Archive of Our Own ^beta

We’ve heard from users concerned about many recent laws and their potential to impact AO3. We want to reassure you that while this continues to be a challenging time with a number of troubling laws under consideration around the world, AO3 is not currently affected. AO3 is run by a noncommercial, nonprofit organization, and it does not implement infinite scroll, offer recommendations to users, or use other techniques with which many regulators are concerned.

While these bills should not directly impact AO3, they are a reminder to stay alert for potential legal issues affecting fans in your area. Where applicable, the OTW encourages people to contact their local representatives and voice their concerns. You can read more about the OTW's Legal Advocacy work on our website.

Chinese Obscenity Laws and Danmei Authors

We have received a number of inquiries from concerned users regarding the arrests of dozens of danmei writers in China. As an organization, the OTW wholeheartedly shares these concerns. We stand firmly in support of free expression and we are closely monitoring the situation.

Age Verification Laws

Age verification laws have been proposed in multiple states and countries around the world. These laws create barriers that prevent open access to information, hamper the right to freedom of speech, and threaten users’ privacy. The OTW continues to strongly oppose these laws and we want to assure you that we do not intend to introduce age verification on our projects. We continue to monitor for opportunities to make our voice heard and encourage fans to do so as well. Local voices are often the most important for policymakers to hear from.

We've filed two amicus briefs on age verification laws already this year. One, filed with Wikimedia (who runs Wikipedia) and other organizations, in Netchoice v. Brown, urged the appellate court to uphold a block on the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act which requires online platforms to verify users' ages before allowing access, restrict certain content for minors through strict controls, and actively monitor and edit content in order to remain compliant with these restrictions.

In a second amicus brief filed with Wikimedia in Netchoice v. Fitch, we expressed concerns with Mississippi House Bill 1126, which threatens platforms’ ability to distribute free knowledge by imposing broad, sweeping restrictions that encroach on free speech rights.

Copyright

We also filed another amicus brief with other organizations in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, where we discussed the importance of internet access as a practical necessity of daily life, and argued that holding service providers liable for users’ copyright infringement based only on accusations of infringement, rather than actual proof of infringement, would threaten innovation and creativity by creating an incentive for service providers to deny service to creators without requiring evidence or providing due process.

UK’s Online Safety Act

We are monitoring how the Online Safety Act is being interpreted and enforced by the authorities.

Russia’s LGBT Ban

Russia’s restrictions on LGBT-themed content have escalated from a 2013 law aimed at protecting minors to a sweeping ban on all positive depictions of LGBT relationships. In 2023, the Russian Supreme Court labeled the "international LGBT movement" as extremist, effectively criminalizing LGBT advocacy. We strongly condemn this and continue to monitor the situation.

Game Storefronts Delisting NSFW Content

Recently, gaming storefronts Itch.io, Steam, and Valve have begun removing or restricting adult content, citing pressure from payment processors like Visa and Mastercard. These moves are obviously concerning for freedom of expression. The OTW remains committed to both fans' privacy and freedom of imagination. We will not change our policies on explicit or queer media.

KOSA

We continue to monitor the progression of KOSA, which has been reintroduced in the United States Congress. Although AO3 is not a covered platform under this bill, the legislation, if passed, is likely to have serious freedom of speech and privacy implications for all internet users. OTW Legal has already communicated its opposition to this bill to Congress and continues to encourage U.S. users to voice their opposition to it.

Australian Online Safety Act

While we do not believe that this law as-is applies to AO3 or any of our other projects, this is a developing situation that we will continue to monitor. Read more about this in our earlier post: Social Media Bans and AO3.

With regard to all the above legislation as well as any in the future, AO3 and the OTW will do whatever we can to preserve access to AO3 and inform users if anything changes. We remain committed to freedom of expression and will defend it as necessary to ensure that AO3 remains a safe, open space for creative expression.

Is there a new law that might affect fans or fannish activities in your country or region? Send us a message about legislation you think we should know about. (Submitting a concern doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a future Spotlight on Legal Issues post.)

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan-run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Copyright is the legal protection granting the owners of creative works (such as books, music, artwork, and so on) the authority to control their use, distribution, and sale. Copyright is a limited right, with key exceptions such as fair use. Fair use allows people to use copyrighted works for transformative purposes, such as commenting, reporting, and criticizing. Noncommercial uses are particularly favored as fair uses.

For Fair Use Week 2025, we want to spotlight recent discussions about Fair Use and highlight its importance for transformative works, because fair use makes fanworks legal under copyright law.

OTW’s Legal team is currently keeping an eye on site-blocking legislation, which has the potential to be overly broad and has been reintroduced in the new US Congress. We're also watching some interesting cases, like one against Jimmy Kimmel for his videos mocking George Santos' Cameos. Legal’s Rebecca Tushnet submitted an amicus brief in that case, defending Kimmel’s right to make fun of Santos. Another recent legal dispute saw tattoo artist Kat Von D sued by a photographer whose photo she used as a reference for a tattoo—she won a jury verdict that some of her uses of the photo were fair uses, and the tattoo itself was not an infringement. The Authors Alliance, which supports the interests of authors in strong fair use rights and strong protections against publishers’ attempts to make authors surrender their rights, submitted an amicus brief in support of fair use.

The US Copyright Office also recently released a section of a report on AI and copyright focusing on when AI-generated works are copyrightable. The Office concluded that human involvement in creation is required for copyrightability and that merely providing a prompt—even a detailed prompt refined over multiple attempts—does not represent enough human involvement to satisfy that requirement. As a result, the Copyright Office will accept works with AI-generated components, like the credits in a live-action film, but purely AI-generated works will not be considered copyrightable human creations. The Office is also expected to issue a report on AI training and fair use in the coming months. However, the Copyright Office does not decide most issues of fair use and its recommendations will not be binding in courts.

Another set of fair use developments comes from the US Copyright Claims Board, a small-claims proceeding set up by the Copyright Office. It was started in 2020 to handle some copyright claims more cheaply than litigation in federal court. Although there are some serious problems with the setup, the Board is not a rubber stamp for copyright owners – they do not always side with them. One example comes from a recent decision which found that a YouTube feud, where one YouTuber brought a claim against another for using clips of her work, involved fair use and not infringement.

It’s absolutely critical that fair use remains a robust exception to copyright, as it’s the foundation of transformative works’ existence—including, but not limited to, all types of fanworks.

As the OTW, we are committed to defending the right of transformative works to exist. Our Legal team works hard to stay on top of recent developments involving copyright law. And we want you to know your rights: exercising fair use rights and reminding people that copyright is not absolute keeps fair use healthy. In light of this, we wish you a happy Fair Use Week and hope we could help you catch up with some of the latest developments regarding copyright!

Is there a new law that might affect fans or fannish activities in your country? Send us a message about legislation you think we should know about. (Submitting a concern doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a future Spotlight on Legal Issues post.)

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan-run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Recently, the Australian Parliament passed the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill as part of the Online Safety Act of 2021 amendment. Starting in late 2025, the bill will prevent teenagers under 16 from using social media platforms including Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter/X. The bill plans to apply enormous fines to tech companies that don’t take measures to prevent minors from creating social media accounts.

Despite its intentions of protecting minors' mental health, the ban has sparked debate over digital censorship and privacy – raising notable concerns related to identity verification, digital access, and freedom of expression. One frequently cited concern is that this ban separates young people from any information and online support networks they may have: many young people primarily receive news on current events from social media and have cultivated online communities where they connect with other young people.

Others critique that setting a ban will lead to problems going unreported by teens who successfully circumvent it. In addition, social media companies have raised further concerns that this bill lacks guidance or advice on implementation.

Experts also comment that the bill lacks input from the group it impacts most – young people. The Australian government has said that they will solicit further expertise from young people, but critics argue that it's too late.

You can read more about the Australian Act here.

Outside of Australia, other countries have put forth or are discussing similar ideas:

• In Norway, the prime minister has announced plans to raise the minimum age to use social media from 13 to 15 in order to better protect young people from the "power of algorithms."
• Meanwhile in Turkey, the Information and Communication Technologies Authority announced plans to ban users under 13 from media applications; however, following news of Australia's ban, they adjusted their direction and are now considering a ban of all users under 16.
• In the UK, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology has also said that a social media ban for people under 16 is "on the table" in the name of online safety.

Understandably, bills like these have raised concerns regarding what counts as "social media" – more directly, whether this bill will affect OTW projects. While the Legal committee is keeping their eye on these and other bills that may affect us, we do not believe these bills will affect any of our projects, including AO3.

While bills like these may not affect AO3, they are a reminder to stay alert and aware of legal changes in your jurisdiction. If applicable, you may also want to contact your local representatives and submit concerns regarding how legislation will affect fans in your country.

Is there a new law that might affect fans or fannish activities in your country? Send us a message about legislation you think we should know about. (Submitting a concern doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a future Spotlight on Legal Issues post.)

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan-run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

As many of you are aware, H.R. 9495—also known as the "nonprofit killer"—passed in the U.S. House of Representatives last Thursday, November 21. OTW Legal has received a number of comments from understandably concerned users, and we'd like to take this opportunity to provide more information about this bill as it makes its way to the U.S. Senate.

Section 4 of H.R. 9495 would give the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury unilateral power to revoke the 501(c)3 status of any nonprofit, with minimal due process, simply by claiming it is affiliated with terrorism. The bill allows the Secretary to limit the disclosure of evidence against an accused nonprofit and places the burden of proving its innocence on that nonprofit—meaning a nonprofit could be forced to defend itself without being told why it has been accused in the first place.

You can read the text of the bill here.

While this bill is unlikely to pass in the current U.S. Senate, many organizations anticipate its return under the incoming presidential administration and U.S. Congress. If H.R. 9495 is ultimately passed into law, there is a danger that it could be enforced biasedly or used to further political agendas.

This bill poses a direct threat to the nonprofit sector as a whole, including many fannish nonprofits. Concerned U.S.-based fans can and should contact their senators and urge them to vote no on H.R. 9495. If you live outside the U.S., you can help spread the word by sharing this, our posts on social media, or resources from other organizations fighting for internet freedom, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Action Center.

Our Legal committee is keeping a close eye on this bill. Based on where it stands right now, we don't see an immediate risk to the OTW or AO3 but we will inform you if this changes.

Is there a new law that might affect fans or fannish activities in your country? Send us a message about legislation you think we should know about. (Submitting a concern doesn’t guarantee that it will be included in a future Spotlight on Legal Issues post.)

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan-run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Governments around the world have sometimes introduced legislation that tries to regulate online platforms and limit access to "harmful" content, instead of regulating bad behavior itself. However, not all proposed internet legislation thoroughly considers the challenges of living in the digital age and the risks of government regulation.

We have covered some of these proposed laws in the past, and we're still keeping an eye on a number of proposals. You can follow the ones we're watching at Bad Internet Bills.

The most recent development in the US is that the US Senate passed the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), but the US House of Representatives is unlikely to take up the bill this year. This is good news for now, but fans should stay vigilant. There is no firm timeline for this particular bill to progress further, but it's still possible for KOSA or bills similar to it to be brought to a vote in the future. If you live in the United States, you can contact your local congressperson about your concern.

We have called on AO3 users to oppose KOSA and other bills like it in the past because these bills often have vague definitions of what's considered harmful to children, leaving it open for interpretation and abuse by various government entities or officials. Further, enforcement of bills like these hinges on age-verification technology. Such technology is currently unreliable and, even if it improves, will pose extreme privacy and security risks to users. In addition, these kinds of laws encourage affected sites and platforms to self-censor any information they believe governing bodies will consider inappropriate in order to avoid liability.

The OTW and AO3 would not be directly impacted by KOSA because we are a nonprofit and KOSA's current draft only applies to for-profit institutions. However, many other sites and platforms fans use regularly for their fannish activities would likely be affected. More generally, bills like these may have the inadvertent effect of exposing internet users to greater security risks. We will continue to highlight upcoming regulatory changes that may affect fans online and offline.

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Internet bill S-210, An Act to restrict young persons’ online access to sexually explicit material, aims to protect Canadian youth but instead could drastically alter Canada’s online landscape for everyone.

Like various proposed US age-verification laws, it would not affect the Archive of Our Own (AO3) because AO3 is not a commercial website. However, it would introduce serious risks to Canadians’ ability to securely access content on the internet, regardless of their age or of whether or not that content is sexually explicit.

S-210 creates liability not just for providers of adult content, but for internet service providers (ISPs) as well. Age verification requires providing personal information to an ISP, where it can create security and privacy risks. Separately, ISPs would also need to view content passing through their services. The latter task is mostly impossible because internet traffic is often encrypted for security purposes. To comply with potential orders issued under S-210, ISPs would need to reject encrypted traffic, which would leave Canadians either cut off from large portions of the internet or exposed to significant security risks due to unencrypted data. Internet Society has a detailed breakdown of how all of this would work in practice.

If you live in Canada and are concerned about this bill, you can email your MP to voice your opposition via OpenMedia’s pre-drafted campaign form, or you can contact your MP directly. You can also check out the text of the bill for yourself.

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan-run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

Tennessee's proposal of the ELVIS Act might sound like something fun for fans, but in fact has the potential to create problems for fans engaging in a variety of fannish activities. This legislation is moving forward next week under pressure from Tennessee Governor Lee, but there is still some time to voice concerns and message the governor about how this act will hurt the public interest.

A number of organizations including the American Society for Collective Rights Licensing, Authors Guild, Copyright Clearance Center, National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are sponsoring this act. The proposed legislation creates a new right of publicity “in any medium in any manner” for life + 10 years.

OTW Legal is concerned about the potential impact of this Act, and believes Tennessee fans should be aware of the profound risks posed to both RPF and fictional fanworks that invoke an actor's image. One part of the law is relatively minor: it adds “voice” to the existing right of publicity, which covers commercial uses. But it goes further. There is new, broad liability for anyone who knowingly “publishes, performs, distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to the public” content that includes someone's voice or likeness, with no limitation to commercial uses. This could potentially harm artists, authors who describe an actor (or a character played by a particular actor), vidders, and other fannish creators. There is also broad liability for anyone who “distributes, transmits, or otherwise makes available an algorithm, software, tool, or other technology, service or device” whose purpose is to make the replicas.

Because the ELVIS Act establishes liability for both the “user” and the “developer/platform”, it means that – without clear definitions – there could be a legal free-for-all on social media. The act's wording could mean that anyone clicking on an infringing document could be at legal risk. One of the OTW's partner organizations, NetChoice has more information about why the ELVIS Act could put fans at risk just for posting concert photos or for being associated with violations. As their post points out, there could be better laws passed instead to ban deep fakes.
The ELVIS Act is unnecessary as Tennessee law already adequately handles fraud, deception, and misappropriating someone’s likeness. If you are also concerned about this Act, let Tennessee officials know.

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) has been much in the news lately, and OTW Legal has been receiving inquiries from understandably concerned users. We thought it would be worthwhile to provide some information on KOSA and also a rash of other bad internet bills that have been proposed around the U.S. It’s been, unfortunately, a busy summer – and now that Congress is back in session it’s time to take action!

The tl;dr is that the OTW and AO3 are not currently implicated by KOSA and many of the other bills because of our nonprofit status (most of the proposed laws only apply to for-profit institutions). This means the operations of the OTW and the AO3 wouldn’t be directly impacted by these bills. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t reason to be concerned just generally about these bills and the internet environment they would create, so, if you’re in the U.S., you can contact your elected representatives. More information below!

KOSA

KOSA is presented as a bill “to protect the safety of children on the internet,” but that’s not what it accomplishes. Instead, the bill would basically make “covered platforms” liable if they fail to design their platforms to prevent users under the age 18 from exposure to a wide amount of content designated as harmful to children. The AO3 is not a covered platform under this bill, but lots of platforms relied on by kids and fans are for-profit and would be affected by KOSA.

There are a number of concerns about the bill:

First, the content that must be kept away from minors is often vaguely defined. This will inevitably lead to censorship as platforms will err on the side of blocking information to avoid liability.

Second, because platforms only have to avoid exposure to minors, this encourages platforms to verify the ages of all of their users – conduct that would detrimentally affect the ability to be anonymous or pseudonymous online.

Third, it isn’t actually the platforms who get to decide whether the content is harmful to kids; rather, the bill would leave this decision up to the Federal Trade Commission and the individual states. Given that many states have begun advancing theories that information about racism, sexism, sexual and gender identities, and reproductive health is all harmful to children, this could result in widespread censorship of such information under this law.

Sponsors and supporters of this bill have stated publicly that they see it as an anti-LGBTQ+ measure and that if it passes,they intend to use it to discourage online communication that would help young LGBTQ+ people.

Finally, it’s likely that the censorship this bill encourages would affect not just minors but all internet users, as age verification is notoriously difficult online and covered platforms might therefore strive to be cautious and censor all such information to avoid liability.

OTW Legal has directly communicated its opposition to this Bill to Congress. But there is more you can do. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has more detailed information about this bill. It also explains how you can oppose it. Teen Vogue also has a good write-up of the bill. You can also read the text of the bill for yourself.

Other Bad Bills Around the Country

This summer has unfortunately been a really active one for states quickly passing a number of troubling internet laws, and there are still more in the pipeline. There are also some other bad proposed federal laws floating around. Many of these laws are briefly summarized below. If you’re a resident of one of the states below, you can also make your voice heard to your state representatives. Bad Internet Bills has a lot of great resources to help you get involved in protesting these bills. Further information is provided below.

1. Federal EARN IT Act and STOP CSAM Act: The EARN IT Act isn’t really new, in that it first showed up in 2020. It wasn’t popular and it was dropped but now it’s back. The bill claims to be about the sexual exploitation of children, but it is worded broadly in such a way as to threaten online privacy and encourage censorship of marginalized communities. In this way, it is very similar to the STOP CSAM Act. Both bills would impose liability on websites for containing certain material, even without that websites’ knowledge, the acts will encourage the same sort of over-policing and censorship that KOSA would promote, probably aimed at speech about reproductive health, gender identity, and sex and sexuality. Also, since the liability could be imposed even when the websites didn’t know any material was there, it encourages websites to proactively scan all content, creating an atmosphere of surveillance on internet platforms and driving platforms out of business if they can’t afford to do that kind of monitoring. Here, too, OTW Legal has communicated our opposition to these bills, but you can help. You can read more about the EARN IT Act’s problems; the STOP CSAM Act’s problems from the EFF; and you can read the texts of both bills. There is also some information on how you can oppose the EARN IT Act and the STOP CSAM Act.

2. Federal RESTRICT Act: You may have heard the RESTRICT Act referred to as a “TikTok ban.” Among other things, it provides the executive branch with broad powers to take actions to mitigate national security risks posed by internet services with any ties to foreign adversaries. While the OTW and AO3 do not fit the definition for such a service, fans may be interested in the statute because of the free speech implications on their continuing use of TikTok, for instance. Because the statute is vaguely worded to permit executive prohibition in poorly defined circumstances, its future impact beyond TikTok could be great. Find out how to oppose the RESTRICT Act.

3. Federal Cooper Davis Act: This act would require social media platforms and other providers of internet services to report to the government certain transactions suspected to involve fentanyl, methamphetamine, and other counterfeit controlled substances. The reporting requirements, which would include user identity and location, kick in when the platform has a reasonable belief that a controlled substance transaction might be planned. In theory, this sounds good. In practice, though, this raises privacy concerns and also encourages platforms to monitor user communications to avoid possible liability for failure to report. Such monitoring would likely place disproportionate attention on the communications of people of color and other marginalized communities. You can find out how to oppose the Cooper Davis Act.

4. New Jersey A5069: New Jersey is considering a KOSA-like bill prohibiting practices by social media platforms that cause harm to children. While the law would not affect the OTW because of its nonprofit status, it carries similar harmful implications as KOSA. The bill has passed the New Jersey Assembly but is still under consideration in the New Jersey Senate. If you are a New Jersey resident, you can voice your opposition to the bill by contacting your state senator..

5. Maryland’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act: Maryland is considering a law that would require businesses providing online services not to do anything detrimental to a child. As has been noted, such a vaguely-defined term can be wielded as a censorship tool that stifles online communication. It doesn’t apply to nonprofits like the OTW. If you are a Maryland resident you can contact your representatives about this bill.

6. California’s SB-680: This proposed bill is similar to KOSA, in that it makes social media platforms liable for designing services that cause harm. Again, this law would not affect the OTW because it doesn’t apply to nonprofits. The bill is currently being debated and has not yet passed. If you’re in California, you can voice your opposition to the bill by contacting your local representative.

7. California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act: This bill passed last year but has not yet gone into effect. Similar to the Maryland bill described above, it requires businesses providing online services not to do anything detrimental to a child. Like Maryland’s bill, this bill does not affect the OTW as it does not apply to nonprofits. The bill, has been challenged in court.

8. Utah’s Social Media Regulation Acts: Utah has recently passed a bill that requires social media companies, starting next year, to enact age verification on all accounts, require parental consent for minors under the age of 18 to be on social media, provide parents or guardians full access to all social media accounts held by a minor, and block access by minors to social media between 10:30pm and 6:30am, among other requirements. Obviously this bill has a number of troubling implications, and it can be interpreted to apply to the AO3 (although we would argue that it shouldn’t). The bill has already been passed but Utah is accepting input so that may be something concerned users can participate in.

9. Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act: This recently passed bill would require social media companies, starting next year, to require parental consent for any user under the age of 16. Like the Utah bill, there are arguments that this bill, if passed, could apply to the AO3. (The bill text starts at the bottom of page 622).

10. Arkansas’s Social Media Safety Act: Arkansas has recently passed a bill that requires social media companies, starting in September, to require age verification and the consent of a parent or guardian if the account holder is a minor under the age of 18. The OTW is not covered by this bill as a nonprofit. However, it has the same troubling implications as the other age verification bills. A trade association for internet companies including Meta, TikTok, and Twitter has sued in federal court to block this bill from going into effect. The ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have filed a brief in support of blocking the law. (Read more about the lawsuit.)

11. A bill was proposed in Texas requiring age verification and the prohibition of any minor under the age of 18 being allowed to have a social media account. The bill did not define “social media platform” and so it was unclear who would be covered under this bill. The bill was introduced and referred to committee, but it was not acted upon before the legislature adjourned. Therefore, it has not been passed. We will continue to monitor if the bill becomes active again. (Read the text of the bill.)

You might be wondering why the OTW doesn’t do even more itself to actively oppose these bills right now. As a nonprofit, there are severe limits on how (and how much) the OTW is allowed to engage in lobbying. What we can do is encourage people to oppose these bills by voicing their concerns to their elected representatives! When appropriate, the OTW also participates in amicus briefs, which are briefs in support of positions in lawsuits that would benefit fans and fan creators.

If these bills do pass –- and we hope they don’t! -– we would look for opportunities to work with allies to file amicus briefs and launch other challenges to them. You can read more about OTW Legal’s work, including amicus briefs we’ve filed on our website.

The Organization for Transformative Works is the non-profit parent organization of multiple projects including Archive of Our Own, Fanlore, Open Doors, Transformative Works and Cultures, and OTW Legal Advocacy. We are a fan run, entirely donor-supported organization staffed by volunteers. Find out more about us on our website.