Printable View
Ah I see, that makes sense. In the end it's kind of a funny situation, basically it's like, I love this show! So I'll sell illegal fan art and steal from the company responsible for creating it kind of thing. X3
Also what are thoughts on pokemon gijinka adoptables? It's a rather popular thing out there now a days. Although the finished design is yours the "theme" itself is copyrighted. So what happens then?
At that point, I honestly do not know. It could still be illegal. What QT said in relation to selling fanart overall, I think it's just a safer bet to assume it's illegal ;>>Quote:
Originally Posted by pomchi
If you like to know more about Copyright information, I remember snagging this document from Concept Art a while back that was up for people to read.
Power Point and PDF versions
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1j...it?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1j...it?usp=sharing
I think that the general "rule" of closed species is "don't be a dick" :P It's not impossible to create one anyways, but it's also not impossible to also just come up with your own idea instead of taking someone else's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QT Melon
Holy crap that's awesome. Thank you!
Really? I thought the main theme of the people creating these closed species was:
Let's all be Avaricious!
Threatening and Malicious!
Cause screwing people over
is actually quite Delicious.
- - - Updated - - -
I'd be much more comfortable believing that modern copyright laws weren't disgustingly anti-consumer and just plain overkill, but unfortunately that's not the case. :B We have people suing others for making non-commercial works of admiration (fan art) and even attempting to make things better- it's really quite frightening...
Can you demonstrate actual examples of where people are really suing and winning over people committing copyright violations when it comes to the small person doing a closed species in this discussion?
If anything it's major companies shutting down people making fanart, and often times rightly so when they take and make prints and peddle work at conventions or etsy or little online shops. Not some person posting up something on an online gallery unless they feel it damages the brand - like someone posting pornographic material.
Even then, I'm hard pressed to find how it is pro consumer to allow pornographic material (even if the companies just look the other way), especially if the works were not pornographic and more kid friendly.
I'm just wanting to see where these massive lawsuits are coming from, since I have explained the difficulty in suing for copyright infringement already.
It may be "rightly" by the twisted modern copyright laws in the US, but it's rather wrongly when you take it in an ethical sense. If someone's making maybe a couple hundred dollars (if that) and you're making several hundred million, I fail to see any real damage. Suing someone over fan art is wrong in every sense.
While I can't provide any examples of people suing over closed species as it is a rather early trend, I actually can give a great example of someone making a big lawsuit over fan art. In the mid-1980s (I believe it was in Florida), Disney sued a children's hospital over having Disney characters painted over the wall with a ridiculous claim that it would make it appear the hospital was affiliated with Disney. In reality, it was to make it more comfortable for the children.
And you think it's hard to file a lawsuit over copyright? Funniest thing I've ever heard, as it's easy as sending an email with merely a claim and no evidence (i.e. a DMCA takedown).
You shouldn't be making money off other creative property you didn't create. If you want to make money off your creative property, then...be creative.
Like I said, if you're going to bring in this argument, at least find decent examples where this is really widespread. I've done research over this and cases like you're stating is few and far inbetween due to costs. Companies usually just issue a C&D since it is the much easier of options than suing for damages.
Are you sure you got the story right? Because threatening a lawsuit is not the same as a successful lawsuit? As I said most that companies tend to engage in more commonly is Cease and Desist. This is not the same as suing for damages. It can be for possible damages, but more often than not a company is more satisfied with a C&D unless they really have reason to believe that money is going to be won.
Companies most often sue in copyright for actual piracy, not because you created fanart. With the laws it's heavily weighted in big companies favor.
You need to get your legal terminology correct. A Lawsuit is not the same as a Takedown request. In order for the case to go to trial, most IP lawyers will not go pro bono (ie free) and ask that you pay up front.
They actually did file the lawsuit, fought the battle, and (unfortunately) won. And what's "creative" under current copyright law is so narrow it's nearly nonexistent. It's gotten to a point where people are coining terms like "copyfascism" and "copyright troll." It's not pretty, in addition to quite sad.