jesse_the_k: text: Be kinder than need be: everyone is fighting some kind of battle (expectant)
Jesse the K ([personal profile] jesse_the_k) wrote in [community profile] podficmeta2010-01-22 02:02 pm

Should readers get permission to make podfic?

While I just argued that the act of podficcing adds "fannish value" to a work, I'm unsure that readers must obtain an OK from the writer to make a recording.

Since I'm a newbie, I did some research. While I don't think it's possible for a podfic to fundamentally change a source in the same way, I started with remixes, since there's the same "permission" issue there. It seems most remix challenges are based on a mutual remix: by participating in writing, each fan also permits their work to be remixed (with one "safe" work held inviolate).

The Fanlore Wiki told me:
 begin quote 
Though remixing in both fanfiction and vidding has become enormously popular, not all fans embrace the concept. [... snip ...] Though some fans feel any story is fair game for remixing, others believe that permission should be gained from the author first before using their work as a jumping-off point. Many fans feel it's hypocritical to reuse the original creations of the copyright holders in the canon while protesting that anyone should be allowed to remake their fanworks.
 quote ends 

Current metadata don't state whether the podfic's reader has the writer's permission. Would the absence, permission or refusal of writer's OK change how you'd choose or read podfics?
zvi: self-portrait: short, fat, black dyke in bunny slippers (Default)

[personal profile] zvi 2010-01-22 08:51 pm (UTC)(link)
The writer's permission wouldn't affect whether or not I'd download/read a work. And I don't think it should be necessary to have it write sequels, or remixes or whatever.

I guess the one way in which a podfic is different from a remix or sequel is that it's a complete capture of the original. One might consider it analogous to archiving, and there's a very real (and I think) reasonable taboo against re-archiving. I suspect this is part of why I'm more sympathetic to the "podfic is an independent artistic creation" theory than "podfic is an accessible version" theory.

I think maybe the question we should ask ourselves is what sort of fannish work do we not envision requiring permission. I suspect most people would say it's fine to post art without asking the permission of the writer. And I'm not sure what the difference is there, except that they're different media.

(frozen comment)

(Anonymous) 2010-01-24 07:50 am (UTC)(link)
I'd like to think a reader wouldn't just merrily go ahead and podfic something that's posted under f-lock. Particularly if it's RPF.
If a writer is posting under f-lock I'm thinking zie is presuming some reasonable expectation of privacy for the work?
Further, the writer might also be attempting to limit the exposure of the RPF *subjects* by posting under f-lock in the first place. Podficcing that particular work kind of intrudes on that. IMO.
zvi: self-portrait: short, fat, black dyke in bunny slippers (Default)

(frozen comment)

[personal profile] zvi 2010-01-24 07:59 am (UTC)(link)
Unsigned anonymous comments are frozen without reply. You may repost if you add some sort of identifier; it does not have to be your most well-known fannish pseudonym. I just don't want all anons to look the same.