How to Fan Without Being Banned

Is fanart, fanfiction, and all other fan-made work legal and ethical?
Short answer: yeah, probably.
Long answer: well...it depends.
Remember: I am not a lawyer. I'm just an author and content creator. :)
CaFae Latte merch:
www.cmalongi.c...
CITADEL sci-fi novel:
www.amazon.com...
TO KILL A NECROMANCER novella:
www.amazon.com...
--
VISIT MY WEBSITE:
www.cmalongi.com
WRITING COACH SERVICES:
www.cmalongi.c...
TIP JAR:
withkoji.com/@C...
JOIN THE PATREON COMMUNITY:
/ cmalongi
--
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
TikTok: / c.m.alongi_author
Instagram: / c.m.alongi

[@Mack-gn3tu]

Very interesting and important video topic! I agree 1000% that authors should support fan fiction and fan art! I am looking forward to seeing the next season of Cafae Latte!

[@ayamehimura9482]

THE PANDA REDD REFERENCE!

[@mocahbutterfly]

I knew you were going to cover Disney’s double standards on copyright. I remember seeing an Adam Ruins Everything segment cover it a few years ago.

[@jaycedawson5520]

Just a note, because it's interesting to me. Anne Rice did soften her stance on Fanfic over time. She started publishing Online only books and since online publishing was fairly new at the time she was convinced any fan works would possibly void her copywrite. She doesn't read it, but she's apparently chill with it existing now that Online Publishing is more common and the law has caught up.

[@kelseyswanepoel7056]

George has shown himself to not understand what true fanon and fanfic is.

[@MommaKris]

Thank you for making this video, very helpful to this aspiring author. Love your tiktok series and also love your mom's work.

[@tonialong6344]

I love this! I love CaFae Latte, it's become my comfort thing to watch before bed.

[@Some1.._]

THIS WAS POSTED AN HOUR AGO? Holy I’m early- mostly because I’ve been rotting on my phone all day

[@pufferishofpeace]

Hey! I just wanted you to know that the art of Bob and Cyrus featured at 2:37 is made by AI. I saw the original post that you commented under, and the caption did say it was made by AI, but I just wanted to make sure you knew. AI generated images can be extremely harmful to artists by possibly taking their jobs and using human art to learn off of without the artist's consent.

[@mixofreak]

While potentially true for generative models replacing jobs that human artists would normally do, and hiring touch-up artists rather than as many... you're literally watching a video about fan works being permitted, for non-commercial purposes, as well as part even saying that technically, it isn't generally legal to commission art of IP you don't own, even if you aren't then selling that commission, etc. Fan works not for sale, specifically to show appreciation of something without spending money on it if they're not a talented fan artist themselves-especially when they're disclosing that it is made by a generative model-it isn't replacing anyone's job. If nothing else, it is solidly something non-commercial for something that shouldn't be commercial in the first place. Bringing it up about letting people know it is from a generative model is fine, especially if it helps others know what models were used so fans can express their fandom despite lack of time to learn how to depict it themselves and the illegality of commissioning it (as well as not having the money if it were legal). Bringing up the harmful nature on something that can't in case use be taking away a job that legally shouldn't exist... it a bit absurd in this case. As for learning off of an artist's work without consent... as also brought up, fan works that aren't commercial are legal, as long as not expressedly requested to be taken down, more or less. You can copyright the creative expression such as the text of the books or video itself, and trademark the names, but not the idea itself. Likewise, many human artists are trained by studying other artist's works, with the knowledge that they can't sell that work, and need to create their own based on the techniquest they learn. Generative prompt to image art learns patterns, and doesn't store specific art for reproduction. Image to image, on the other hand, directly is inspired by what the user puts in, which puts it into the legality of that user... but it doesn't spin that uploaded image or new one into the model itself. Even if it did, it would be by the patterns, not the specifics. Image to image can be filtered to be even more like the original, but again, that's on the one uploading. The issue with generative models isn't how they learn, because they learn like humans do... even if they're much faster and while that speed an create sloppy results, it also can make output that is far faster than humans, which can be touched up by a skilled artist far faster than creating from scratch. The issue is more when the use of those tools aren't disclosed, or when they are specifically used to replace existing jobs. Use for tasks that were never going to be paid positions only provides more examples to the public of how much better a human artist can be, further justifying their knowledge and skills. Even if someone wants to commission a piece of their own IP for personal use and has the money to hire an artist... they can be creating multiple pieces to work out their idea, and then hire someone who can achieve far better than that generative model, after settling on how they want it done. This reduces time spent on multiple layout and other draft stages, allowing that artist to take on more commissions in the same amount of time. The pool of freelance jobs may reduce on the low end... but human artists will be able to either charge more because of their quality, or take on more work by not having as much time wasted. People pushed back on photography when it first came out, but it is a valuable tool and now recognized as a form of Fine Art. Photomanipulation and digital art was pushed back on as well, but now those tools and medium are used even more prevalently, allowing physical mediums to raise their rates significantly. The same is going to happen with generative models. The genie isn't going back in the bottle, and the art communities that models are being created for (visual, writing, music, etc) can either bang the drum as a call to arms as didn't work the previous times new tools came forth... or it can seize control of what the tools can do, learn what they can't do, and find a way to make the best use of both, marketing what they can do with or without them. It is literally the only solution. Pure generative model output is considered public domain under a ruling from the Supreme Court. It is a tool for all who can access it.

[@lunatsukano2794]

Thank you so much for this

[@lindsaypetersen5940]

I started working on my own book with my character Cerberus and the characters of my friends. Yes I have their permission and I love stretching my creative brain a bit

[@danielmalinen6337]

What I have understood from the basis of news and media, Disney actually allowed Mickey Mouse's copyright to expire on the grounds that trademark protection is stronger and never expires, and in recent years the company has spent time converting the first appearance of Mickey Mouse into a trademark. But then the next interesting mumbo jumbo follows when the character's copyright has expired but the appearance is trademark protected because there has never been anything like this before. But it should be pointed out that I'm not a lawyer either, I've only read about it in the news and media.

[@thegrimmretails3777]

Sherlock Holmes was a blatant ripoff of C. Auguste Dupine. And even though Doyle refused to allow August Derleth to write and publish Sherlock Holmes stores, he could not stop that same author from writing and publishing the adventures of Solar Pons.

[@leadingstrangeness]

There's also the hilarious invention of Herlock Sholems. Author Maurice Leblanc was forbidden by Doyle to use Holmes in his novels about the French thief Arséne Lupin. So he made his one detective... That happened to have a similar name.

[@highlorddarkstar]

I suspect Disney has given up on extending copyright and is just going to go all in on trademark. So Mickey Mouse(tm) is protected, as is his image.

[@nataliekrupnick5310]

THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING

[@CovenOfNightmares]

Now its time for fanfic writers to do their THING PLEASE. I am dying here ; - ;

[@andeeharry]

Thanks for sharing, this is interesting and your outfit is so cute

[@JJ-rx8ym]

Depending on the TT, it could be protected by parody law. And Disney owns ABC and Hulu. They might lend out a property to a subsidiary. Someone I follow said fanfic is great writing process because you get to skip world building and practice plot, dialogue, and other important aspects. I threaded this to Tananarive Due and she liked this idea

[@anuacyl8388]

Still love the vest but if any fabric left over would pop with an accessory (tie, headband, hairbow)

[@CMAlongi]

Ikr, but there is N O T H I N G left. It gone.

[@anuacyl8388]

@@CMAlongi aww! The vest still looks amazing though. Your friend did a great job (if they don't already know that, they should) with it.

[@aliceporter7474]

Thank you! This was really helpful.

[@haleywalker1640]

A question I have related to this, in terms of expies and homages. So I have this dark fantasy/horror/adventure story idea where fairies have captured autistic humans to keep around as companions/pets under a misguided belief they are helping them and some of the humans are fighting back since they do not want to lose their autonomy. The idea is still in the early stage of development and on the back burner (since I want to familiarize myself more with fae lore, figure out what is flexible and what isn't [which might lead to another question for you later on if that's okay with you] and am also working on another book I'd like to publish first), but for a naming theme I decided to have the main characters (all women) be named after classic childhood fantasy heroines which also helps as a baseline for figuring out their specific motives for rebelling (Dorothy wants to get back home to her family, Alice wants to explore, and Wendy wants there to be a choice between staying in the fairy world or the human world instead of being forced to stay in whichever one the fairies believe they belong in). The problem comes with the fourth heroine that I was thinking of naming Susan, who managed to escape the fairy world but ended up doing so without her three siblings who now resent her as a result, which is a parallel to how Susan Pevensie refused to go back to Narnia in the Last Battle which results in her being "no longer a friend of Narnia" and potentially being separated from her family forever when they all die in a train crash. On one hand, this character is not Susan Pevensie (in the same way that my Dorothy, Alice, and Wendy aren't Dorothy Gale, Alice Liddell, and Wendy Darling despite any similarities they share) and the other world is not Narnia, their circumstances for leaving/refusing to come back are not the same (my Susan felt betrayed by a fairy king she and her siblings were helping, who neglected to tell her how much time had passed and kept her family in the fairy world for too long, while Narnia's Susan just no longer believed in it and wanted to live her life), and it would feel odd not to have any nods to Narnia since Wonderland, Oz, and Neverland get referenced. But on the other hand, The Last Battle (and the Narnia series as a whole) will not enter the public domain for another 25 years or so (potentially longer, if Disney gets their way with extending copyright again) and I worry about getting in trouble even if I were to either change her name or leave her unnamed. Where does homage end and copyright infringement begin?

[@CMAlongi]

Excellent question! Copyright law does NOT cover names, titles, or short slogans. You could name your characters Jon Snow, Harry Potter, and Percy Jackson. So long as they're not the Bastard of Winterfell, the Boy Who Lived, or the son of Poseidon, you're theoretically fine--although the author might still try to come after you. Luckily you're using names that are already very firmly established in the real world. Dorothy, Alice, Wendy, and Susan are absolutely free game, even if their arcs correlate with other characters of similar names. No one's going to try any legal issues with you there, ESPECIALLY if you give them different last names, physical description, and personality from their inspos.

[@EluraCorenBooks]

As an author, I actually check (maybe once a year, if that) on AO3 to see if I have risen to the point of having fanfiction. That's kind of a pinnacle of success. (No, it has not happened yet. I'm not exactly a prolific writer, nor am I very good about staying in the public eye.)

[@CMAlongi]

Ngl I searched CaFae Latte on AO3 on a lark thinking there was no way... Evidently I've attracted a group of prolific fanfic writers. 🤷‍♀️

[@EluraCorenBooks]

@@CMAlongi that does not surprise me in the least.

[@charlymicky1722]

Thank you!

[@rabbid295]

i wanna be honest i used fae latte from the first few seasons in a dnd campaign that wasnt streamed or anything it was solely a cameo since my entire group loves your work is that ok?

[@CMAlongi]

Absolutely! You weren't trying to profit off of it or publicly claim it as yours. Homebrew stuff is totally fine.

[@agentdoggo6085]

I’m very early

[@andeeharry]

15:18 So Cafae Lottee is public domain now...be careful what you wish for. It is bound to be a horror spoof, like they did with Winney the Pooh and Mickey Mouse. Blood, death, betrayal, and whatever else.

[@CMAlongi]

It is NOT public domain. I'm just not going to kick up a fuss over fanfic/fanart.

[@mixofreak]

It is literally a non-commercial handshake agreement, which precludes it from being public domain.

[@Wolf_is_a_wolf]

citadel is based of warrior cats! YOU READ WARRIOR CATS! :> sorry i just love that silly cat book

[@CMAlongi]

That series DEFINED my middle school years.

[@valhallaerikson5729]

Unintentional irony on my part but I am working on a modern fantasy YA novel where one of the supporting characters is a Lycan who runs a diner and the majority of the staff are Lycans.