HIGHLA-L Digest - 11 Jul 2003 to 12 Jul 2003 - Special issue
Automatic digest processor (LISTSERV@lists.psu.edu)
Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:59:51 -0400
There are 19 messages totalling 815 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. Fanfic & Morals (12)
2. Creative urge (Was: Re: Fanfic & Morals)
3. HL Sequels (was Fanfic & Morals0 (2)
4. Two Questions
5. Fanfic & Morals (Redux)
6. Fanfic: Live and Let Di(ana) (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:06:35 EDT
From: Dotiran@aol.com
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
In a message dated 7/11/2003 8:39:08 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
mac.westie@verizon.net writes:
> Immortals among us, who feel the Buzz, carry swords, &take heads for
> Quickenings, etc. W/o that stuff, it isn't HL fanfic in the 1st place. And
> that stuff belongs to DPP. Who could say otherwise?
>
well for starters, maybe Gregory Widen could make a case? *g*
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:24:27 -0400
From: Sandy Fields <diamonique@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
At 11:06 PM 7/11/2003, Dotiran@aol.com wrote:
> > Immortals among us, who feel the Buzz, carry swords, &take heads for
> > Quickenings, etc. W/o that stuff, it isn't HL fanfic in the 1st
> place. And
> > that stuff belongs to DPP. Who could say otherwise?
>
>well for starters, maybe Gregory Widen could make a case? *g*
I don't think so. Didn't P/D buy it from him? Don't they now own the
rights to it?
-- Sandy
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:26:13 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Creative urge (Was: Re: Fanfic & Morals)
Marina:
(quoting Nina)
> >Speaking of paper tigers, who, exactly, ever said here (or anyplace) that
> >ALL actors or TPTB detest slash?
Now Marina herself:
>I think it was Greg who made a comment very like that. I was just
>attempting to disabuse him of that notion, really.
Not I. Such a blanket statement is pretty much guaranteed to promote
disabuse. Or even abuse, for that matter. Kind of like if I said
something to the effect that all fanfiction was illegal and immoral. I'm
sure I'd get an earful about that. :D
I am sure that there are some actors, crew and executives who enjoy
slash. Some detest. Some don't care. Some arguably don't care because
they are illiterate.
Marina again:
>I don't feel it's relevant, but Greg had said something about the
>general perception of it, and how actors and TPTB hate the idea,
>and I just wanted to show him that it's not universally true.
There's my name being dragged through the proverbial mud again. Unless
there's another Greg on this list. Maybe he and I could settle this with a
duel since he has besmirched my reputation.
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Does Not Read Slash But Does Not Think There Is Anything Wrong With It
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then
beat you with experience." - Dilbert
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:33:13 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
Dotiran:
>well for starters, maybe Gregory Widen could make a case? *g*
He could, until DPP reminded him that he sold the rights. Then he would be
quite embarassed indeed.
Speaking of Mr. Widen, did he write the initial treatments of Highlander
and The Prophecy at roughly the same time? Lots of parallels there. Or
does he just enjoy the general immortality-thing?
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Has The Same Name As Highlander's Creator But Does Not Use It To Get
Girls
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:31:32 -0400
From: comet <hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: HL Sequels (was Fanfic & Morals0
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Ace!Miracle wrote:
> But what second movie?
>
> --Miracle (I still maintain there is no second movie, and any
> videotapes you may see from time to time have fallen in through some
> alternate universe)
You've been saying that since I've known you...so, how do you explain it
airing on tv?
comet
hickss@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
I merely chewed in self defense. I never swallowed. -- Draco, Dragonheart
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:38:51 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
Pat:
>Aren't trademark and copyright two different legal animals?
I'm not completely certain, but I believe copyright encompasses a broader
range. While the James Bond character can be a trademark, James Bond
stories (and its derivative unique elements) fall under copyright. Plus I
understand that obtaining a copyright is a more rigorous process than
obtaining a trademark.
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Will Not Pet Legal Animals
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:50:09 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Two Questions
Mel:
>1. In Testimony, Duncan sees the Q and is afraid that
>Richie lost his head. But wouldn't he know that the Q
>was too big to be Richie? Richie's just a newborn and
>he's only taken a few heads...wouldn't his Q be pretty
>small at that time?
I don't think the correlation of the Quickening size and "power" (number of
heads taken) of an Immortal has ever been made canon, except for very
powerful Immortals. It appears that the special effects budget is more of
a determining factor.
>2. Is there a one Q an ep limit or something? What
>happened to the Q at the end of today's ep?
Nope. Some episodes can have more. Revelations 6:8 for example. Makes up
for the episodes without any. Gotta get that Quick-fix!
>3. Anne said Duncan had no scars. But Immies do get
>scars...what about Kalas and possibly Kurgan? Or is
>only for big injuries like those and small ones don't
>scar?
Kalas and the Kurgan almost lost their heads, hence the scars, and
apparently the neck is the weak, "non-healing" portion of the body
(although severing bone may not regenerate the severed portion, Xavier
being the only on-screen example of this).
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Answers Questions To Pretend He Is A Highlander Savant
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then
beat you with experience." - Dilbert
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 00:19:07 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
Nina:
>I was thinking about how DPP partnered w/ Miramax/Dimension Films to get HL
>3 made. Then, when problems arose, DPP blamed the suits at
>Miramax/Dimension. Yet, DPP partnered w/ Miramax/Dimension on HL:Endgame--&
>again blamed the studio for the problems w/ _that_ movie. And, who is DPP
>now threatening to make HL5 with? Miramax/Dimension, of course.
Considering how Miramax dealt with Peter Jackson over making "The Lord of
the Rings," I would say that any producer wanting to partner with Miramax
at this time would fall under the category of "Questionable-To-Bad
Ideas." I'm sure most studios like to have their collective finger in
every pie to some degree, but sometimes the pie gets squashed by an oafish
hand.
That's not to say that Miramax always turns out bad movies, but I'm sure if
the visions of DPP and Miramax don't coincide, the producers surely should
have learned the second time around. I would rather see "no Highlander"
than "bad Highlander."
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Has Reached His Posting Limit
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then
beat you with experience." - Dilbert
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 18:22:15 -1000
From: MacWestie <mac.westie@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
me before--
> > Immortals among us, who feel the Buzz, carry swords, &take heads for
> > Quickenings, etc. W/o that stuff, it isn't HL fanfic in the 1st place.
And
> > that stuff belongs to DPP. Who could say otherwise?
Rottie (who won't answer questions directed to her)--
> well for starters, maybe Gregory Widen could make a case? *g*
No, he can't. He sold his rights to Highlander way back when, in exchange
for certain things including, apparently, a creation credit on its various
incarnations. He does not have ownership, control, etc. Of course,
neither does Carmel.
Pat--
>How do you know this for a fact unless you've been reading fanfic?
Darn--you caught me, Pat. I never had a chance against you! Oh, the shame
of it all....
I have never denied having read fanfic, slash & otherwise. I, too, was once
a net newbie. I read quite a bit of Carmel's stuff back then. (So I know
exactly who she has force dear Duncan down on all fours. Though it's been
awhile, & I would hope she's moved on.) It soon lost its charm, & I don't
read fanfic these days. I've moved on & use my time differently. However,
if one goes to genre show websites, is on the email lists, etc, it's
impossible to avoid fanfic. It is pretty much everywhere that is related to
shows like HL, Buffy, Farscape, etc. I don't mean that anyone is forced to
read it, just noting that fanfic of all types is all over the net, more &
more. It's getting difficult to get _around_ fanfic to find the
genre-related stuff one may be seeking. Some low profile.
My position re: fanfic isn't that people shouldn't write it, or that people
shouldn't read it. It's that people shouldn't be distributing or selling
fanfic, since they don't own the fictional universe they are using.
Boiled down enough for you, Pat?
Nina
mac.westie@verizon.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 14:33:30 +1000
From: Carmel Macpherson <tunnack@webone.com.au>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
HI all
John said: <<..Okay. Now that's interesting. I'm not savvy with the exact
nature of the law, but I was of the understanding that if I wrote a novel
and had it published that the characters that I create would actually
automatically be
my intellectual property....>>
My understanding is the same as yours John. But, the critical test is the
originality of the character. My point was only that *I* cannot
definitively determine for every character in the Highlander universe the
level of originality that would meet the tests a court would apply to
confirm intellectual ownership by DPP. For example, *if* I could produce a
work published in 1980 which included a character called Felicia who
committed suicide jumping off a roof in her underwear would the court accept
that DPP owned the "Highlander character" called Felicia from the episode
Free fall. I accept, of course, that it is 99.9% likely that DPP do in fact
own the property in an Immortal sword fighter called Duncan MacLeod and a
5,000 year old Immortal called Methos. What I was answering was Nina's
categorical claim that DPP own "...the Highlander universe...". My
understanding is that in common law Countries(US/UK/Australia etc) there has
been relatively little testing in courts of intellectual property other than
trade marks and patents; that copyright cases tend to revolve around
unlicensed copying or else are settled out of court. Therefore, no-one
(other than a lawyer for one party making an ambit claim as lawyers are paid
to do) can make absolute claims about this.
<Nina> Carmel, exactly which of the HL characters do you think a court might
find that DPP does NOT own?
<Carmel> I have no idea. That wasn't my argument. I'm saying that no-one
can say for certain where the cut-off line is.
<Nina> Which HL canon really doesn't belong to DPP? And how can that be, if
it IS HL canon?
<Carmel> The canon that was invented by fans does, ipso facto, not belong to
DPP. For example, the word 'Seacouver' does not appear in any script or
movie or series episode. It was not written by any employee of DPP, and my
understanding is that it was first used in fan discussion, yet is
undisputedly now the location in which North American Highlander episodes
are based and there part of the *canon*. DPP have since used it on one of
their t-shirts. I'm simply saying therefore Nina that these things are
rarely as black and white as you are stating. Canon is an undefined
amorphous inchoate concept. It is what a plurality of fans at any time take
it to be. It's not defined by DPP (indeed, DPP themselves are often
contradictory). For example, we spent years thinking that it was canon that
you couldn't kill immortals on Holy Ground. Then along came Sanctuary. Was
the canon wrong??? In reality, it couldn't have been canon at all since it
was wrong.
<John> Though to be fair, what sometimes does appear is a (for example):
"James Bond is a registered trademark of Eon Productions".
<Carmel> Absolutely. There is of course a total difference between a trade
mark and copyright although both are forms of intellectual property.
Kind regards
@ Carmel Macpherson
<<<@{}=================>>>
@ carmel@hldu.org
http://www.hldu.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HLDU6: 29 April - 1 May, 2005. Sydney
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:39:34 +0200
From: T'Mar <tmar@sifl.iid.co.za>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
Nina wrote:
> Which HL canon really doesn't belong to DPP?
This actually brings up something which I've always found
interesting. What about writers who brought certain concepts
into a show in their own scripts, therefore making them a part
of a show's "universe"?
The best example I can think of is Theodore Sturgeon, who
introduced the world to the concept of pon farr along with
the characters of T'Pring, T'Pau and Stonn, in the Original
Star Trek series. I've often wondered what he would have
thought of the treatment pon farr has gotten in subsequent
Trek incarnations. And since his was the first episode in
which Vulcans other than Spock appeared, I wonder how he
would have responded to the portrayal of Vulcans as "cosmic
party poopers" in Enterprise.
And since the Vulcan mind meld was invented by Leonard Nimoy
in conjunction with whoever worked on "Dagger of the Mind",
I wonder what he thinks of the Enterprise idea that in the
22nd century, mind-melding is considered a "perverted"
behaviour.
Not that this makes the Trek universe belong to Paramount any
less, but I find it interesting. I wonder if there are any
similar instances in HL?
- Marina.
\\"You can spend precious time marching in your prefect lines,//
// but I don't hear that drum; I'm looking for something else.\\
\\ And if you don't like what you see, you don't have to look //
// at me." - Melissa Etheridge ||=====tmar@sifl.iid.co.za=====\\
\\==========Chief Flag Waver and Defender of Richie===========//
"A starship also runs on loyalty to one man, and nothing can replace
it or him." - Spock to Kirk; TOS ("The Ultimate Computer")
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 05:30:25 -0700
From: Gregory Mate <gmate@rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
(If it's a new day where I'm at, does the 5 post limit reset, or is that 5
posts in 24 hours? Ah, easier to apologize than ask permission)
Marina:
>This actually brings up something which I've always found
>interesting. What about writers who brought certain concepts
>into a show in their own scripts, therefore making them a part
>of a show's "universe"?
Probably the company which owns the show absorbs anything the writer
creates for that show. This sort of thing happens all the time in other
professions. For example, an computer engineer who works (as an employee
or as a contracted worker) for a chip manufacturer might come up with a
radical new circuit design which effectively enables new chips to work at
twice the speed of the old chips. However, the engineer would not gain any
royalties from the sale of each new chip, nor would the engineer be able to
sell their design to a competitor without severe legal and possibly
criminal repercussions. As a contracted worker, this would be routinely
written into the contract. It may be that exceptional circumstances exist
where the engineer might retain some rights to the design, but these cases
would be the exception rather than the rule.
Basically as a writer you would trade your right to keep your concept,
character, what-have-you in exchange for the opportunity to benefit
(financially and otherwise) from writing for the show. Theodore Sturgeon
may have come up with several characters and the pon farr concept, but he
was already given a baseline to work with (i.e. the Star Trek universe)
which was successfully marketed before he came on board. He was paid for
the episode(s) he wrote, but because he did not create the Star Trek
universe, did not go out and cast the best actors that could be found for
the parts, did not market the show to network executives, et cetera, his
work was, if you'll pardon the expression, assimilated. He traded the
benefits of working with an established show and a (I assume) guaranteed
paycheck in return for giving up his ideas to the whims of the show's
producers.
Of course, from a legal standpoint, this is a nice scenario for the show's
producers. Now they don't have to consult Mr. Sturgeon whenever they want
to write an episode with his creations, and possibly contend with him
vetoing their ideas. And Leonard Nimoy cannot hop over to Law and Order
and write one of the characters using the Vulcan mind meld, for
example. Ultimately the producers have to answer to the fans, so if they
pervert the original idea too much, they would certainly get a lot of heat
(the Highlander episode "Archangel" comes to mind for several reasons).
In answer to your last question, I am sure that such events have occurred
in Highlander. Unless every possible bit of canon was laid out in episode
#1 and faithfully followed throughout the course of the show (*snicker*),
the show has likely received input from "guest" writers that was
incorporated into the DPP-owned universe.
....Greg....
gmate@rogers.com
He Who Has Insomnia
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then
beat you with experience." - Dilbert
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:01:02 -0400
From: Susan B Drake <sueamanda@alltel.net>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
He Who Has Insomnia
from another also has insomnia- You are correct. My husband is a
writer and everything is done by contract. You either give up all
rights as in hired for a segment or you give them up for a time to the
publisher and they revert back at a specific time. Best Sueamanda
Gregory Mate wrote:
> (If it's a new day where I'm at, does the 5 post limit reset, or is that 5
> posts in 24 hours? Ah, easier to apologize than ask permission)
>
> Marina:
>
>> This actually brings up something which I've always found
>> interesting. What about writers who brought certain concepts
>> into a show in their own scripts, therefore making them a part
>> of a show's "universe"?
>
>
> Probably the company which owns the show absorbs anything the writer
> creates for that show. This sort of thing happens all the time in other
> professions. For example, an computer engineer who works (as an employee
> or as a contracted worker) for a chip manufacturer might come up with a
> radical new circuit design which effectively enables new chips to work at
> twice the speed of the old chips. However, the engineer would not
> gain any
> royalties from the sale of each new chip, nor would the engineer be
> able to
> sell their design to a competitor without severe legal and possibly
> criminal repercussions. As a contracted worker, this would be routinely
> written into the contract. It may be that exceptional circumstances exist
> where the engineer might retain some rights to the design, but these cases
> would be the exception rather than the rule.
>
> Basically as a writer you would trade your right to keep your concept,
> character, what-have-you in exchange for the opportunity to benefit
> (financially and otherwise) from writing for the show. Theodore Sturgeon
> may have come up with several characters and the pon farr concept, but he
> was already given a baseline to work with (i.e. the Star Trek universe)
> which was successfully marketed before he came on board. He was paid for
> the episode(s) he wrote, but because he did not create the Star Trek
> universe, did not go out and cast the best actors that could be found for
> the parts, did not market the show to network executives, et cetera, his
> work was, if you'll pardon the expression, assimilated. He traded the
> benefits of working with an established show and a (I assume) guaranteed
> paycheck in return for giving up his ideas to the whims of the show's
> producers.
>
> Of course, from a legal standpoint, this is a nice scenario for the show's
> producers. Now they don't have to consult Mr. Sturgeon whenever they want
> to write an episode with his creations, and possibly contend with him
> vetoing their ideas. And Leonard Nimoy cannot hop over to Law and Order
> and write one of the characters using the Vulcan mind meld, for
> example. Ultimately the producers have to answer to the fans, so if they
> pervert the original idea too much, they would certainly get a lot of heat
> (the Highlander episode "Archangel" comes to mind for several reasons).
>
> In answer to your last question, I am sure that such events have occurred
> in Highlander. Unless every possible bit of canon was laid out in episode
> #1 and faithfully followed throughout the course of the show (*snicker*),
> the show has likely received input from "guest" writers that was
> incorporated into the DPP-owned universe.
>
> ....Greg....
> gmate@rogers.com
> He Who Has Insomnia
>
> "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and then
> beat you with experience." - Dilbert
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 10:57:38 +0100
From: "John Mosby (Out&About)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals (Redux)
Rottie:
> well for starters, maybe Gregory Widen could make a case? *g*
Nope. He sold it hook, line and sinker to DPP. One could argue that the
Prophecy trilogy bears more tan a passing resemblance though. I watched the
first one, thought 'hmmmmmmm,raincoats, immortality etc etc' and only then
found out about the Widen connection. It actually fits into quite closely
with my perception of Immortal origins as well.
Greg:
>I'm not completely certain, but I believe copyright encompasses a broader
range. While the James Bond character can be a trademark, James Bond
stories (and its derivative unique elements) fall under copyright. Plus I
understand that obtaining a copyright is a more rigorous process than
obtaining a trademark.
I'd still have to say that while trademark and copyright do not mean the
same thing, if one puts it at the end of the movie, then one is definitely
stating their ownership rights. That was tested by another company who
wanted to make a rival Bond film - claiming they had the rights to the
specific story. EON fought them and won.
Marina:
>This actually brings up something which I've always found
interesting. What about writers who brought certain concepts
into a show in their own scripts, therefore making them a part
of a show's "universe"?
As you correctly follow up, most of these were writers for hire. Anything
and everything they create belongs to those who paid them for their services
and they have no legal or moral rights to the situations/characters even if
they were soley their idea (and a script is often a collaborative process
with either other writers or producers and directors). However - to be
fair - circumstances sometimes dictate otherwise. Though the above was true
of much of the classic Marvel Comics characters over the years, more and
more creators are negotiating 'character rights' meaning that they own the
character and that (for example) Marvel publishes them. This means that the
likes of Marvel can sometimes use a big name to tout a project "Neil
Gaimain's...." or "Frank Miller's...". There have been legal arguments about
retrofitting rights where original deals have been sen to eb unfair
(Superman's creators died broke and - whatever you hear - there won't be a
Captain Aamerica movie until those creator rights are settled too).
Creator-controlling is less common in TV/film but not unheard of. Yet
another example would be the licensing of movie rights for a comic. My
general understanding (and I may be wrong here) is that George Lucas would
have to approve every single story published in comic form to stop them
contradicting or offending and would ahve some control over the secondary
characters created for the strip alone. I'm fuzzy on this and it would
certainly be a grey area. Certainly there were some continuity snafus that
occured if we believe that George had the entire original trilogy planned
out years before!
Pure speculation here but I always wondered if the lack of an official
Highlander comic or illustrated strip was somehow connected with DPP's
possible insistance that they'd own *anything* that appeared in the strip
rather than the characters they created which were being used. It would seem
consistent with some of their actions in the past.
Greg:
>That's not to say that Miramax always turns out bad movies, but I'm sure if
the visions of DPP and Miramax don't coincide, the producers surely should
have learned the second time around. I would rather see "no Highlander"
than "bad Highlander."
I think we need to be more specific here. Miramax have released some very
fine movies. However, Highlander is a property releasd by a specific arm of
Miramax's empire: Dimension Films. This is the sub-divsion that releases the
likes of Scream, Dracula 2000, Equilibrium, Hellraiser and...er..Bad Santa.
It's not hard to see what demographic the company is specifically designed
to target. There's no reason to think that precludes an intelligent script
or a successful release etc, but it limits the chance of a having a film
where audiences come out and say "Wow, that film really makes me think..."
Sadly, it does seem that there are people connected with Highlander that are
so concerned with the dollar that they sometimes hurt that very factor by
tilting at a windmill that neagtes the qualities the concept innately has.
I have very little doubt that if someone thought dinosaurs were the new
thing, then Duncan/Connor/'Young TV star looking for first movie break'
would be decapitating a T-Rex before the second act.
John
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 11:18:48 +0100
From: "John Mosby (Out&About)" <a.j.mosby@btinternet.com>
Subject: Fanfic: Live and Let Di(ana)
In a week where we are discussing copyrights and legal and moral minefields,
it's not a good week to be a dead royal.
1) The Princess Diana charity was set up after her death so that it could
channel the many donations coming in to good causes and control the quality
of merchandise seen to be 'offcial'. In a short amount of time it collected
a huge amount of money and licensed her 'signature' and portrait shots to a
host of official merchandisers. It took on various companies who seemed to
be trading on the Diana name but who had no official connection. One of
these was the US-based Franklin Mint, who, The Diana Fund claimed, were
trespassing on and trading off a name they had no license for. The Mint
claimed they were being unfairly victimised. In the end, the Diana Fund,
amazingly, lost the legal battle. This week the company said they would
counter-sue the charity for deformation of their character. The charity had
no choice but to freeze its own assets and stop payments to many charities
who count on it.
The Franklin Mint says that any money - it wants around $20million - will
be..... donated to a charity.
I'm sure the people who would have normally benefiited from the Diana Fund
money appreciate the fact that the Franklin Mint's 'WE got caught, but
no-one else did, so it's unfair' defence is worth every penny the lawyers
got. Irony it seems, is alive if not well-distributed.
2) The dead Princess Diana is being ressurected to beome part of Marvel
Comic's X-Static team - a spin-off from the X-Men that casts a satirical
look at the nature of fame and celebrity. Now, while I won't completely
write this off (I'm all for free-speech and I'm sure there are some dark
but valid points to be made) if there's any doubt that her inclusion will
cast a wave of distaste here in the UK, then I'd wonder how quickly a team
made up of 9-11 corpses would go down in the US? Do I detect a
publicity-stunt?
John
Cynickel.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:21:20 -0400
From: Ace!Miracle <ke731458@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>
Subject: Re: HL Sequels (was Fanfic & Morals0
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, comet wrote:
> >
> > --Miracle (I still maintain there is no second movie, and any
> > videotapes you may see from time to time have fallen in through some
> > alternate universe)
>
> You've been saying that since I've known you...so, how do you explain it
> airing on tv?
Broadcast signals from the parallel universes, that have traveled through
a wormhole and become superimposed on the real TV signals. Every time
you've seen HL2 on TV, it's really been one of the missing episodes of Dr.
Who.
--Miracle (let me have my delusions!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'm not delusional. I'm just preoccupied with a fictional world."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minor Major Miracle: Time Lady, Jedi Knight, Occasional English Professor
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:43:52 EDT
From: Robin Tidwell <Robinchristine79@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
In a message dated 7/11/2003 8:31:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
mac.westie@verizon.net writes:
> Many don't even consider it porn if it is fanfic, &they
> would _never_ consider reading about the same explicit sex acts in any other
> fashion.
>
> Since I believe you said you've been on the net since February, I'm sure
> none of this applies to you.
>
> Nina
> mac.westie@verizon.net
>
Actually, I do read straight up porn, and watch movies with my husband all
the time. So, no, it doesn't apply to me. I've also had internet access from my
mom's and my uncle's computer. So just because I just got mine, doesn't mean I
haven't been reading fan fic for years.
Robin
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:46:33 EDT
From: Robin Tidwell <Robinchristine79@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic & Morals
In a message dated 7/11/2003 8:46:50 PM Eastern Standard Time,
plawson@webleyweb.com writes:
> >Sorry, sweetie, you missed the point. There's far better-crafted porn
> >available than in most fanfic, slash or not.
>
> How do you know this for a fact unless you've been reading fanfic?
>
> Pat
>
A very valid point! I've read beautifully written fan fic! And, the letters
in the magazines and such...Some are just so horrible and corny.
Robin
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 08:59:04 EDT
From: Robin Tidwell <Robinchristine79@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Fanfic: Live and Let Di(ana)
In a message dated 7/12/2003 6:19:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
a.j.mosby@btinternet.com writes:
> 2) The dead Princess Diana is being ressurected to beome part of Marvel
> Comic's X-Static team - a spin-off from the X-Men that casts a satirical
> look at the nature of fame and celebrity. Now, while I won't completely
> write this off (I'm all for free-speech and I'm sure there are some dark
> but valid points to be made) if there's any doubt that her inclusion will
> cast a wave of distaste here in the UK, then I'd wonder how quickly a team
> made up of 9-11 corpses would go down in the US? Do I detect a
> publicity-stunt?
>
> John
> Cynickel.
>
I also seen this. Yes, they have freedom of speech. But, being from the US, I
also think this is extremely distasteful! Still, there is a market, and it
will probably sell fast. That's probably why they're doing it.
Robin
------------------------------
End of HIGHLA-L Digest - 11 Jul 2003 to 12 Jul 2003 - Special issue (#2003-152)
*******************************************************************************