Good question. I thought http://hpmor.com/info/ would cover the licensing, but nope. Some googling doesn’t turn up any explicit licensing either.
“All fanfiction involves borrowing the original author’s characters, situations, and world. It is ridiculous to turn around and complain if your own ideas get borrowed in turn. Anyone is welcome to steal anything from any fanfiction I write.”
I think that only speaks to writing fanfiction of Eliezer’s fanfiction, not rights over the text itself. By default, the copyright is solely Eliezer’s unless and until he says otherwise.
He only says you’re allowed to steal it. Not to use it with permission. If you take it without permission, that’s stealing, so you have permission, which means that you didn’t steal it, etc.
No, no, no: He didn’t say that you don’t have permission if you don’t steal it, only that you do have permission if you do.
What you said is true: If you take it without permission, that’s stealing, so you have permission, which means that you didn’t steal it.
However, your argument falls apart at the next step, the one you dismissed with a simple “etc.” The fact that you didn’t steal it in no way invalidates your permission, as stealing ⇒ permission, not stealing ⇔ permission, and thus it is not necessarily the case that ~stealing ⇒ ~permission.
Good question. I thought http://hpmor.com/info/ would cover the licensing, but nope. Some googling doesn’t turn up any explicit licensing either.
That page leaves it clear:
“All fanfiction involves borrowing the original author’s characters, situations, and world. It is ridiculous to turn around and complain if your own ideas get borrowed in turn. Anyone is welcome to steal anything from any fanfiction I write.”
I think that only speaks to writing fanfiction of Eliezer’s fanfiction, not rights over the text itself. By default, the copyright is solely Eliezer’s unless and until he says otherwise.
He only says you’re allowed to steal it. Not to use it with permission. If you take it without permission, that’s stealing, so you have permission, which means that you didn’t steal it, etc.
No, no, no: He didn’t say that you don’t have permission if you don’t steal it, only that you do have permission if you do.
What you said is true: If you take it without permission, that’s stealing, so you have permission, which means that you didn’t steal it.
However, your argument falls apart at the next step, the one you dismissed with a simple “etc.” The fact that you didn’t steal it in no way invalidates your permission, as stealing ⇒ permission, not stealing ⇔ permission, and thus it is not necessarily the case that ~stealing ⇒ ~permission.
The exception proves the rule. Since he gave permission to steal it, that implies that you don’t have permission to take it in general.