There may be some concerns about this. The "ownership" of the new work belongs to Amazon, as you're basically signing a publishing agreement with Amazon, who then controls the work. Given the situation, that might not be that much of an issue for most fanfiction authors, but some may be concerned (for example, imagine if this had happened with 50 Shades of Grey, which originated as Twilight fanfic, before becoming a monstrosity of its own). Also, there's no guarantee that Amazon will agree to sell the work, but it claims it will publish "as many as possible." It basically sounds like they reserve the right to reject ridiculously bad works.
In some ways, though in very different circumstances, this reminds me of some of the cooler aspects of YouTube's ContentID program, in that it sets up a way for people to reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law, but which most people realize isn't what copyright law should be destroying. Once again, if you just make it so that innovation can occur, people quite frequently figure out business models that build on what maximalists consider "piracy" if they give it time and let the business models shake out.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, ebooks, fan fiction, licensing, shared profits
Companies: amazon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Facebook
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Odd
Not a lot of innovation here. Amazon is paying for the rights to use the characters, and then turning around and taking ownership of the resulting works. Essentially, they are just middle-manning to clear rights to use the characters, at an insanely high cost to the writer.
Yet another success story where a modern company becomes a middleman. Perhaps they are a facilitator for the moment, but that will likely turn to greed if one of the works gets developed into an actual TV episode or movie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So, Amazon are going from distributor to gatekeeper with the same tricks of not giving the creator of the work the majority of profits from sales while keeping control of the work for themselves?
How is this different to traditional publishers?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is it just me, or was that title unnecessarily hard to parse?
Might just be my bad English, though (not my first language).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
But my sense is that significant part of what makes it fun is the lack or restrictions and the ability to share it widely. So, I personally just don't see how there would be any market for paid-for fan-fiction, regardless of price. And if the originator thinks this will give them more control, they should think again. This isn't going to stop fans from writing fan-fiction and sharing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It still worries me that it's very much a gatekeeper move.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Odd
Well, if you ignore all the innovation, of course there's none. Name one other service doing this for authors at the moment.
"Yet another success story where a modern company becomes a middleman."
As opposed to who? Publishers? Retailers? Half the people you try to defend are also middlemen. Being a middleman is essentially what Amazon do - and they're successful because they're very good at it.
"will likely turn to greed if one of the works gets developed into an actual TV episode or movie"
Because no book is ever successful otherwise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
as for if there would be a market, there might actually be one- some fanfiction is arguably just as good as original works, with a couple arguably reaching the level of basically being original works. would I pay for fanfiction? if it was by an author I knew was sufficiently good. (however, there is a LOT of fanfiction that wouldn't be worth it.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'd also say that this setup could be due to licensing rather than a deliberate move by Amazon. That is, rather than allow a blanket licence for every author, the rights holders are only willing to grant permission to a book solely owned and published by Amazon Publishing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Been done before.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just like a book deal, but worse
Moreover, and perhaps more worrisome, I can easily see the 'the only fair use is paid use' lot using this to attack derivative works where the character's/settings aren't licensed, by insisting that now a system is in place where you can pay to use the characters and settings in a derivative work, that means you have to do so, otherwise you're 'stealing from the original writer(s)'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Odd
Amazon isn't doing anyone any favours, save, perhaps, minimizing the risk of a lawsuit.
Amazon's "service" would be redundant if there were clear exceptions for derivative works in copyright.
Alas, there aren't, so we must continue to pretend that art and science must be created in a vacuum to be of any value.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
So, rather than "pure" fan fiction, you'll get something that's more like a standard authorised novel. That is, you'll probably get something approaching a novel based on the universe you'd buy in the shops anyway, with the advantage of ideas coming from random authors rather than pre-approved commissioned authors who may or may not have any passion for the original material. It may also be more likely for a current show to take the direction suggested by fan fiction if it's officially licensed and published - giving fans a way to direct the show in the way they prefer.
So, if the quality of the paid work is higher, or even leads to new material in the canonical world of the original then it's definitely better than the free stuff. If not, well, there's nothing that can stop true fans from writing and sharing what they wish.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Just like a book deal, but worse
Not really. It's better than the offer they currently have (zero income, and if you try you'll probably be shut down and/or sued). Writers always have the option of altering the story to remove references to other works if they wish to publish without this protection for higher cuts. True, the cut could be higher, but we don't know how much of that 65% is being demanded by the copyright holders or how much behind the scenes work is actually involved to guarantee compliance (all work done on the author's behalf for no up front charge).
I agree with your second point, but what's the alternative, really? Without this move, fan fic languishes in an area where the author can't profit, and any attempt to shut down freebies is bound to backfire on the copyright holders in some way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Odd
And then they can have their own team of authors write anything they want utilizing those characters. They could theoretically spin the entire control of that specific universe.
They get the rights to use X-Files characters. They publish fanfics. Two months later they drop out 50 full sized X-Files novels. Profit (provided X-Files are still relevant, but replace with, uhhh, anything else).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Another monopoly?
While existing copyright holders "don't mind [free fan fiction] (with a few notable exceptions) as long as nothing is being sold" I suspect Amazon will.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Odd
As usual, ass with no brain, you're wrong.
The writers are writing the stories simnply for the love of the series/movie, without thought of profit (as hard as it is for a copyright maximalist like you to believe).
Amazon has simply come up with a way for the studios and writers to make money!
"Perhaps they are a facilitator for the moment, but that will likely turn to greed if one of the works gets developed into an actual TV episode or movie."
The licensors (tv/movie studios) control the rights, so even if one of these fanfic stories prove good enough to adapt into an episode or film, the studio, not Amazon makes the money on it.
Amazon only makes money on copies of the stories sold through it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
Quite frankly, a good 3/4 of Star Trek novels are just fanfic with the "naughty bits" expunged.
Yet they sell.
(Star Wars has a better track record of using profesional authors and maintaining continuity.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Odd
Your argument is invalid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Just like a book deal, but worse
If it was instead a license or something similar, where Amazon was legally allowed to act as seller, but the author still retained all other rights over the story, I wouldn't consider that too bad of a deal, it's just as-is writers would basically be handing over the rights to their works for nothing more than the potential of profit in the future.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
Star Wars (unlike Star Trek) kept a tighter control on continuity and used already-published authors.
Trek (primarily Pocket Books) used fanfic writers and stated that, except for adaptations of movies & TV episodes, the stories weren't canonical.
Pity since some authors, like comics scribe Peter David, did first-rate material that deserves to be part of the overall Trek Universes (Yes, it's plural).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Odd
You don't think that profit motivation will change all that? All of a sudden you will have writers not really interested in the series will be cuing up to churn out material with the hope of a marginal profit.
Money changes everything.
The licensors (tv/movie studios) control the rights, so even if one of these fanfic stories prove good enough to adapt into an episode or film, the studio, not Amazon makes the money on it.
Incorrect. Amazon would hold the rights to the story, and they could then license it to the studio for development. There is nothing that says Amazon would be the ones making movies or whatnot. Why think so narrowly?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It's not one bit different. But because it's a tech company Masnick thinks it's cool.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Just like a book deal, but worse
I think you are off with your concern of 'the only fair use is paid use'. But, I think where people seek to monetize derivative works (in any manner); that this will be cited.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Odd
"Incorrect. Amazon would hold the rights to the story, and they could then license it to the studio for development. There is nothing that says Amazon would be the ones making movies or whatnot. Why think so narrowly?"
Because I've worked on licensed products since 1981?
Written, illustrated, and occasionaly edited for several comic book companies on licensed series (including Star Trek, X-Files, Jurassic Park, and GhostBusters), the terms are usually that the publisher has to have approval from the licensor on story (and art) content (I could tell you horror stories on that score) and that the licensor has control over reprinting and ancillary rights (including use in other media)
That's why, for example, Dark Horse was able to reprint Marvel's Star Wars comics, since LucasFilm, not Marvel, controlled the rights.
Theoretically, the licensors could, once the contract with Amazon expires, move the project to Barnes & Noble.
Either way, the licensor controls the re-use rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Another monopoly?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
No, boy.
Because it's a case of a copyright owner figuring out a way for both it and the fans (who wouldn't make a cent otherwise) to monitize their work, Masnick thinks it's cool.
And so do I.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Just like a book deal, but worse
However, as I've said elsewhere here, the author ultimately has the choice as to whether to accept this deal, upload for free anywhere or to publish a version with the copyrighted references removed, with the many other methods available. While there's still a choice, I don't see why this is too much of a problem. If an author doesn't like the deal, they don't have to take it - they just won't be able to legally monetise the work they based on copyrighted material while it still references that material.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Odd
All that experience, and no clue!
You don't know the content of the license that Amazon is obtaining. You also still miss the point that Amazon would hold the rights to these stories, which they could then sell to the licensor to be developed into movies or other shows, etc.
You seem to be thinking that Amazon's license would be very limited in scope, similar to someone making toys. I doubt that would be the case, because it would keep them from hitting the financial jackpot. This process looks more like crowdsourcing future TV scripts to me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
Anyhoo, this is LICENSING: "They're basically licensing the copyrights from certain popular works". -- SO LICENSING WORKS, OKAY? Due props plus some cash thrown their way are about all most creators ask.
Just stick to traditional copyright, kids: it's proven for more than a hundred years to work. -- And on the other side, DON'T STEAL, that's been proven wrong for millenia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
Slavery was proven to work for more than two thousand years.
Should we stick to that?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Just like a book deal, but worse
The fact that fair use doesn't even remotely require payment, and in fact is directly contradictory of the idea behind fair use, is apparently beyond those that make that argument, but that doesn't stop them from doing so.
Probably the most obvious claim of 'no fair use that isn't paid use':
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130110/01515121624/lionsgate-censors-remix-video-that-copy right-office-itself-used-as-example-fair-use.shtml#comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
That is uncalled for. I mean, Tim is to literature what Marcus Carab is to music.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Slavery was proven to work for more than two thousand years.
Should we stick to that?
We do, almost. Look at the conditions of those workers who make the clothes you wear, your electronics and most of the products you have in your home. In many cases, particularly in the Third World- their lives are no better than that of the slaves of Colonial America.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Potential Game Changer
[ link to this | view in thread ]
35% Commission
As people have criticized, I agree that I don't like the fact that Amazon is taking over ownership of the work, but in the old days publishers use to file the copyright on published works and tie up novels for 28 years. It's not too much different.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Baaaaaad idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
Fan Fiction is NOT, and CAN NOT be copyright infringement, because there is nothing copied at all.
US: "102 (b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."
Copyright is about the exact form, and not about an "idea" or a "concept".
The use of characters and settings developed by others MIGHT constitute trademark infringement (if named the same), but most literary characters are not even trademarked.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
US: "102 (b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."
Copyright is about the exact form, and not about an "idea" or a "concept".
I agree with you in theory, but the courts have generally ruled otherwise. See: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8887709316369349826&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1& amp;oi=scholarr
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: "reasonably monetize what might be considered infringement under the law"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 35% Commission
I'm guessing, because they aren't printing anything, and won't be paying to edit the material, their overhead will be low enough, not to worry about the costs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Innovation? Try Predation!
I do 100% of the work, and reap only 20 - 35% of the profits? That's insanity. Do Amazon and the franchise owners really deserve 65 - 80% of my profits just for sitting back in their comfortable chairs puffing cigars made out of hundred dollar bills?
The Constitution is supposed to promote the creation of art. So that's why they had to some forms of art illegal, to promote art. Yeaaaaah.
Nice try, Amazon--you're not getting a cent of my money. I'll wait till the Pirate Party gets copyright terms down to 5 years, then sell my own work for 100% of the profits. C ya!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm surprised Amazon is against erotica fan fiction though. Everyone knows that sex sells, and the smut stories usually rank among the most popular in fan fiction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
Anyway, on to the funny part. You think the Pirate Party is going to get copyright lowered to five years? In your lifetime? The Pirate Party is an international joke. A feckless bunch of malcontents, wannabe anarchists and the mentally ill. They're so pitiful in the US that the national party had to be taken over by the Florida state party which says a lot given they only consist of a handful of crackpots and losers. I predict it won't be long before you are begging Amazon to publish your drivel. Just remember 35% of zero is still zero.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
But go ahead, keep laughing. The Pirate Party is merely the tip of a much bigger movement, as you'll figure out eventually. ;)
(And yes, I did mean cigars made out of hundred dollar bills. The cigars are lit with smoldering hopes of dreams of the gullible young writers who gave up all their rights for a pittance.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Do you post your fic on Archiveofourown.org? I both post & read most of my fanfic there for many reasons, but a big one is that there's a drop-down menu on "Download" where you can choose mobi, epub, pdf, or html to download to your ebook rather than reading the fic on the screen. My first thought on discovering the drop-down was, "I'll never have to pay for an overpriced zine again!", and I immediately gave AO3 a nice donation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Is there really a market for paid-for fan fiction?
That said: when printing costs took off in the mid-80s, a fan could find herself paying $30, $40, $50 for a zine with full-color covers, fancy binding, and full-color illustrations. Beauty and the Beast fandom (the TV show with Ron Perlman & Linda Hamilton) was the first to see these very opulent, romantic, and expensive zines published: you'd see full-color zines with fancy raised printing, metallic overlay printing, even a lace-and-crystal embellished zine was sold.
I put out an X-Files zine with a nice B&W cover on heavy stock, acid-free pages, with perfect binding--I charged $20, did not make a profit, and I had to do four printings to supply demand. It wasn't that big of a zine, only about 200 pages. It was considered a well-priced zine at the time, so people were spending more for other zines.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Odd
All that ignorance, and no clue, boy.
"You seem to be thinking that Amazon's license would be very limited in scope..."
Because movie/tv licensors have been doing this for decades, and have the system down pat.
"I doubt that would be the case, because it would keep them (Amazon) from hitting the financial jackpot."
And your first-hand knowledge of the process is...what, exactly?
"This process looks more like crowdsourcing future TV scripts to me."
All the more reason for the licensors to maintain control, son.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
As a writer of fanfiction, i enjoy writing just as much, if not more, than the original authors. Writing stories for people is fun and to receive praise or even criticism from reviews is whats worthwhile. The only thing that would make it better is if you could make money from it. Even at 35%, it is 35% more than we would get anyways, so i find this idea amazing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
You keep waiting for the Pirate Party or "the movement" to come to your rescue. Long before that happens I imagine you'll be living under an overpass eating dog food out of a can.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
a.k.a. a writer. She's saying that she writes for a living, but can't monetise one area of her writing due to copyright.
It's amazing that your zealous defence of the broken copyright system involves attacking people you claim to be protecting. You're actually attacking writers (and - assuming you're the same AC as other similar threads - games developers, musicians and filmmakers among others) who disagree with your obsession with infinite copyright. You're attacking content creators because they don't agree with the way that copyright has been twisted beyond recognition to support the income of those who won't adapt.
Incredible, but at least nobody's going to confuse you with someone with intellectual honesty and a fact-based argument.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Innovation? Try Predation!
[ link to this | view in thread ]