I've read half of one John Scalzi book, and it's the one that has a note at the front that it's an affectionately intended rewrite of a science fiction novel from the 50s that he liked, implicitly into a modern style incorporating additional ideas he had about the concept.
Like. That's a fic. It's indistinguishable from loads of fics I've read except that he presumably got permission of some kind so he could publish.
Obviously he considers this a much more profound difference than we tend to; we're like 'this allows you to sell it without concealing the derivation' and he's like 'no this makes it legal for this story to exist.'
Don't know what he means about 'saying mine and walking off with all your pretty toys.' Like, everything else in his policy at the link is rational and reality-based if a little obnoxious and condescending (which is also how his narration is, so at least he's consistent) but in what way does he think he's capable of 'taking' his ip away from fandom if he feels like it?
Is this a veiled way of saying he'll sue, or is it just impotent posturing?
It would tie in with his confidence in the poll quote that fic is very clearly illegal; he doesn't personally object to its existence and considers it a compliment, but he likes knowing it's Very Illegal and he has the power to banish it with the power of copyright, should it offend him.