Dragon Ball

Does anyone know why Umbriel's SOTW was removed from the gallery. Below is the reply I got from tsurara after PMing her.

Whilst Umbriel did use fanart, it was edited in the sig to some extent.

Thanks... and if all is ok, I will ask Umbriel to re-upload if no-one has issues with with.

If credit was made to the site the image was taken from, then that's half the battle won. Isn't nearly every image taken from elsewhere nowadays??

Cheers.

Chiefblackhammer

It isn't as much about the fact it was taken from elsewhere but the purpose of the image.

Scans, renders or vectors are designed to be used by others in their own works...fan art REALLY isn't...so it should NOT be used, but that is just my opinion.

__________________

tsurara

My reservation is that it's tagged. We don't allow the uploading of tagged images to the gallery (because, obviously, they were tagged so that they would NOT be stolen and used without credit)... so I'm not sure we should allow the use of them.

Then again, if he hadn't posted the source: there's no way to know.

Either way, the artwork WASN'T credited... it was tagged. I found the website myself with a google search in Japanese.

If the artist had posted a prohibition against use of her artwork on her site: I would an adamant "no"... but she's curiously silent on reuse issues.

I'm pretty ambivalent about this.

Like I said, I originally deleted it because 1) he said in the description it was "a cropped wallpaper" and 2) I had a nagging suspicion that the original was fanart taken without permission from a Japanese fanartist's site

1 isn't true... and 2 is debateable -- we know the artist and the image is tagged BUT the image either never has been or is no longer featured on the site, the artist does produce doujinshi for sale (which could have been scanned to generate the image), and they don't specifically prohibit image use on other sites (it's still rude, but it isn't explicitly stated).

Dragon Ball

Actually, aren't MOST images outside the public domain copyrighted? Isn't a scan really a copyright infringement? All magazines I ever pickup have the "copyright" text on it. Anything done by another person and used in your own work really should be credited, but 99% of the work done for SOTW is not credited. Using a character in your SOTW is a copyright infringement I would think. If I went ahead and created a banner with the Coca Cola logo in it, I'm sure this is no different to using Naruto in a banner.

However, use of other's work has slid into a socially accepted norm as long as it has been edited. The only thing that is frowned upon is taking another's work and not editing it in the slightest and passing it off as your own work.

So, I don't mind Umbriel's submission as it was edited, and due credit mentioned.

If no-one has any strong objections, I will ask Umbriel to re-upload.

Thank you.

Chiefblackhammer

I am not arguing copyright infringement or the fair use act (which allows works to be reproduced or modified and not be copyright infringement under certain circumstances). We can go into that but it is kind of pointless for this topic.

What I am saying is that when people upload scans, renders or vectors that they are explicitly for use in wallpapers, banners or sigs. Fan art is to show off one's own skill not to be re-used by others for GFX.

In terms of "net-modus operandi" for GFX use by anime communities given the purpose of the upload it is acceptable to use scans, renders or vectors...but not fan-art. But that is just my opinion and from what I have seen on other sites.

Plus if you think about it using fan-art is no different then if we start allowing others to take a wallpaper and change 1 little thing and bam call it a new wallpaper made them.

__________________

tsurara

I have a strong objection to posting anything on the front page of the site that is a gross breech of netiquette, breaking the rules, or disrespectful in general.

Altering another fan's work without credit to or permission from that fan is quite a bit different from using a promotional image from a series (to essentially promote that series). While the series of origin is generally evident of a scan or fanart: the artist is NOT. In the situation of a scan: the artwork has been PURCHASED at some point and generally has been produced by/belongs to a company or organization seeking to promote a series. Fanart, wallpapers and edited works are generally created by unpaid individuals for love of the series. If credit is removed from the equation, you remove the ability for anyone to trace that work to the artist in question.

And artists %&*# HATE that.

It's an issue between shitting on coorporations and to a lesser extent, profit-seeking independant artists to their possible benefit (through promotion) -- and capitalizing on the sweat and tears of other memebrs of our own fandom. If we prohibit the theft and derivative use of our own work as fans, so why would we deny that same protection to fans overseas?

IF this is fanart (and not a doujinshi scan): I'm 100% against it's use. But since there's no way to tell without a great deal of footwork, there's nothing I can do. Doujinshi is a grayer area than fanart because a physical copy has been purchased somewhere along the line, an artist has profitted from a derivative work, and a legitimate "Scan" can exist without anyone having committed the right-click-save sin of fanart theft.

As for Umbriel's defense in the matter: someone else having stolen the artwork first doesn't mean it's free for all afterwards. Someone who didn't draw fanart has no right to give permission for it's use.

As long as it doesn't win: whatever. But if anything featuring uncredited fanart reaches the front page: I think we have a major hypocracy issue highlighted for all to see.

I don't think we have enough proof to block the submission. But I think he should absolutely have to credit the artist in his entry.

Dragon Ball

Thanks for your input chief and tsurara. Much appreciated. Will ask Umbriel to re-upload but with credit clearly indicated.

Cheers.