Talk:Zine Pirating

Those "open letters" *are* fascinating, but yeah, I think they should go on their own pages-- maybe "Zine Pirating/Alexis Fegan Black's Open Letter" and "Zine Pirating/Bill Hupe's Zine Piracy letter to Candance Pullaine" ? -- Liviapenn 22:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused why they are archived in full though. I mean, I agree it is interesting, but doesn't this contradict the setup that Fanlore itself is not an archive for meta articles? Or is there an exception for "historical sources" and it's like a wikisource?--Ratcreature 15:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Does this "Clean Up" Tag still valid?

I know every article can always use more work, but is this clean up template still needed?--Mrs. Potato Head 00:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The page looks okay to me. As I understood it, the clean up tag is for pages that have serious problems with formatting or organization of ideas.--æthel 02:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Er, on second thought, it is a pretty slow introduction; I don't see any mention of piracy until several sections in. The introduction should be more focused on piracy itself, rather than giving background information on the history of zines.--æthel 02:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

wholesale pirated editions vs. unauthorized reprinting of selected content

The Archival Turn in Feminism happened to mention (and I've seen it mentioned before) that in other zine cultures zines "reproduce texts with little or no regard for copyright" but that pirated editions reproducing an entire publication are not nearly as common. "most zines feature materials pilfered from other texts..." (p. 59) This Fanlore page seems to address mainly wholesale reprinting--is there a page that covers other types of unauthorized borrowing in fanzines? From this page I get the feeling that media fanzines were a lot less easygoing about that sort of thing than punk zines.--aethel (talk) 22:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Media fanzines were, as far as I know, were way less easygoing regarding than what sounds like the practices of other types of zines. It was fairly uncommon, but practiced, for content to be reprinted with permission and the editor or author almost always stated the original source. It was quite uncommon and frowned upon for material to be reprinted without permission; I'm trying to think of any right now that did this, or did this and and it didn't raise an uproar. Clippings from newspapers and magazines were another topic, as they seemed to be reprinted fairly willy-nilly, especially in newsletters. I don't know of any page on Fanlore that talks about these permissions and practices. --MPH (talk) 23:46, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

It occurs to me now that the book doesn't make clear whether the illicit borrowing was from other zines or from more mainstream sources, so I may have been jumping to conclusions. I find it interesting how everyone assumes it's okay to copy "official" non fannish content to the extent that this practice isn't even talked about or debated (except occasionally brought up as a counterpoint during heated debates over fanwork permissions). Or maybe it was? Maybe these ideas could be added to the Permissions page. Or maybe the Copyright page.--aethel (talk) 01:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)