Where's the Line Between Fanfic and Reboot?

Today I'd like to ask all of our readers an open question. The Washington Post today proudly trumpets the publication of three new works of fiction: And Another Thing..., Dracula: The Un-Dead, and Return to the Hundred Acre Wood. All three of these books are based on the work of three very famous authors: Douglas Adams, Bram Stoker, and A.A. Milne, respectively. The new novels are written by completely new authors, using the same characters and plot devices the original authors employed.

This idea of writing new stories using another author's world as a starting point seems eerily similar to a very popular online activity: fan fiction.
Fanfics and those who write them are a bit controversial among literary types. Some book fans swear by them. Others, who consider themselves into 'serious writing,' dismiss fanfics as unimaginative.

In Japan, the concept of dojinshi, a sort of fan fiction, has been relatively mainstream for the past thirty or forty years. In the West, we have been much slower to jump on the bandwagon.

But now it seems that the concept is picking up steam. The idea of 'rebooting' a film franchise [think the new Star Trek] has become a popular way to revive beloved characters. Now it seems that the trend has spread into mainstream popular literature.

So my question for you is this: do these three new novels constitute the positively connotated reboot, or the pejorative fanfic? Is the idea of taking characters and plots from another writer good or bad for popular fiction? Are we seeing the idea of the fanfic spread, or is this something completely different?

In other words, where's the line between fanfic and reboot?