XerXesXu
Virgin' on literate.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2011
- Posts
- 1,351
In that imaginary scenario, it's probable that some would win some of the time, and some would lose. Each case will turn on its own merits. The Court would have to read the Claimant's work and the Defendant's work and decide the Defendant's work is fair use. The OP describes his work in the title thread as derivative. A parody can be derivative. A derivative work can also be transformative, (departure from canon? I see that phrase used a lot in discussions of fan-fic) that is have a different nature and purpose to the original, and thereby be non-infringing.I think a rich author who was willing to take on fanfiction infringers as a matter of principle, knowing it would yield nothing financially, would have an excellent chance of winning. I think most fanfiction is infringement, and in most cases the author would win. They might not get much money out of it, but they probably could win an injunction to remove the infringing stories. The fact that it doesn't happen is not the result of it being a weak case legally; it's because it's not worth it financially to pursue.
We won't be in a position to read both works and make a judgement; I don't know if Laurel would attempt to assess whether the OPs work would have a better than 50/50 chance in SCOTUS, that's not how she makes money. There are a variety of sentiments expressed, sight unseen, about the matter in this thread, and she may share one or other of those sentiments. I imagine that would guide her decision if she was pointed to the original story and asked to decide whether she would host it.
Last edited: