Someone in Bulgaria spray painted a Soviet statue into superheros. Someone awesome.
Anonymous said: Fanart would count as a derivative work (hentaikid would benefit from Googling that), the original copyright holder has the right to derivative works. Putting "copyright of X" (where X is the original copyright holder) is a recognition of that, probably with the hope that "used with permission" will be implied.
The confusion is between trademark and copyright. If DC tried to sell artbooks out of the 600k deviantart batman pieces they’d be in a world of hurt not even their lawyers could get them out of. They don’t automatically belong to them.
Trademark gives them commercial rights over their intellectual properties and yes, derivatives thereof. When you make fanart you’re hitching your wagon to a popular existing franchise because no one cares about your OC donut steel, we all understand that. But it is harmless and not actionable. When you go further and try to put out your own batman comic or videogame or movie that’s when you are muscling in on their commercial rights (Which is why often fan projects get stamped on when they’re in these fields)
Agreed that saying “Copyright of X” in your fanart is just a symbolic gesture, but it’s something a lot of people take literally and again, work for hire involves the transfer of copyrights for money. That spiderman comic is © Herb Trimpe or Todd Mcfarlane until he signs on the dotted line and gets his cash.
And in Europe you can’t sign away as many rights as in the US. It’s definitely a complex field and IANAL, but I did attend lectures on the subject taught by a lawyer.
tl;dr corporations mix and match trademark, copyright and legal threats in order to give an impression of complete control over their properties.
!!! IMPORTANT !!!
DO NOT COMMISSION, ART TRADE, OR HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS PERSON. REPORT HER. Please do not tell them to kill themselves no matter how much they anger you. That only makes the situation worse and it is not needed.
Lolibutt steals art, and impersonates the person she is stealing from.
She uses Google translate to talk in Japanese. She tries her best to impersonate the artist. Also, Lolibutt is getting money from stealing these artworks. From Gaia money, to points. Lolibutt is Milkykuyu.
The amount of points isn’t small either. It’s about 800 - 10,000.
Journals about her,
This is another one of Milkykuyu’s ways to get money.
All of the original artwork is here: http://tegaki.pipa.jp/179295/
If you like her artwork please support the original artist, not the thief.
Well that’s nice, but how about instead of rustling up an internet posse to chase after some small time swindler you do something about the big sites that systematically steal art from everyone? 9gag? Fakku? Dozens and dozens more… they’re the ones making a killing out of art theft, not some poor tracer japanese wanabee
Fanart is still a copyright violation though, legally speaking. -SIrkowski
Is it? Is it the same thing to draw a Donald Duck and send it to Disney magazine as to have an industrial CD burning operation in a warehouse? In the latter case the cops are going to bust in through the door acting on their own initiative, it is a criminal operation. In the former someone has to get their panties in a knot to the point that they’ll initiate civil proceedings. And if the artwork is unflattering enough to provoke this it’s bound to be parody
Of course if someone has enough money (A corporation) they can ruin your life. And legal departments need to justify their existence, so they will try to go after easy targets and it doesn’t get much easier than a porn artist making fanart of underage characters, haha.
But fanart being automatically copyright infringement? No way.
How I feel whenever I think about…
Pfft. Like I’m telling you.
Another episode of “Hentai or Hay Fever”.
But this is a terrible game, Uncle Ghastly! It never, ever seems to be Hay Fever!
And of course in Hentai, hay fever is represented by blonde haired lolis and silver haired shotas fucking everything that moves
Ha ha yeah, I ran 15 km yesterday. This one really hits home.
Artists posting fanart need to stop saying their artwork is “copyright X corporation”. Copyright is the right to make copies of a specific piece, and that belongs to you when you post a picture, not to warner brothers or whoever.
Do you know why DC owns the copyright to that Batman cover over there? Because they commissioned it, paid for it, and the artist signed a contract handing over the copyright to them, and they’ve been doing it for a long time, so they have tens of thousands of pictures of batman. They also own the trademark, which is the right to use a word in a specific context for business purposes.
But they do NOT have some mystical droit de seigneur over all current and potential images of a guy wearing pointy ears and a cloak.
Sorry guys. Had to remove the picture of Astrid from How To Train Your Dragon because of this DMCA notice…
Cool, so apparently we can get DMCA notices for specific pictures, now. That’s, uh, pretty interesting?
I haven’t seen the picture but unless it was a screenshot from the movie, it’s not dreamworks copyrighted material. You can dispute DMCAs you know. “It’s an original drawing I made inspired by the movie, it is quite clearly parody as my blog disclaimer states.
Avatar update time! I feel it’s high time I grew up and posted an actual photo of my real face, like a mature person would.
"Hey, evolution, you seem like you’re feeling better. That’s a pretty red bug you’re making there.”
"Oh, thanks. It’s a flatid leaf bug."
"I like the shape. And that’s a lovely shade of red."
"I picked it myself."
"That’s a weird fuzzy branch it’s crawling on, though, huh?"
"What? No. Those are the babies."
"… you are so weird.”
Source: Flickr / christophandre / licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 (exposure adjusted from original)