From: jwkenne@attglobal.net   
      
   On 2014-06-12 00:50:30 +0000, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) said:   
      
   > On 6/11/14 11:16 AM, Jacey Bedford wrote:   
   >> On 11/06/2014 04:31, David Friedman wrote:   
   >>> On 6/10/14, 5:51 PM, Jacey Bedford wrote:   
   >>>> On 10/06/2014 19:51, Michelle Bottorff wrote:   
   >>>>> But tie-in fiction is a point.  There you have a situation where there   
   >>>>> is an audience for the source material, and you are catapulting off of   
   >>>>> that.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Tie in fiction is always traditionally published. If you self pubbed any   
   >>>> tie-in story you'd have extreme copyright issues. You would, in effect,   
   >>>> be publishing fanfic for profit.   
   >>>   
   >>> No problem if the original is out of copyright—Jane Austen, say, or   
   >>> Dickens.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> Austen and Dickens are hardly tie-in fiction, though.   
   >   
   > 	Well, anything based on them is either tie-in or fanfic if you put it   
   > in modern terms.   
   >   
   >> And neither Star   
   >> Wars nor Doctor Who are going to be out of copyright any time soon.   
   >>   
   >   
   > 	Alas. By the old copyright rules (14 years, renewable for another 14),   
   > Original Trek, the original SW movies, a lot of Old Who, and a lot of   
   > the Trek Spinoffs would be out of copyright.   
      
   They were 28/28 50 years ago, and were never 14/14/.   
      
      
   --   
   John W Kennedy   
   "The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything...."   
     -- Emile Cammaerts, "The Laughing Prophet"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)