Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,202
edits
Talk:Doctor Who: Lockdown!: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→Fan Gallery and their licensing
JDPManjoume (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 807: | Line 807: | ||
:As for other stories, that need looked at - "A Star and a Beetle", likely "Bad Night at the Office" (As I'm not sure we could count one namecheck of a Harold Saxon as something that would need licensing) & possibly "Quantum Physics Lecture"? At the moment though, "A Better World" is the only one that is posing to me as a potential candidate for inclusion. | :As for other stories, that need looked at - "A Star and a Beetle", likely "Bad Night at the Office" (As I'm not sure we could count one namecheck of a Harold Saxon as something that would need licensing) & possibly "Quantum Physics Lecture"? At the moment though, "A Better World" is the only one that is posing to me as a potential candidate for inclusion. | ||
[[User:JDPManjoume|JDPManjoume]] [[User talk:JDPManjoume|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | [[User:JDPManjoume|JDPManjoume]] [[User talk:JDPManjoume|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | ||
:::Some things are getting confused here. The proposal was merely to keep some things ''on the Wiki'' — but, where authorial intent is vague or unavailable, that doesn't necessarily mean covering them ''as valid''. There could be a setup where ''A Most Unfortunate Pit-Stop'' is covered as invalid due to Rule 4 concerns, whereas something like ''[[w:c:lockdown:Turn Left Prequel Comic (short story)|Turn Left Prequel Comic]]'' is not covered at all due to Rule 2 concerns. | |||
:::This is also the first mention in this conversation (or indeed anywhere) of the ''Fan Gallery'' stories being "charity works". What Cook has said is that the ''Fan Gallery'' was intended as an opportunity for fans to showcase their work to other fans, which is not the same thing at all. The wider ''Lockdown!'' event ''is'' also used to promote charities, but that's not stopped us covering any of the clearly-licensed minisodes like [[WC]]: ''[[Farewell, Sarah Jane (webcast)|Farewell, Sarah Jane]]'', so I'm not sure it's really relevant. | |||
:::Speaking of Rule 2 — it is also the rule infringed in the case of charity works created by copyright-holders. The decision reached on this Wiki was that when e.g. [[Paul Magrs]] submits an [[Iris Wildthyme|Iris]] story to a charity anthology, he is ''not'', actually, making ''use'' of his own "commercial license" to the character, because he's not putting her to a commercial use. Thus, as far as this Wiki knows/is concerned, the situation you describe has never come up — there ''hasn't'' been a case of one story in a book being commercially licensed to use a DWU character, while the other stories in the same anthology were Rule-2-breakers. It flatly hasn't happened yet. | |||
:::Whereas yes, in this case, I ''can'' testify that the agreement I was able to work out with Mr Black was wider-ranging than just the one free release. I am fully empowered to sell ''A Better World'' if I want to, [[Auteur]] and all. (I mean, actually, I ''can't'' testify to that here: authorial-quotes originating on the Wiki itself are not technically admissible evidence. But in terms of common sense, I just want to provide the facts here. If it is ruled necessary that the evidence in question be officially logged somewhere, I'll always be able to make the same statements on some off-Wiki platform, such as my Tumblr blog.) | |||
:::Also, the idea with ''Pit-Stop'' possibly being okay with Rule 2 isn't that it's "not specific enough" for us to know it's ''the'' Heather — rather, I had in mind the precedent set at [[Talk:Legacies (short story)]], or with the [[Cyberman]] namedrop in ''[[An Ordinary Man (novel)|An Ordinary Man]]'', that it's alright for a story to ''namedrop'' things to which it doesn't have the license, so long as all the elements that are actually and explicitly ''involved in the plot'' are licensed. Nardole is very much involved in the plot of ''The Search for the Surgeon'', so I don't think it makes the cut. But if somebody had a story licensed to use Hydroflax exclusively, and it included a one-line mention that one of Hydroflax's victims was Nardole, ''that'' would probably be okay. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
