• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Fur Affinity, Fan Art/Fiction and the DMCA

Carenath

Cynical Dragon
There's gonna be a lot of butthurt furries when they find their favorite fanpieces gone if something like that happens.
To say nothing of their characters, if their characters are infringing on someone elses copyright and the owner doesnt like it.

Many anime companies see fan art/fiction as a source for the next generation of writers and artists, but Disney, Warner Brothers and other "family friendly" companies like Nintendo come down like the Hammer of Thor on people infringing.
That and I doubt "family-friendly" companies would appreciate the prolific erotic artwork their character creations are depicted in... I can name one or two popular artists who's artwork violates another's copyright like this, for drawing pokemon in erotic poses...

... If I write a fanfiction basted on a movie, I'm not duplicating anything that's copyrighted. I may be using trademarked characters, but trademark != copyright, and has a whole different (somewhat more lax) set of rules.
Characters can be copyrighted, and the owners can sue you for drawing them in an erotic pose and distributing the image, profit made or not. Some authors have explicit rules regarding fan-fics, and allow them provided certain names or places are not used, others seem to turn a blind eye.

My only guess regarding DMCA take-downs is that the characters owners dont want them shown in erotic poses on sites like VCL and FA because they see it as tainting the character's clean image.

No. I will only comply with a DCMA if the same DCMA is served upon DeviantArt first. When DeviantArt complies... I comply, otherwise I say "THFFFFFPT!".
Difference is, they might not mind the character derivitives being drawn on DA, DA doesnt allow you to post adult artwork as far as I know, but here, and VCL, adult artwork is almost the raison d'etre, so I would imagine you're more likely to be served with a take-down than DA is, on that fact alone. They dont want their characters being drawn as porn, so they sue. Though saying that, I wouldnt be surprised if a few copyright owners were anal enough to go after dA as well just to keep any unauthorised versions of their stuff being displayed.
 
Last edited:

PriestRevan

Banned
Banned
this is a load of crap fyi

you are using someone else's intellectual property

if they decide they don't want you too, tough cookies for you. you can claim fair use sometimes, but "eeyore taking it up the ass from megatron" is very unlikely to be covered under fair use, as they can claim it degrades their image

This is true. Too bad Disney and Warner Bros. can't catch everyone.

But, just putting this out there, those characters whom look like copyright characters *cough*sonic*cough* are protected, correct (like, same style)?
 

Dragoneer

Site Developer
Site Director
Administrator
They dont want their characters being drawn as porn, so they sue. Though saying that, I wouldnt be surprised if a few copyright owners were anal enough to go after dA as well just to keep any unauthorised versions of their stuff being displayed.
This is true, but I've seen some pretty risque stuff on dA, too.

But then again, what about Bugs Bunny? Is Bugs Bunny porn illegal? I mean, the character dresses in drag and attempts seduce men into luring them into harm's way and/or traps. The character is already lewd. And what about Disney? Disney hid porn in its movies, innuendos in the Lion King ("Sex") and the suggestive Nala/Simba romance scene that later results in a cub being born in the movie. Or ol' Penis Knees from the Little Mermaid.
 

Aurali

Banned
Banned
innuendos in the Lion King ("Sex") Or ol' Penis Knees from the Little Mermaid.

these two are taken extremely out of context.. only very dirty minds will say crap.. like the penis in the poster of Little Mermaid.. however there is a picture of a naked chick in The Rescuers

I would like to agree on some crap.. but I wouldn't care less if my Eli character was drawn into porn.
 

Carenath

Cynical Dragon
This is true, but I've seen some pretty risque stuff on dA, too.

But then again, what about Bugs Bunny? Is Bugs Bunny porn illegal? I mean, the character dresses in drag and attempts seduce men into luring them into harm's way and/or traps. The character is already lewd. And what about Disney? Disney hid porn in its movies, innuendos in the Lion King ("Sex") and the suggestive Nala/Simba romance scene that later results in a cub being born in the movie. Or ol' Penis Knees from the Little Mermaid.
Thats true too, it really does depend on the copyright owner in the end.. hypocrits or not.
 

Freehaven

Dammit.
Characters can be copyrighted, and the owners can sue you for drawing them in an erotic pose and distributing the image, profit made or not. Some authors have explicit rules regarding fan-fics, and allow them provided certain names or places are not used, others seem to turn a blind eye.

My only guess regarding DMCA take-downs is that the characters owners dont want them shown in erotic poses on sites like VCL and FA because they see it as tainting the character's clean image.

"Copyright law will only protect the characterization of a fictional character if the character is portrayed in a copyrighted work." In truth, it takes a combination of copyright and trademark laws to fully protect a fictional character.

And even if a character is copyrighted, that still means the character can be used without shelling out money to the copyright holder under Fair Use statutes and the parody/satire provisions in copyright law. Whether or not your usage is legally Fair Use and/or a parody is a matter for the courts, though I think Disney has better things to do that to sue an Internet artist for drawing Gadget Hackwrench getting fucked by Chip and Dale and maybe Monterey Jack.

The only reason places do things like Fanfiction.net's "don't write fanfics off of these authors' works" list or VCL's "no copyrighted characters please" deal is because the admins usually don't have the resources to sustain their case in a drawn-out lawsuit or other legal action. (Well, that, and it's somewhat easier to keep certain content off a site than it is to fight to keep said content on your site.)

The DMCA, by the way, isn't some end-all be-all solution to copyright infringement, nor should it be the only tool people rely on to try and prevent copyright infringement.

And of course, if you really didn't give a damn about what's done with your work and your characters as it relates to copyright, you could always license your works under the Creative Commons Zero license.
 

Carenath

Cynical Dragon
"Copyright law will only protect the characterization of a fictional character if the character is portrayed in a copyrighted work." In truth, it takes a combination of copyright and trademark laws to fully protect a fictional character.

And even if a character is copyrighted, that still means the character can be used without shelling out money to the copyright holder under Fair Use statutes and the parody/satire provisions in copyright law. Whether or not your usage is legally Fair Use and/or a parody is a matter for the courts, though I think Disney has better things to do that to sue an Internet artist for drawing Gadget Hackwrench getting fucked by Chip and Dale and maybe Monterey Jack.

The only reason places do things like Fanfiction.net's "don't write fanfics off of these authors' works" list or VCL's "no copyrighted characters please" deal is because the admins usually don't have the resources to sustain their case in a drawn-out lawsuit or other legal action. (Well, that, and it's somewhat easier to keep certain content off a site than it is to fight to keep said content on your site.)

The DMCA, by the way, isn't some end-all be-all solution to copyright infringement, nor should it be the only tool people rely on to try and prevent copyright infringement.

And of course, if you really didn't give a damn about what's done with your work and your characters as it relates to copyright, you could always license your works under the Creative Commons Zero license.
Im not a lawyer, I only know you can copyright a character of your own creation, and any artistic works your character is portrayed in which have been created by you.

Fair Use may not apply outside the US, not every country has legislation for it, and fair use, satire and parody protections wont apply to pictures of Disney characters getting buttraped in any case.

Copyright is badly biased against the end-user, and the DMCA erodes fair-use laws as soon as copy-protection measures are put in place.. They need to be updated and modernised to take the current culture and balance into effect. I strongly believe that so long as no attempt is made to profit from another's work, use of that persons work, without permission is acceptable in certain situations.
 

Arcturus

Banned
Banned
Dragoneer said:
No. I will only comply with a DCMA if the same DCMA is served upon DeviantArt first. When DeviantArt complies... I comply, otherwise I say "THFFFFFPT!".

VCL was served those notices while the internet was growing in popularity, back when companies were afraid of the idea of people taking their material and actually using it through Fair Use. Companies used to fear the internet. Now they're learning how to live with it.
So you'd ignore a DMCA claim, Dragoneer? Is that the official position of Ferrox Art, LLC, that you will ignore lawful takedown requests?
 

Firehazard

I can fix it!
It would hurt a company's image if they do that kind of stuff. Potentially making them lose profit.

Plus that means they gotta pay their lawyers to back things up and it becomes messy.
I'm pretty sure the big companies just hire lawyers year-round and pay them an annual salary rather than paying outside ones per-case. Also U.S. corporations are pretty immune to image problems, unless they get busted for some major breach of law, and even then it's a crapshoot. The media giants have already pulled some amazingly dunderheaded stunts in the name of copyright (all those lawsuits against alleged music pirates), and it's never put a dent in their pocketbooks.

That said, it's probably true that they've stopped caring about fan art at this point.
 

hara-surya

Deviated Prevert
The media giants have already pulled some amazingly dunderheaded stunts in the name of copyright (all those lawsuits against alleged music pirates), and it's never put a dent in their pocketbooks.

Actually those lawsuits put a huge dent in their pockets and the fact the enormous settlements have been declared unconstitutional (UMG v. Lindor) and the open question of whether "making available" is even a violation (Capitol v. Thomas) has taken all the steam out of their lawsuit engine.
 
Last edited:

Freehaven

Dammit.

Renard_v

FAT DONGS
Im not a lawyer, I only know you can copyright a character of your own creation

You cannot copyright a character. You can copyright an image of one. A character would be a registered trademark of a company. It's not the same kind of property.
 

krisCrash

Member
We already had that document up earlier - characters are copyrighteable if they are special enough. They're a design. Barbie's face is copyrightable. Celebrity faces may not be reused for everything, and soforth. Logos and designs.

I'm just gonna post the link again; http://conceptart.org/copyright/
 
Top