Important!! Re Pern-Related Art
Clayton J. Dreslough
What a time for my news server to keep refusing to post my messages! I
tried to send this before..if it's a repeat, my apologies.
Well, I really blew it this time, folks.
I'm writing to let everyone who may be using any of my Pern inspired art
know that they should remove it from their web pages. I just was notified
by Anne McCaffrey's laywer that I had no right to draw the pictures
(they're derivative works, and therefore in violation of her copyright),
and I certainly had no right to charge for time or materials to do them,
and that anyone who downloads them is contributing to the infringement of
Anne's copyright. He may go after people using the art - not just me. I
don't know.
I am so sorry about this. My non-Pern inspired stuff is still copy ok,
and I'm going to expand my gallery with all new non-Pern dragon stuff.
For your own sakes, please remove any Pern-inspired/related/vaguely similar
art from your sites if you're using it! I think I've reached all of my
commission customers, but if you paid for a piece and haven't gotten a
letter from me, please email me with your RL address. I'm refunding all
commissions.
PnguinTrax
Dee -
I was under the impression that as long as you did not portray any of
Anne's characters, there was no infringement of copyright. Of course, UK
law may differ from US copyright law. After all, most of the pieces on
your site were persona pieces done as private commission. I fail to
understand how this violates the rights, but I'm sure it was better
explained to you. I for one will be sorry to see your work go away, as
I've enjoyed it.
Good luck to you -- hope it gets settled to everyone's benefit.
Barb
<0
(0)
<><>
Wyldhart
Hi,
I didn't see the original post you were replying to, could you re-post
it or mail it to me please?
I'm concerned because it may impact on fandom art, but it may just be
because Dee is a professional graphics artist and has earned commision
from Pern derived art. (anyway, yeah, she hasn't drawn any of the
original characters, as far as I know)
Just a thought.
ays
Kimberly Chapman
"Clayton J. Dreslough" (dra...@ct1.nai.net) writes:
> I'm writing to let everyone who may be using any of my Pern inspired art
> know that they should remove it from their web pages. I just was notified
> by Anne McCaffrey's laywer that I had no right to draw the pictures
> (they're derivative works, and therefore in violation of her copyright),
> and I certainly had no right to charge for time or materials to do them,
Hmmm...I admit I don't know all the details fro mboth sides, but this sort
of this is running rampant on the web. My X-Files page has a link to that
blue ribbon campaign, my Trek page has a link to yet another blue ribbon
campaign (both demanding free speech in the light of Fox and Viacom,
respectively, cracking down on personal webpages celebrating the shows).
Does my books page with it's little tribute to McCaffrey need a blue
ribbon now too?
I really hope that the writer herself isn't on a crusade to destroy fandom
art, because that would just ruin the books for me...knowing that those
words were written by someone who so detests her fans and is so
egomaniacal that they must squelch any fan art. I don't want to think
that, so I'll just hope that this is some dumb lawyer venture, and not Ms.
McCaffrey's own project.
Mind you, there is a difference between fan art and selling unofficial
material, as was done here I guess. I suppose the artist should have
obtained permission first...but it's still kind of sad that we live in a
world where he'd have to.
Hmmmm...this is all very depressing.
Kimberly Chapman, B.J. Hon, B.A.
-------------------------------------------
The only red man I've ever seen had a terrible sunburn.
The only black man I've ever seen had the lights turned off.
The only yellow man I've ever seen is Homer Simpson, and
The only white man I've ever seen is Homer before the animator painted him.
Race is a social construct to facilitate subordination.
We are all different shades of beautiful.
Judy A. Trummer
I don't think that authors are out to try to keep people from enjoying
their writings through creating related art, stories, whatnot.
The author *does* have a copyright, though, so naturally they don't
want people making money off their ideas at their expense.
They can't control the quality of work done by unauthorized people,
so it's misleading to let them sell it as "<insert copyrighted book/
show/world here>" products.
That said, I think Anne is pretty cool with letting Pern fans do their
own thing. Mercedes Lackey doesn't allow Valdemar-based MU*s, so
Pern fans *do* have blessings to count in that Anne does allow suchthings
(with minor alterations).
It might not be as much fun to have restrictions on what you can do
with other people's ideas, but ultimately it's for legalese protection-
type stuff; if you came up with some wildly popular fantasy concept,
you'd probably want restrictions on who can do what with it too.
And *nobody* can prevent you from creating whatever you want for your
own free-of-charge use, as far as I know.. so grab your cray-pa's and
go nuts :)
Keith Miller
In article <5k9j9g$kr0$1...@violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk>,
ph...@mail.tilehill.ac.uk (Phillip Harvey-Smith) wrote:
>In article <3366B1...@lovergirl.com>, Wyldhart <wyld...@lovergirl.com>
> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>I didn't see the original post you were replying to, could you re-post
>>it or mail it to me please?
>>I'm concerned because it may impact on fandom art, but it may just be
>>because Dee is a professional graphics artist and has earned commision
>>from Pern derived art. (anyway, yeah, she hasn't drawn any of the
>>original characters, as far as I know)
>>Just a thought.
>>ays
>
>damn angry, it seems to me that Anne (or her lawyers) are saying to the
>world you can read what it says in the books, imagine it, but not share
>your version of it with anyone else ! It always seems to me so selfish and
>money grabbing, as if she hasn't made enough out of all our collections
>of books/related material. Actually one of the primary reasons that I have
>gone off buying Anne's work is this, sorry she's a great writer, but her
>attitude leaves a lot to be desired, IMHO.
>
>Phill.
>
>
>
>|Phillip Harvey-Smith, computer technician, Tile Hill College, Coventry.|
>|Email: ph...@sol.tilehill.ac.uk, Phone (01203) 694200 Ext 245. |
>|=======================================================================|
>|Rising and falling at force ten, we twist the world and ride the wind. |
I agree with you, Dee drew me a picture of my Dragon, and his rider. And now I
am forced to take it off my webpage.
Anne also forced a Email RPG that I was a member of to close. Then anne turned
around and said she didn't sell the movie rights after all.
I doubt we will ever see a pern movie!
Maybe we should start a petition?
M'lar rider of Bronze Cryalith
Homepage at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/7085/
(type it in just like that or it won't work)
Phillip Harvey-Smith
j...@mich.com
On 1997-04-29 pngui...@aol.com(PnguinTrax) said:
>Newsgroups: alt.fan.pern
>Dee -
>I was under the impression that as long as you did not portray any
>of Anne's characters, there was no infringement of copyright.
Yes copyright law varies from place to place. However one of Anne's
characters is a ball of dirt called PERN, Another is Fire Breathing, Flame
Fighting, Go-Betweening, Flying, Human transporting, Dragons.
How you going to have a PERN MUSH or write a PERN story with out any of the
above? Simple... You can't. Thus any story or game based on PERN either
receives her offical blessing or violates her copyright. IT's that simple
John F Davis, WA8YXM, In Delightful Detroit, aa...@detroit.freenet.org
"Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business"
C:\BELFRY: Where my bat files are kept /\oo/\ !!
Net-Tamer V 1.08X - Registered
Kimberly Chapman
Judy A. Trummer (tru...@omnifest.uwm.edu) writes:
> I don't think that authors are out to try to keep people from enjoying
> their writings through creating related art, stories, whatnot.
Hopefully not most of them...it's the lawyers that are trying that. :)
> The author *does* have a copyright, though, so naturally they don't
> want people making money off their ideas at their expense.
You're absolutely right...people shouldn't make money off of other
people's stuff without permission. It's just that these days webpages are
being persectued by lawyers merely for displaying images. I don't know if
anyone's noticed, but over the past week or so every single Simpsons page
I know of that had sound files on it has either been shut down completely
or forced to remove the sound clips. Now really...I understand copyright
and all that, but how does celebrating a show you love by repeating
quoates ad naseum and allowing other people to hear them too (which they
could off their own tv sets) hurt the creators? It's not like these
websites make money from the sounds...it's simply fans enjoying the bits
together.
And yet Fox has had it's lawyers crack down on X-Files and Simpsons pages.
I just hope that now that I finally got my webpages up and running, which
have Startrek, X-Files, SImpsons and Pern stuff on them, some lawyers
aren't gonig to order me to cease and desist...probably won't, since all I
have is a few images up. I'm small fish, I guess.
It just seems to me that it's not worth it to go after websites that don't
make money anyway, and all you do is make your fans resent you.
Not that that is what happened in this case...clearly he was making money
from the images and that's not right. But his warning did include people
who have other Pern images, and that's what really concerns me, and
saddens me as well.
> They can't control the quality of work done by unauthorized people,
> so it's misleading to let them sell it as "<insert copyrighted book/
> show/world here>" products.
More often than not, it's not that they're concerned with quality control
but rather royalty control...the creators and lawyers don't make money off
of unlicensed material.
> Pern fans *do* have blessings to count in that Anne does allow suchthings
> (with minor alterations).
Yup...but really, Anne has the blessing to count that her works are so
highly regarded. I'm an author as well, and honestly, if anyone ever
started a MUSH or newsgroup or anything like that based on my works, I'd
be really really flattered...even if they were taking some creative
license with what I'd written. As long as the basic emotion and purpose
of the stories remained untainted, I would care less if people made up
their own charcaters and pretneded to act them out. I'd be flattereed,
quite honestly. And If I ever get published, you can hold me to that. :)
> type stuff; if you came up with some wildly popular fantasy concept,
> you'd probably want restrictions on who can do what with it too.
Nah...not really. Like I said, as long as the people weren't destroying
the basic intention of the stories, I'd have no problem. In fact, I'd say
it's a goal of mine to have works so popular that people want to imagine
themselves into the stories, as I do for TV shows and books I love.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and if anythign I wrote ever
became a subject for someone else's website, a mush, a newsgroup, a
discussion group, whatever...I'd be delighted.
Kimberly Chapman - aka KaCee of KaCee's place (alt.pub.kacees)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Drop on by to KaCee's cyberbar...where the waitresses are
fully dressed and respectable, the drinks are free and always
served with a smile and a hug! *hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Michael Moore
Kimberly Chapman wrote:
>
> Judy A. Trummer (tru...@omnifest.uwm.edu) writes:
> > I don't think that authors are out to try to keep people from enjoying
> > their writings through creating related art, stories, whatnot.
>
> Hopefully not most of them...it's the lawyers that are trying that. :)
>
> > The author *does* have a copyright, though, so naturally they don't
> > want people making money off their ideas at their expense.
>
The author does not necessarily retain copyrights to their works.
Quote often the author gives up those rights to the publishing
company.
>
> It just seems to me that it's not worth it to go after websites that don't
> make money anyway, and all you do is make your fans resent you.
And quash what is basically free advertising.
>
> Not that that is what happened in this case...clearly he was making money
> from the images and that's not right. But his warning did include people
> who have other Pern images, and that's what really concerns me, and
> saddens me as well.
I think it was a 'she'. Now, just out of curiosity, could her artwork
be
considered derivative based solely on the content of the pictures? In
other wods, if her pages didn't have the word "Pern" or "Anne McCaffrey"
on them anywhere, could Anne's lawyers go after the artwork based on the
fact that the dragons portrayed therein looked like Pern dragons are
described?
The answer to that has lots of implications. Also note that copyright
law in the U.S. also has 'fair and acceptable use' clauses.
>
> > They can't control the quality of work done by unauthorized people,
> > so it's misleading to let them sell it as "<insert copyrighted book/
> > show/world here>" products.
>
> More often than not, it's not that they're concerned with quality control
> but rather royalty control...the creators and lawyers don't make money off
> of unlicensed material.
I get the feeling that they (being the lawyers, the publishers, and
maybe
the authors) can't see beyond direct profit. They seem to simply ignore
the advertising value of a M* or Web publishing of fan artwork. They
also
seem to find it hard to believe that people would actually put time and
effort and money into running a M* or creating fan artwork and NOT
CHARGE
for access to it.
>
> > Pern fans *do* have blessings to count in that Anne does allow suchthings
> > (with minor alterations).
>
> Yup...but really, Anne has the blessing to count that her works are so
> highly regarded. I'm an author as well, and honestly, if anyone ever
> started a MUSH or newsgroup or anything like that based on my works, I'd
> be really really flattered...even if they were taking some creative
> license with what I'd written. As long as the basic emotion and purpose
> of the stories remained untainted, I would care less if people made up
> their own charcaters and pretneded to act them out. I'd be flattereed,
> quite honestly. And If I ever get published, you can hold me to that. :)
FWIW, while it seems many have had bad experiences relating to copyright
infringement with regards to M*s, I believe Anne McCaffrey's position on
this to be just the way you described it. She has her requirements that
must be met if you want to run a Pern M*, RL roleplaying club, or any
similar "fan club"...you have to remain true to Pern as she wrote it.
She has to know where to find you. You can't make money off it without
special arrangements. You have to prominently make copyright notices
available.
David York
I just got this email from Dee
Hi all.
Well, after spending a day consulting with people who have intellectual
property lawyers at their disposal, as well as with a book on copyright,
I've found that Mr. Katz was making claims to rights that he didn't
actually
have. Basically, he was bullying me to get me to do what he wanted,
regardless of whether or not he had grounds to do so. To clarify: It is
permissable to draw pictures when inspired by written works. They are
not
derivative works. And, it's also fine to cite an artist's inspiration.
Long
story short - the only way for Mr. Katz and myself to settle this would
be
in court, but by the simple fact of economics, I can't afford to defend
myself.
Because of this, I'm leaving Pern fandom. I'm tired of living in fear
while
trying to give other people the opportunity to create something
beautiful.
I love the books...I always will, but I can't put any more blood, sweat
or
tears into the clubs, the genre, or anything that might profit Mr. Katz
or
his law firm while causing the ruin of my fledgeling family and
business.
I do not hold Ms. McCaffrey responsible for any of this, and I will
continue
to buy and enjoy her books. I suspect that her lawyer is simply
overzealous,
and is representing her poorly in this matter.
The fanzine has:
3 subscribers
2 picture submissions
1 story
It wasn't going to make this publication go-round either. Despite the
germ
of a good idea, it just doesn't seem to be appealing to fans. I've been
advertising for 6 months at least, with very little interest generated.
The MUSH site has maybe 9-10 players, as it was just starting up.
If someone on this list would like to take over the club, I am fine with
that. I will transfer all my subscriber files, text stories, guidebooks,
picture files by other artists to whoever is the new editor. The HTML
for
the web pages (but none of the art I made) is also welcome to be used by
whomever takes over. (Using the art may get you in trouble with Mr.
Katz.)
Anne McCaffrey's email is available on her web page at
http://members.aol.com/dragnhld
She is the one who must formally transfer the club rights to a new
individual.
However, the MUSH berth on purple is mine and will remain mine (I
accepted
it as a payback for an art contract that was never fufilled), and all
Pern
references will be wiped off it. The current database will be destroyed,
and
replaced with a fresh one. It will no longer be a PernMUSH. I make this
announcement with apologies to Kate and Kuyel, who had just come on
board
and were excited to start groups on the system, but Delphi, TinyTim and
TinyCWRU mushes are still open for those who want to build at their own
risk.
This list will be dispanded and shut down, and the highpass web site
will be
removed from http://purple.cow.net/~highpass.
You all are welcome to reconnoiter and rebuild the club with your own
resources.
I'm sorry it has to be this way, but I just can't do this anymore. I
will
miss fandom dearly, and I will forever be a fan of Ms. McCaffrey's books
-
just not her lawyer.
-Dee Dreslough
dra...@ct1.nai.net
=============[dra...@ct1.nai.net]===================
Gallery: http://purple.cow.net/~kirra/gal-home.html
Infinite Monkey Systems: http://www.imonkey.com
====================================================
and this is just real stupid! So we have 4 choices
1) Fight the lawyers
2) Tell Ms. McCaffrey about this, and hope she'll do something
3) Find someone to take over High Pass
4) Do absolutly nothing and let a Fanzine, a Newsletter, a MUSH, and
some great artwork be lost to everyone who was using them.
We could also start a "Blue Ribbon" thingie for Pern related stuff.
David York
--
I am that merry wanderer of the Earth.
Puck, A Midsummernight's Dream, Act 2 Scene I
Remove @don'tspam to reply
Clayton J. Dreslough
Just to clarify:
This warning only applies to my art, which was being distributed from a web
page _not_ associated with a club or mush. It was meant as a free
art-share page for fans, but also to promote my abilities as a comission
artist. (it's that 'But also' part that's gotten me in hot water.)
Clubs' art to my knowledge is not affected by any of this.
This only applies to art copied from or made through a commission
contracted from the information listed on
http://purple.cow.net/~kirra/drt.htm or
http://purple.cow.net/~kirra/dr.htm, from the gallery titled 'Dragon Rider
Art (Tables Version)' or 'Dragon Rider Art'.
If it's by me, I'm asking you now (for your own safety) to pull it.
-Dee Dreslough
dra...@ct1.nai.net
Jason Hatter
Michael Moore (mi...@datasys.net) wrote:
: The answer to that has lots of implications. Also note that copyright
: law in the U.S. also has 'fair and acceptable use' clauses.
Making a profit on someone elses work is NOT a "fair and acceptable use".
AFAIK, since IANAL.
--
Jason
http://www.cris.com/~towonder/
RPG stuff at http://www.cris.com/~towonder/rpg.html
featuring Sailor Moon V at http://www.cris.com/~towonder/fanfic.html
Perhaps a Princess...
In article <5k7mal$i...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>,
Kimberly Chapman <aq...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
@I really hope that the writer herself isn't on a crusade to destroy fandom
@art, because that would just ruin the books for me...knowing that those
@words were written by someone who so detests her fans and is so
@egomaniacal that they must squelch any fan art. I don't want to think
@that, so I'll just hope that this is some dumb lawyer venture, and not Ms.
@McCaffrey's own project.
Either Anne, or lawyers out of control, ya mean? It does not seem to ME that
you can copyright a concept. Are the lawyers going to go after every
picture of a rounded dragon? That is going too far. I understand that
fighting it is expensive though -- and I bet this is what lawyers hope.
But it makes ME steamed!
@Mind you, there is a difference between fan art and selling unofficial
@material, as was done here I guess. I suppose the artist should have
But why shouldn't she sell it? She created it. It is NOT Anne's characters,
Anne's storyline, or even her Weyrs. They are characters created by
others -- complete with individual descriptions. I don't see how Anne
can claim any sort of copyright infringement given this.
You see fan art at conventions, BEING SOLD, doing the exact same thing.
However, I DO fear that Anne's out to shut down fan sites on the web.
Randall Stukey's EXCELLENT DragonWeb site seems to be suddenly gone from
both its main site, and its mirror. My ex-Weyrwoman did not explain
why in her letter. But I went out on a quick check -- his personal pages still
exist (no explanation of why certain links don't work now) The Fandom Domain
pages still exist. But NONE of the Pern/DragonWeb pages are out there.
@Hmmmm...this is all very depressing.
Tell me about it :(
===================================================
Sarah sa...@eskimo.com
===================================================
My picture of the world is of masses of people extending gifts to other
people, doing favors -- but nobody keeping score. -- Dr. Whitsett
===================================================
Karena Kliefoth
On 1 May 1997 19:44:45 -0500, tru...@omnifest.uwm.edu (Judy A.
Trummer) wrote:
(snippage)
>I really don't like the more recent covers - I wonder why, with the general
>success of her books, they seemingly couldn't afford(?) to keep Whelan
>drawing 'em? Or has he stopped doing dragons?
>Judy
Whelan's taken a break from doing book covers for a year or so while
he works on his own private, personal art. I've certainly liked his
renditions of Pern the best,from what I've seen. I hope he is able to
do the cover for the Masterharper book when/if that ever comes out.
-Karena
Jazmyn Concolor
In article <5k9j9g$kr0$1...@violet.csv.warwick.ac.uk>,
Phillip Harvey-Smith <ph...@mail.tilehill.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <3366B1...@lovergirl.com>, Wyldhart <wyld...@lovergirl.com> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>I didn't see the original post you were replying to, could you re-post
>>it or mail it to me please?
>>I'm concerned because it may impact on fandom art, but it may just be
>>because Dee is a professional graphics artist and has earned commision
>>from Pern derived art. (anyway, yeah, she hasn't drawn any of the
>>original characters, as far as I know)
>>Just a thought.
>>ays
>
>Every time I read one of these things about Anne's Copyright, it makes me
>damn angry, it seems to me that Anne (or her lawyers) are saying to the
>world you can read what it says in the books, imagine it, but not share
>your version of it with anyone else ! It always seems to me so selfish and
>money grabbing, as if she hasn't made enough out of all our collections
>of books/related material. Actually one of the primary reasons that I have
>gone off buying Anne's work is this, sorry she's a great writer, but her
>attitude leaves a lot to be desired, IMHO.
>
>Phill.
>
>
This is rather odd since Anne herself was never bothered by the art
before..Unless someone was mass selling prints, I guess. Original one of a
kind pieces were always okay to be sold at the cons or comissioned..
This might be just Anne's lawyer..Or worse yet, the lawyer of the studio
that currently holds the movie rights..Its not just web sites going down
from what I gathered, other Pern fan activities who are operating without
Anne's permission are under fire. Mosty those online though since offline
clubs have been pretty much left alone as long as they follow a few basic
rules.
I have quite a bit of Pern art from MANY artists..Mostly originals or
hand colored prints/limited edition prints (sold with Anne's permission..ie.
M. Whelan, etc.)
I hope to aquire more, so I hope its only the mass produced stuff being
affected and not the one-of-a-kind SF con/fan club type stuff..
Clayton J. Dreslough
A Followup:
#1. I have permission from Anne McCaffrey to post Mr. Katz's letter to me,
so I'll post that at the end.
#2. Since I have quickly and completely cooperated with her requests, "need
have no further worries. I am personally very sorry to have had to limit
your project but it had to be done." exerpt from a letter from Anne
McCaffrey that has made me feel a /lot/ better about the whole situation.
Basically, long story short, she had Mr. Katz come down like a ton of
bricks on me because she had to - "You are obviously very aware of the
popularity of the World of Pern (r) and the whole nine yards and I can't
blame you for wanting to help artists. But I also have far too many
totally unscrupulous people on the web taking quick advantage who know and
care little about Pern." and it's upset her that she's had to take this
action.
It was wrong of me to associate Pern with my art without permission or
licensing.
I deserved to get hit with the rolled up newspaper, regardless of the
niggling legalities of fair use and gray areas.
Anne McCaffrey continues to amaze me with how gentle and undestanding she
is even when she is the wronged party. She is a most gracious person, and
I can't express how sorry I am to have put her in any distress.
So, here's the letter from Mr. Katz. I'm still leaving fandom to strike out
on a bold new Public Domain World project, and I will not do Dragonriders
of Pern inspired art ever again as a pennance. I think this has resolved
itself well, all things considered, and I still feel, and always will feel
very warmly toward Ms. McCaffrey and her wonderful books.
(I'm going to post this at the URL that used to house my Dragon Rider
Gallery as well.)
Please note that my page was NOT a club page - it was a free art download
site, but also an advertisement for my commission services. Clubs with
permission are fine, and should operate as they have been, within the
bounds of the rules of Pern clubs...just don't charge money for art
services relating to fandom, and only use her trademarked terms on pages
where it is appropriate.
-Dee
dra...@ct1.nai.net
=====================================================
From: j...@jpp.com
Dear Ms. Dreslough:
I represent Anne McCaffrey and recently had occasion to review your
web page entitled "Dee's Dragonrider Art Gallery (Tables Version)".
You have made clear in the text of your materials that the artwork
appearing at this web site is inspired by and based upon Ms.
McCaffrey's Dragonriders of Pernr series and you appear to understand
fully the copyright and trademark rights reserved to Anne McCaffrey,
by your reference to her works. You also seem to understand that you
may be violating her rights by your statement found on your web site
that "if mentioning my inspiration is something that can get me sued
. . oh well. If I've goofed, let me know where to fix and I will.*sigh*"
Indeed, you are seriously violating Anne McCaffrey's trademark and
copyright rights by your efforts to copy her work (creating
"derivative" works) and marketing them over the Internet. As you
indicate, you have not received permission from Anne McCaffrey to do
so and the mere fact that you disclaim such endorsement does not
allow you to violate her rights. Moreover, by both displaying the
artwork and permitting it to be downloaded over the Internet, you
not only violate Ms. McCaffrey's rights, but you contribute to others
violating her rights which is, in itself, a contributory copyright
and trademark violation. We have, for example, confirmed that your
pictures are being used by others. For example, David York gives you
credit for graphics appearing on his Pern page.
By this letter, I am advising you that you must remove your art
gallery from the Internet immediately. Should you fail to cease and
desist from these copyright and trademark infringements, we will have
no alternative but to proceed with a legal action for an injunction
and damages, as allowable under the copyright and trademark laws.
Anne McCaffrey has not hesitated to prosecute copyright and
trademark violations against others who have violated her rights over
the Internet. On her behalf, we have obtained substantial monetary
judgments, in those cases in the middle and low six figures, for such
violations. Ms. McCaffrey takes these copyright and trademark
violations seriously.
Please promptly confirm by return letter that you are complying with
this demand. If you fail to do so, we will be required to take
further action.
Very truly yours,
Jay A. Katz
cc: Anne McCaffrey (via facsimile)
Pen
<snip>
> When Anne dies (we all die eventually), I assume the rights to her copy
> righted characters and stories will go to her estate, ie relatives or
> some legal firm which will collect royalties and such.
>
> When do things like that lose their copyright protected status?
> Do they ever?
<snip>
**********************************************************************
I am not looking forward to the day Anne dies-- I hope it's in the far
and distant future. Without her, Pern, and Earth, will not be the same.
On a more Callous note,:-( I believe copyright status dies 50 years
after the death of the author. Anne has passed copyright rights to one
of her sons (I forget which--Kevin?) so he will be able to make
decissions and even write about Pern after her death. What a wonderful
gift. I'm not sure if giving him the copyright extends that 50 years or
not...
__Pen
Laralyn McWilliams
> On a more Callous note,:-( I believe copyright status dies 50 years
> after the death of the author. Anne has passed copyright rights to one
> of her sons (I forget which--Kevin?) so he will be able to make
> decissions and even write about Pern after her death. What a wonderful
> gift. I'm not sure if giving him the copyright extends that 50 years or
> not...
I don't know exactly how the time limit works, but I do know that there
are two separate
rights here: the books themselves, and the characters and world system,
etc. Her
son can get trademarks and copyrights on the characters and world that
are not
subject to the year limit. I know that for Conan from R.E. Howard,
Howard's
copyrights to the texts have expired (as have Tolkien's). But you can't
write about Conan,
because Universal and Marvel (among others) still have trademark and
copyright
on the character and world.
MH Clark
In article <01bc54b8$1ebc3de0$0201010a@dee>, "Clayton J. Dreslough"
<dra...@ct1.nai.net> wrote:
>
> Well, I really blew it this time, folks.
>
> I'm writing to let everyone who may be using any of my Pern inspired art
> know that they should remove it from their web pages. I just was notified
> by Anne McCaffrey's laywer that I had no right to draw the pictures
> (they're derivative works, and therefore in violation of her copyright),
> and I certainly had no right to charge for time or materials to do them,
> and that anyone who downloads them is contributing to the infringement of
> Anne's copyright. He may go after people using the art - not just me. I
> don't know.
Sorry to hear about that.
It is tough for the artist. You find inspiration in something and even
though you don't have the rights to it, you create your art anyway. Then
people start offering you $ for what you've done. Next thing you know
the offices of Leechum, Suckem and Grab are calling and threatening to sue
your grandchildren four times removed, and remove your gold fillings, if
you don't cease and desist. 8{).
I'm sure your talents can survive though. Life lessons like this can be
a real #&$@#!! Good luck.
On a semi-related topic.
I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV. 8{).
When Anne dies (we all die eventually), I assume the rights to her copy
righted characters and stories will go to her estate, ie relatives or
some legal firm which will collect royalties and such.
When do things like that lose their copyright protected status?
Do they ever?
It seems there has to be some limit or someone would be demanding
royalties for The Bible, Plato, Homer and Shakespeare.
Can I write stories from Heinlein's worlds?
Can I draw pictures and sell them that depict the characters from
Frank L. Baum's Wizard of OZ.
I assume Tolkien's son tries to protect the Middle Earth characters, but
can he really stop someone from drawing/selling pics of Bilbo, Gandalf?
Just wondering.
Is there a Barrister in the house?
Does England have significantly different copyright laws from the
U.S.?
It must be tough on authors like AM to deal with countries like
Saudi Arabia which pretty much don't admit their is such a thing
as copyright. When I was last there you could buy current Fiction
books in PB, produced by local printers, that were total copies of
the actual copyrighted books.
.
And just to be clear:
I support AM's right to protect her copyrighted material.
I won't pay for anything I know is in violation of AM's
copyright.
On the other hand, my skewed morals don't bother me too much when
I find free copyright violation art on the net and I infringe on
her rights by downloading it. (I will probably burn for this 8{( )
--
Sung to the tune Danny Boy, by Deadpool. see Deadpool #3.
Oh, Tommy Boy! Your lungs, your lungs are filling --
With blood and phlegm and other nasty things --
Oh, Tommy Boy, Your niece, your niece is buggin' WHURFF!
Laralyn McWilliams
Just a quick legal note. You are /obligated/ under most copyright
statutes to vigorously defend your copyrights from unauthorized use by
others. I'm sure that's why Anne McCaffrey and/or her attorneys only
allowed Pern MUSHes and clubs that she approved and that operated under
her rules--that way she's determining the use of the information. You
can /lose/ copyright status if you don't stop others from using
materials from it.
Here's an example. I make an adhesive bandage strip I call Bandaids.
Cool. Now some other folks make similar products and call them other
trade names like Curad. That's fine. Imitation is flattery. People like
my bandages so much they start calling /all/ such bandages 'bandaids.'
Flattery? Nope. If I don't step on that, I'll lose the trademark
'Bandaid.' Note the new singing Bandaid commercials: where they used to
say, "I am stuck on Bandaid, 'cause Bandaid's stuck on me," now the kids
sing, "I am stuck on Bandaid brand, 'cause Bandaid brand's stuck on me."
That's defense of trademark.
Defense of copyright is similar. You have to be aggressive, or legally
you LOSE it. That means if Anne allows others to create images, clubs,
etc. in ways she doesn't acknowledge or control, someone could create
'Porn Clubs of Pern," and she would lose a case to get the product
removed from the market because her rights would have been 'watered
down' by the other, more acceptable but unapproved uses.
It's nasty, and creates a combative environment. But unfortunately,
that's how the laws are written.
I hope this helps clarify things. :)
Laralyn, a.k.a Merien at Ista Weyr/PernMUSH
http://www.gloatinggoat.com/ista
Jason Hatter
MH Clark (tsc...@ccgate.hac.com) wrote:
: When do things like that lose their copyright protected status?
: Do they ever?
last I heard, original creators life+75 years, but that may have changed.
: I assume Tolkien's son tries to protect the Middle Earth characters, but
: can he really stop someone from drawing/selling pics of Bilbo, Gandalf?
Yes.
Jason Hatter
Laralyn McWilliams (the...@gloatinggoat.com) wrote:
: Just a quick legal note. You are /obligated/ under most copyright
: statutes to vigorously defend your copyrights from unauthorized use by
: others. I'm sure that's why Anne McCaffrey and/or her attorneys only
: allowed Pern MUSHes and clubs that she approved and that operated under
: her rules--that way she's determining the use of the information. You
: can /lose/ copyright status if you don't stop others from using
: materials from it.
<snip example>
No. You can NOT lose copyright status. You're getting copyrights
confused with TRADEMARKS, which you CAN lose by failure to enforce your
legal rights. To the best of my knowledge (and I am not a lawyer, but
after the last year in rec.games.frp.dnd, I do know that the previous part
is true), the only thing that failure to enforce copyright affects it the
amount of money you can win in a lawsuit (which, if what I've heard is
true, is also based on how much the person being sued made).
Check the US copyright information, on one of the government web sites
(should be able to find it in a search). I'd post the URL, but I don't
have one handy. If I can get one, I'll post it...
Actpccpek
In article <5k9m1f$sv6$1...@news3.microserve.net>, crya...@geocities.com
(Keith Miller) writes:
>>Every time I read one of these things about Anne's Copyright, it makes
me
>>damn angry, it seems to me that Anne (or her lawyers) are saying to the
>>world you can read what it says in the books, imagine it, but not share
>>your version of it with anyone else ! It always seems to me so selfish
and
>>money grabbing, as if she hasn't made enough out of all our collections
>>of books/related material.
Harlan Ellison addresses the issue of whether writers have the right to
request that works unpublished or unfinished at their death be destroyed
in a recent tv commentary. If you're familiar with Ellison at all, you
know he holds strong opinions. You can catch this editorial on the Sci Fi
channel and if your local cable company doesn't carry it, I think it's
reprinted on their web site at www.scifi.com
It may make us angry but Pern belongs to Anne. We are just fortunate that
she has invited us to HER vision of it and her stories.
All right everybody-I've got my protective body suit on-flame away.
BK
Kimberly Chapman
Actpccpek (actp...@aol.com) writes:
> All right everybody-I've got my protective body suit on-flame away.
Anyone who flames you for expressing an opinion, especially one founded in
relevent facts, even if it's something they vehemently disagree with, is a
pathetic, immature twit who would be best ignored.
Kimberly Chapman - aka KaCee of KaCee's place (alt.pub.kacees)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Drop on by to KaCee's cyberbar...where the waitresses are
fully dressed and respectable, the drinks are free and always
served with a smile and a hug! *hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*hug*
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Pub's Website: http://outer-net.com/kacee/pub/pub.htm
Sam
Actpccpek wrote:
>
> It may make us angry but Pern belongs to Anne. We are just fortunate that
> she has invited us to HER vision of it and her stories.
>
>
O.k, can someone explain to me the difference between Pern clubs, which
roleplay in Anne`s pern but are careful to never use Anne`s characters,
and Dee`s artwork, which uses the *basic* pern dragon and rider but is
careful not to use Anne`s characters. Surely they fall within the same
boundaries? I`m not attacking Anne here `cos she may be right or have an
overzealous lawyer, but I think maybe she/her lawyer are going a bit over
the top on this.
Sam
Nat
Judy A. Trummer <tru...@omnifest.uwm.edu> wrote in article
<5kbddt$n...@omnifest.uwm.edu>...
> mike wrote:
>
> <<I think it was a 'she'. Now, just out of curiosity, could her artwork
> be
> considered derivative based solely on the content of the pictures? In
> other wods, if her pages didn't have the word "Pern" or "Anne McCaffrey"
> on them anywhere, could Anne's lawyers go after the artwork based on the
> fact that the dragons portrayed therein looked like Pern dragons are
> described?
> >>
Doubt so. But her pages DID have those words on them.
> And of course, Pern dragons *aren't* described. They have neck ridges,
> whirling eyes of varying colors, and eye ridges of some sort. Ears are
> mentioned once. They only come in certain colors. But it's only really
> the Whelan cover art that gives coherent mental pictures of what these
> dragons might look like (and they don't appear to have ears...).
They ain't supposed to have ears - I think that was a mistake. Pernese
dragons hear through their headknobs - don't ask me how.
> So, basically, I think there's no way to look at a picture of a dragon
> and say, "That's a Pern dragon."
Which is true, more or less... even if you copy somebody else's style of
drawing... (I'm just saying this so I can justify my feeble attempts at
faux Weston in pencil. :-)
> I would like, aside from Copyright Issues 'n all, to see what Anne
considers
> the most faithful or accurate picture of dragons.. the one that looks
most
> like the dragons in her head. Personally, I like the ATWOP Ruth (yeah,
me
> and about a million other people.. :) and the fire-lizards from the
earlier
> editions of the Harper Hall books. Well, they *were* cute on Dragonsdawn
too.
Like I said, Steve Weston, esp. on _Renegades of Pern_. But that's my own
opinion, which may be ethnically based? - notice how he includes elements
from the Chinese dragons, most notably head structure,
horns/antlers/whatevers and "aquatic"-style tail and webbing. MW did a nice
job with _AtWoP_ and _TwD_, though IMHO _DF_ and _DQ_ were terrible.
Especially _DQ_. Actually he does humans better than dragons - see his
cover of _Killashandra_ (I think).
> I really don't like the more recent covers - I wonder why, with the
general
> success of her books, they seemingly couldn't afford(?) to keep Whelan
> drawing 'em? Or has he stopped doing dragons?
> I think the attempt to show faceted eyes on more recent art, like the
> DLG, is more faithful to the sparse description in the books, but it's
> so.... icky looking. Maybe because that artist also draws FLs as rather
> stocky and indelicate, not as pretty as the elaborate ones on the HH
> books...
You mean Rowena and _Dolphins_? That was totally gross. I still think
Weston did a better job - and his dragon eyes _are_ more or less faceted.
> But I ramble.
>
> Still trying to figure out where ears would go on a dragon, and what they
> would look like if they did...
>
> Judy
-Nat
Smitty
In article <01bc5cf0$82ccd660$2cba15a5@user>, Nat <nath...@mbox2.singne
t.com.sg> writes
>
>> And of course, Pern dragons *aren't* described. They have neck ridges,
>> whirling eyes of varying colors, and eye ridges of some sort. Ears are
>> mentioned once. They only come in certain colors. But it's only really
>> the Whelan cover art that gives coherent mental pictures of what these
>> dragons might look like (and they don't appear to have ears...).
>
>They ain't supposed to have ears - I think that was a mistake. Pernese
>dragons hear through their headknobs - don't ask me how.
Some form of vibration-sensitive organ -- doesn't have to be a hole in
the head, although that's the preferred Terran solution (and not just in
vertebrates -- moths have a similar structure too!). The whole ears/no
ears thing is another inconsistency -- in DQ Canth is described as
having ears more than once (at one point Mirrim goes and tugs on one)
but in MORETA Orlith very clearly states that she doesn't have ears!
For art purposes I always go with the "no ears" version, although my
headknobs tend to come out as small, streamlined bulges towards the back
of the head -- I refuse to draw dragons with those silly little "nessie-
knobs"! Tried it for a while but it just looked daft! <g>
>> So, basically, I think there's no way to look at a picture of a dragon
>> and say, "That's a Pern dragon."
>
>Which is true, more or less... even if you copy somebody else's style of
>drawing... (I'm just saying this so I can justify my feeble attempts at
>faux Weston in pencil. :-)
Everybody has their own mental image of what a Pern dragon looks like,
be it taken from a description or a book cover. And those images can
change over time. It's a purely personal thing and one that I'd hate to
see changed by a film -- that would destroy the artistic diversity we
currently have in the fandom.
>Like I said, Steve Weston, esp. on _Renegades of Pern_. But that's my own
>opinion, which may be ethnically based? - notice how he includes elements
>from the Chinese dragons, most notably head structure,
>horns/antlers/whatevers and "aquatic"-style tail and webbing.
Weston's dragons are just too fiddly for me (and they're the covers I
always see first, being British), they're all frilly and the wings just
don't WORK (I won't mention the back legs <shudder>)! <g> They're
pretty to look at -- which does count for a lot where book covers are
concerned -- but from a biological point of view they're just not
<<right>>. RoP is not one of my favourites even amongst Weston covers
-- that blue just about outsizes Ramoth! -- although the firelizard
isn't bad: from that angle you can't tell that he does them without
forelimbs (as on ATWoP, which is odd as he DID paint them with forelimbs
on the cover of DRAGONDRUMS).
>MW did a nice
>job with _AtWoP_ and _TwD_, though IMHO _DF_ and _DQ_ were terrible.
>Especially _DQ_. Actually he does humans better than dragons - see his
>cover of _Killashandra_ (I think).
Funnily enough, I really like the Whelan cover for DF -- that is a
wonderfully alien looking dragon! DQ wasn't so good, I agree....
>You mean Rowena and _Dolphins_? That was totally gross. I still think
>Weston did a better job - and his dragon eyes _are_ more or less faceted.
Where DoP was concerned, Weston won hands down, even if he DID get the
wrong species of dolphin! <g> What Rowena produced was horrific -- body
proportions all over the place, forelimbs that couldn't be tucked
anywhere useful, UGLY head, precious little streamlining, and (worst of
all) differing numbers of wing-fingers on each wing. UGH!!!
As for the eyes -- the facets don't have to be so large that they're
visible; in fact, for the sort of highly accurate eyesight that dragons
are meant to have, they should be so tiny as to be almost invisible!
Don't think in terms of a faceted jewel, think more along the lines of a
dragonfly's eye, which has tens of thousands of facets (ommatidia) to
it. A dragon's eye would be much larger, with maybe millions -- the
more ommatidia, the sharper the image and the finer the range of
movements that may be detected (compound eyes are better at picking up
small movements than the "simple" eyes of vertebrates and some
molluscs). This sort of eye would appear to consist of a smooth, satiny
(rather than glossy) surface and you would have to look very closely
indeed to see an individual facet.
--
Smitty
Logres Weyr Homepage: http://www.frdesign.com/logres/