Forum:Charity Stories that are TECHNICALLY licensed...: Difference between revisions

4,753 bytes added , 19 August 2023

m

Protected "Forum:Charity Stories that are TECHNICALLY licensed..." ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

Scrooge MacDuck

Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators

38,015

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{Forumheader|The Panopticon}}
+{{archive}}
 <!-- Please put your content under this line.  Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ -->
 == Opening post ==
@@ Line 112: / Line 112: @@
 :::Look, here's the reality of the situation. [[T:WRITE POLICY]] applies. I think this should have waited for a forum thread, it's a big change, but if you're insisting that you really did want to enshrine the idea that only IP rights to IU concepts matter, well, alright. I think it was poorly done, but fair enough. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
+:: I don't think it ''was'' a big change (in terms of scope, it only applies, as far as we know, to a single source; and again, I viewed myself as very much spelling out what seemed to be the underlying assumption overall). But that being said, if you want to start a sort of devil's-advocate thread reviewing the decision — that is, as a general question of policy, distinct from the thread about reviewing the facts of ''DiT'' that you're doing anyway? or perhaps you'd want to fold it into that? — I don't intend to forbid you from doing such a thing! Still, I personally stand by it as both a saner policy, and one that reflected current practice ''in all cases other than DiT'' at the time it was written.
+:: (I say "all cases other than ''DiT'', but given ''DiT'' was covered-as-{{tlx|invalid}} rather than deleted as outright fanfic, one could argue that this aspect of Czech's closing post had never really been implemented anyway.) [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 19:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
+== Conclusion ==
+<div class="tech">
+A lot of space in this thread was taken up by the controversy about ''[[Dimensions in Time (TV story)|Dimensions in Time]]''. However, it was really always somewhat outside of its scope. It was covered-as-{{tlx|invalid}} (rather than banished-as-fanfic) for most of its history, and by the time the thread was opened, this had been changed to ''validity''; right or wrong, it has never been filed in the same category as the small group of prose stories [[User:OttselSpy25]] actually proposed to validate.
+As I stated in one of the final messages above, [[User:Najawin]] is welcome to start a thread reviewing the decisions which applied to the likeness-rights stuff in the case of ''[[Dimensions in Time (TV story)|Dimensions in Time]]''. However, this has little bearing on the stories at stake here, which ''do'' only make use of stuff to which the relevant publishers had full rights which they simply chose not to exploit. It is hard to conclude without simply rephrasing: the simple fact of the matter is that we've always allowed ''free'' releases so long as they had commercial licenses. '''Rule 2 is concerned with commercial ''licenses'', not commercial ''releases'''''. And it is simply not logically possible for Paul Magrs to not ''possess'' the commercial license to Iris Wildthyme just because he happens to be writing a charity story. He owns it. Any story he writes is by definition commercially licensed to use Iris, whether it's ''released'' commercially or not.
+The decision to exclude licensed charity stories was taken not for a principled reason flowing from [[T:VS]], but simply for simplicity's sake. In line with the ongoing crusade against shortcuts that result in loss of information, it is time to repeal this and tidy it away. The "unless it's published for charity" exception to T:VS does ''not'' by any true stretch of the imagination flow from the [[four little rules]].
+Thus: ''[[Baron (Count) Dracula and Count (Baron) Frankenstein (short story)|Baron (Count) Dracula and Count (Baron) Frankenstein]]'', ''[[Being an extract from "The Amazing Adventures of Iris Wildthyme on Neptune" (short story)|The Amazing Adventures of Iris Wildthyme on Neptune]]'', ''[[Moon Eyes (short story)|Moon Eyes]]'' and ''[[It's Raining Gin (short story)|It's Raining Gin]]'' are hereby officially added to our treasury of valid sources. The anthologies in which they appear should be given pages while making clear that other entries in the book are ''not'' licensed and ''not'' covered, much as we do for DWU short stories appearing in primarily-non-DWU anthologies, such as ''[[Resurrection Engines (anthology)|Resurrection Engines]]'' or ''[[Decalog 5: Wonders]]''.
+(The scruples about ''It's Raining Gin'' are understandable, but ultimately, both the presence of unlicensed non-DWU-elements, and the plot-inconsequential namedrop of an unlicensed BBC concepts, are both squarely within permissible precedent. Rule 2 is about ''relevant DWU concepts'', and every word in that summary is important. Sooty's not a DWU concept and Metebelis IV is not relevant.)
+As concerns further examples of the form, however, I think the slope is potentially slippery enough — if people started creating pages about license-breaking stories in bad faith — to warrant caution. Thus, '''any new purported licensed-story-printed-in-a-charity-book should get an inclusion debate reviewing its status''', by default, albeit sometimes a cursory one.
+Thank you to everyone who participated! [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 16:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
+</div>
+[[Category:Panopticon archives]]
+[[Category:Inclusion debates]]

Forum:Charity Stories that are TECHNICALLY licensed...: Difference between revisions

Forum:Charity Stories that are TECHNICALLY licensed... (view source)

Revision as of 16:43, 19 August 2023