If I can add my piece as a temporarily lapsed history postgrad—the other enormously important thing that AO3 does vis a vis archiving work that is underrated by all these conversations about morality is the heavy lifting of presenting a legal defence against the overreaching use of copyright law by entertainment corporations like Disney, Comcast, etc.
Archives are as useful as they are because they largely exist outwith the bounds of copyright law. There is, of course, copyright law that does apply to archives, if you’ve ever tried to reference archived material in, eg. a published paper, you’ll know what that looks like, but you cannot DMCA strike an archive. You cannot remove history from archives simply because Mickey Mouse has been doodled on the sides of a page. But you can do that on the internet—particularly an internet without the OTW legal team’s immensely important work.
I’d like to draw a comparison between the work the OTW does and, perhaps a little strangely, an ongoing struggle in the world of computer and web development.
The internet, for those who don’t know, was largely built in two ways. One, by academics and US federal government employees working hand-in-glove, and two by a veritable army of programmers and coders who developed the architecture of the internet and made it available for all to use and reuse when and how they pleased. We call this ‘open source’ software or code. Every single thing you touch and interact with on the internet relies on open source code. Not almost everything—everything.
And bad, bad things happen when, for example, major companies try to use copyright law to bully developers into giving up their hard work. The internet literally falls apart.
How does this relate to fanworks? If you have ever reblogged a gifset from a movie under copyright, or drawn and posted fanart or sketches, or read fanfic or fan videos online, then YOU have violated copyright, such as it exists (and if it isn’t a violation of copyright law in your specific country, I can assure you that Disney’s legal team is hoping to make it a violation), and could be liable for the legal fallout from it. Companies like Disney are interested in monetising every element of our social and cultural life, and the easiest way for them to do this is through the use and abuse of copyright law. If you mocked TumblrPlus, just you wait for what the Mouse has in store.
Now, back to the archives. Strip away the enjoyment factor of the internet, ignore, if you will, how the internet connects people and how it gives you the opportunity to enjoy art and culture in a way you otherwise can’t. Imagine you’re a historian trying to research how culture responded to the pandemic. You’re going to need an archive to do that. Now imagine you need to pay £5, £10 for each archived resources you want to read or observe. For reference, my MPhil dissertation referenced 600 separate archived items, and that was only a 20,000 word paper. PhDs run close to 100,000 words. Think about how untenably expensive that research would now be.
That’s why it’s important to support the OTW. Not because of the moral component, because of the pure and simple defensive value it provides as a front against capitalist alienation. Nobody is telling you to not donate to individuals’ GoFundMes, they’re telling you to think strategically and systematically. (And I am also telling you that—as with boycotts—if you choose not to participate, then that’s fine, don’t participate, but you also don’t need to go running about shouting it to the high heavens, that in itself is both deeply boring and maliciously individualistic).