Dear Amplitur:

You are correct. This "fan-fiction" is a derivative work of the original.

In the United States, the Copyright Act defines "derivative work" in 17 U.S.C. § 101:

A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.

US Copyright Office Circular 14: Derivative Works notes that:

A typical example of a derivative work received for registration in the Copyright Office is one that is primarily a new work but incorporates some previously published material. This previously published material makes the work a derivative work under the copyright law. To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a "new work" or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable.

A work is derivative if it incorporates copyrightable material. Copyright owners who feel derivatives are too close to their original work may initiate a legal battle. But the courts are unpredictable in terms of derivation rulings. That's because there aren't a set number of words, lines or notes that can be used safely without permission. Determining the creator's intent is even more difficult. There is also the murky waters of Fair Use to consider.

Here are some examples of derivative works:

• A screenplay based on a novel (an adaptation)
• A translation into of an English language novel into Russian
• A translation of a work into a new medium, such as a written work into an audio book
• A recording of a song remixed with an already existing song
• A book of maps based on public domain maps, and including some new maps
• A lithograph based on a painting
• A biography of someone that contains their journal entries and letters
• An arrangement of words and music based on a piece by Bach
• A new musical arrangement based on a traditional folk song
• A computer program that revises or modifies the source code of an already existing program, or translates it into another computer language
• A pictorial version (graphic novel; comic book) of a public domain novel
• A fictionalization of a factual work, such as a novel based on a historic account of a battle
• An abridgment (a shortened or condensed version) of a novel
• A drawing based on a photograph
• A sculpture based on a photograph
• A work that depicts characters and setting from another original work

Authors who are opposed to fan-fiction include Lucasfilms Ltd. (Star Wars), Raymond Feist, Anne McCaffrey, George R.R. Martin (A Song of Ice and Fire), Anne Rice (Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Chronicles). Anne Rice is very aggressive in going after fan-fiction.

Authors such as J.K. Rowling (Harry Potter) and Stephenie Meyer (Twilight series) do not mind fan-fiction. Rowling is flattered by it. Meyer actually provides links on her webpage to the fan-fiction derived of her works.

As a general rule, however, very few authors have given permission to produce derivatives. When permission is given the derivative author should make a statement to that effect in the front matter of the book.

Is it Sin?

Whenever a person violates legitimate law, it is sin. The only law we are allowed to violate are those laws that are contrary to Divine Law.

To put it bluntly, if a person produces a derivative work without the permission of the original copyright owner, is stealing, it is theft.

Even if the original copyright owner does not pursue litigation, it is still illegal and a sin.

Whether or not it is grave sin to create a derivative work without permission depends on the circumstances. Creating fan-fiction for commercial gain without permission, I believe is grave. In any event, none of that should matter. Sin is sin, whether it is grave or venial. We are obligated to avoid all sin.

Reading or buying fan-fiction that is a work of theft (stolen property) makes one an accomplice to that sin.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary