aliothfox

A fox on the internet!

ABDL artist, English/Lit/History educator, bit of a weather geek.

@TheDamagedKey is bae <3

Cubs: @KameronSpottyfox, @KavuKitten, @Baubau, @pampers, Tonio Puppyroo


posts from @aliothfox tagged #writing

also: #writers on cohost, #writing on cohost, #writers of cohost

So I saw a comment on a Furaffinity journal this morning that yet again made a bunch of inaccurate claims about what does and doesn't count as copyright infringement. It's a lot of the same (wrong) claims I see all the time, so I thought I'd take advantage of Cohost's long form to make a post about copyright myths and facts. One disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. What I'm saying here is the result of several years of meticulous research on my part, but I am not qualified to give legal advice.

Myth 1: It's not copyright infringement unless I'm profiting off of it. Fact: Copyright infringement claims are about your liability to the original owner of the intellectual property you're using. It is possible for you to make no money off of what you created from someone else's IP and still be liable for infringement. The reverse is also true: in some cases, you can make money off of someone else's IP and not be liable. While profit may influence your liability, it's not the sole factor that determines whether you're guilty of infringement or not (in fact, there is no single factor that does).

Myth 2: Most companies don't waste time going after people who make fan art. Fact: Companies routinely "go after" creators of fan work. You just don't hear about it much because fan art is almost always copyright infringement, so the overwhelming majority of those cases usually end without ever going to court. Usually, it's as simple as the copyright owner (Disney or Nintendo, for instance) submitting a DMCA notice to the website hosting the fan work (DeviantArt or FurAffinity, for example), and the host site removes the fan art in question. On the occasion that a creator decides to fight it, they get a lawyer, who immediately tells them "Sorry, you don't have a case." Some higher-profile cases do make it to court (the Harry Potter Lexicon case, for instance), but even then, they usually lose. Nintendo forced a well-made Legend of Zelda fan movie offline. Paramount kneecapped a fan-made Star Trek project. If you think you're safe because you're working in a franchise that has a lot of existing fan art, you're not.

Myth 3: Aha! But if I call it parody or research and claim "Fair Use," they can't touch it! Fact: The Fair Use Doctrine is not a magic bullet against copyright infringement liability. First of all, Fair Use is not a denial of infringement. If you bring Fair Use as your defense in a copyright case, you are essentially saying "Yes, I am infringing on the owner's copyright, but I should be allowed to in this case." Criticism, parody, education, research, and so forth are part of the nature of the work, but the nature of the work is only one of MANY factors considered in a Fair Use case. In other words, "it's a parody/criticism/etc." is the bare minimum point of entry to even claim Fair Use, not a guarantee that you're win a Fair Use case.

In Summary: Almost all fan art is technically copyright infringement. It is allowed to exist purely at the sufferance of the companies who own the franchises. Some companies are more tolerant than others (some even have creation resources for fan works!), but that is purely up to them. Companies have little to gain by prosecuting their own fans, but that doesn't mean that they can't or won't. We can have a whole talk about the nature of copyright law and needed reforms and whatnot, but that's a separate discussion. This is more just addressing how things currently stand without attempting to cast any "good" or "bad" judgment on that status quo one way or the other.



Good morning, folks. Yesterday I was dadposting, and today I am in Professor Fops mode. We're getting close to the end of the semester, and I imagine a lot of you are probably having to get hot and heavy on those research papers. I thought I would share a few tips with you to hopefully take away some of the stress. Here's a couple of things to remember:

A little extra work up front can save a lot of extra work later.

One of the most common mistakes I see students make (and frankly, this applies to any paper, not just a research paper) is that they want to jump right in and start writing instead of taking any time to plan their paper ahead of time. I can't tell you how many times I've heard students say, "Oh, I do better when I just free-write." Let me be candid: you don't do better when you "just free-write." You might think you do. You might have gotten away with it through good grades in the past. But 100% of your papers will be better if you spend time prewriting.

Outlines and annotated bibliographies are meant to make your work easier, not harder.

If your teacher has assigned an outline and/or an annotated bibliography, it's important to remember that there is a purpose for this, and it's not just to create extra busywork. Your research needs to be directed to a specific purpose, and having an outline and annotated bibliography will help you direct that research. It will also make your actual paper much easier to write. Having an outline means you'll be starting with a roadmap instead of staring at a blank page. Having an annotated bibliography means you'll be starting with your sources already lined up and having an idea of how you'll use them instead of scrambling to figure out what fits where.

The purpose of these two things is to make it easier to write the paper. Yes, it means you have to put in a little bit of extra work at the beginning, but it also means that your paper will fall into place much more smoothly and be better organized. It also means you won't get to your conclusion and be scrambling to pad out your word count.

Whenever I write a research paper (and yes, even though I'm no longer a student, I do still have to write research papers sometimes!), I always begin with an outline and annotated bibliography, even though it's almost never technically required. An outline in particular is vital - even if your teacher doesn't require one, you should do one. You don't have to necessarily do it in a precise format and get all the Roman numerals right or anything like that, but you should at least figure out (before you start writing) what you want for your central idea and supporting points, and roughly how you want to present them. Having that written down - even if it's just scribbled notes in a notebook - will keep you from losing your train of thought.

You need a thesis statement before you start.

Your thesis statement is the linchpin of your paper; everything revolves around it. It should be one of the first things you come up with. A lot of people tend to overthink the thesis statement, and really, it's just a summary sentence of your main idea and supporting points. I'm currently working on a research paper about social media. Here's my working thesis statement:

Social media has had a tremendous impact on how society processes and responds to current events, including its ability to influence journalism, galvanize activists, and enable provocateurs.

That statement could very well change as I work on the paper, but it's a good start and gives me an easy way to direct my research. It's clearly divided into two parts: the central idea (that social media has had a major cultural impact) and the key supporting ideas (the list that comes after "including"). The thesis statement isn't going to be the first sentence of your paper (you need to give some background and establish context first; the thesis statement usually comes at the end of the introduction), but it should be the first sentence you come up with.

Google should be your last resort, not your first resort.

Google (and search engines in general) is one of the absolute worst possible ways to find sources. I cannot stress this point enough: Google is not your friend. Google's search results are determined by algorithms designed to bring Google the most ad money, and nothing else. I know we spend a lot of time joking about "Google-fu" to present a false air of expertise, and we use smarmy "let me Google that for you" links sometimes, but the truth is that Google is an awful research tool.

Take advantage of your school's resources.

If you're taking classes at any college worth its salt, you almost certainly have access to research databases. Research databases are collections of scholarly periodicals, eBooks, peer-reviewed studies, and all sorts of other sources that aren't available from a simple Google search. The fact that research databases usually give you tons of advanced search options to help you refine what you're looking for is a bonus.

Your school also probably has a library, and despite what you might think in the digital age, libraries (and, more specifically, librarians) are one of the best tools you have for doing research. The librarians at your school's library know exactly how to connect you with the best resources available specifically to you, and trust me, they're ready to help. Chances are that they're underutilized and therefore incredibly bored. Give them something to do, for the love of god.

Free research databases exist too.

Even if you don't have access to a college library or can't find what you're looking for in your school's available resources, there are much better places to go on the Web than Google. Research databases are still your best bet, and there are quite a few free, open-access databases that anyone with an internet connection can use. Here are just a few:

When I talk about free research databases, people often mention Google Scholar to me. I personally dislike Google Scholar (for various reasons that are more complex than I'm really able to cover in this post), but it is an option.

When all else fails, use Wikipedia.

I know this probably sounds like a weird thing for a teacher to be saying since you've probably heard a lot of teachers tell you to stay the hell away from Wikipedia, but let me clarify: Wikipedia is not useful as a source. Not because "anyone can edit it," as is typically given as the reason (Wikipedia's error rate is actually lower than that of Encyclopedia Britannica, in fact), but because it's not meant to be a definitive source; it's meant to be a general reference, just like any other encyclopedia.

What makes Wikipedia extremely useful is its guiding principle of verifiability. Everything on Wikipedia has to be cited, at least in principle. In practice, it falls short sometimes (we've all seen stuff making fun of the "citation needed" tags), but even so, the reference list at the end of a Wikipedia article can be a gold mine for finding sources. You can't use Wikipedia itself as a source, but what's wrong with using Wikipedia's sources? They're far better than the unfiltered list you'll get from a Google search; every source on a Wikipedia reference list was put there by a human being. There's nothing there by mistake, and there's nothing that has been put there by an algorithm.

Stop panicking about source citations.

Stop it. They're not as hard as you're making them.

Do cite your sources...

If you got it from somewhere else, you have to cite it, even if you've changed it into your own words. Citations are for crediting information, not for crediting specific words (that's what quotation marks are for, and yes, direct quotes have to be cited too). Do it as you go; don't write your whole paper and then go back and try to figure out what came from where. Even if you don't do the specific format yet, at least leave yourself little notes so you know which sources go with what.

...But don't freak out about the citation format.

Seriously, don't. I know MLA, APA, Chicago, and so forth can all be really intimidating at a glance, but people freak the hell out over them, and there really is no reason to. For one thing, there are a thousand resources (that you can find through a quick Google search) for how to do just about any citation style. For another, every citation style is really just two parts:

  1. How you acknowledge sources in your paper
  2. How you list all of those sources at the end of your paper

That's all there is to citing sources. The inline citations (that is, where you cite the sources in your paper) are usually just the author's name paired with a page number (if applicable) and/or date. The specific look of a source citation depends on which style (MLA, APA, etc.) you're using, but the general idea is that you're giving a signpost for your reader to find that source in your bibliography (reference list, works cited, etc.).

Oh, and don't rely on citation generators. They're pretty much useless unless you have an instructor who doesn't care much about the format.

For the love of God, don't try to write your research paper on a mobile device.

Word processing applications on mobile devices (smartphones and tablets) are generally designed around everyday use (writing letters, simple reports, memos, etc.). They're not designed to accommodate the rigorous formatting requirements of an academic paper. You need to be on a desktop or laptop. If you don't have one, check with your college's instructional media department or whatever type of student support services your school has; chances are they can rent/loan you a computer.

Final thoughts

Ultimately, a research paper is a lot of work - that's by design. It's usually a term paper or other big project to evaluate what you've learned throughout the semester. There's no way for me to "make it easy," and that's not what I'm trying to do with this post. What I am trying to do is help lower your stress levels and help you see that a research paper is much less of a reason to panic than you might have made it. Look at it in pieces instead of getting overwhelmed by the scale of what you have to create. If you don't get anything else out of this, please take the first point to heart: a little extra work up front can save you a lot of extra work later. Having quality sources lined up and an idea of where you're going will make it a much smoother experience.

And of course, if you have any questions, you're welcome to ask them in the comments below and I'll do my best to give you a thorough answer!