The "Google meme"

[StormyChang]

2.6, 2.8, 2.9 and 2.11 all apply in my opinion.

2.6 - Content that was neither made by nor for the uploader is prohibited. - but, even if they're copypasta'ing from multiple pics they're technically still making it, or putting it together like a collage. like, in grade school when you cut things out of magazines, right?
2.8 - Content of poor quality (e.g. fuzzy audio, blurry images, incorrectly rotated) is prohibited. - they aren't really blury, or ill rotated. (at least the ones i've seen.) they've all been upright, and clear, even in thumbnail form.
2.9 - Content lacking artistic merit (e.g. text only images, empty documents) is prohibited. - these images are clearly not text-only or empty documents. maybe they're lacking artistic merit to you. but even collages can have artistic merit. otherwise teachers working at art schools wouldn't make them an exercise in class.
2.11 - Content that is traced, plagiarized, or stolen is prohibited, including any character that is heavily derived from another user’s unique character. - this is sort of a sticky area where i will probably agree with your point to an extent. because alot of artists always fight the 'i found it on google it's free game' argument with their own art.

honestly, i think you're nit-picking, and manipulating the rules to your own definition (mostly the artistic merit rule, but that can be a notorious grey area). i dont really like this meme.. but i dont think it's so bad there needs to be a rally cry to knock them all down.

 

[kayfox]

except the people posting the meme actually did put this stuff together in an image editor.

I have seen some really cool photo manipulation and I dont really want that tossed out with this stuff.

Just delete the notification and move on.

 

[Erethzium]

"putting stuff together" does not count as creating something if it's completely comprised of material that you did not create.

Does this mean I can take two pieces of art, cut the characters out of them and then re-edit them into another image, and claim that I created it? No, it's other peoples' work that I'm pasting together.

This "meme" breaches the For You/By You rule, plain and simple.

Me, I just filtered them out with Fur Affinity Filter by making it filter anything with "google" in the name or description.

 

[Taralack]

"putting stuff together" does not count as creating something if it's completely comprised of material that you did not create.

One might argue that this is the definition of photobashing, which is actually quite a common technique employed by concept artists. But that's a whole 'nother can of worms..

 

[quoting_mungo]

The primary rule being breached by (most postings of) the meme is 2.5 - Content used as part of an upload that is royalty-free or under Fair Use (copyrighted material used for a limited and “transformative” purpose) must cite the source of the original content. Some uploads have also been pushing or breaking the appropriately clothed models clause of the photography section. If you can cite the original source and it's been released under an appropriate license, they're fine in most cases.

We are removing them, but removals take a certain minimum amount of time and we only have so much of it. This goes for all recurring types of violations on the site - if you're seeing it, we've not removed it yet, either because we're not aware of it or because we've not had the time yet. We're not deliberately ignoring them or letting them slide.

 

[RTDragon]

I wonder who would make a meme about this? since the majority of pictures are not royalty free and copyrighted.

 

[Laini]

The thing I found weird was on FA's Twitter they posted a status about it https://twitter.com/furaffinity/status/546314531832889344
Also, a polite reminder regarding the "Google Meme" - reposting/editing copyright works is not permitted on the site. They will be removed.

They can't do it now obviously because the admin message is about how the site is broken again but that was posted almost 2 days ago, why didn't they make it a notice then, on the site, not the Twitter feed that the vast majority of users don't read (heck, I only got there by accident).
It probably wouldn't have stopped everyone who was going to upload one but it would have stopped some of them and saved themselves some work.

 

[RedSavage]

The primary rule being breached by (most postings of) the meme is 2.5 - Content used as part of an upload that is royalty-free or under Fair Use (copyrighted material used for a limited and “transformative” purpose) must cite the source of the original content. Some uploads have also been pushing or breaking the appropriately clothed models clause of the photography section. If you can cite the original source and it's been released under an appropriate license, they're fine in most cases.

We are removing them, but removals take a certain minimum amount of time and we only have so much of it. This goes for all recurring types of violations on the site - if you're seeing it, we've not removed it yet, either because we're not aware of it or because we've not had the time yet. We're not deliberately ignoring them or letting them slide.

CC's justice boner is going to shoot through the roof and jizz all over Europe.

 

[ventus]

Just add a server rule so it will deny all submission containg both the words "google" and "meme"

 

[CaptainCool]

CC's justice boner is going to shoot through the roof and jizz all over Europe.

Meh.
I just like that they actually do enforce the rules.

 

[LegitWaterfall]

I'm not so bothered by the rule-breaking, though it is an issue, as much as the fact that a majority of the memes I've seen are ripped wolf dudes or half-naked dog-girls...

 

[CaptainCool]

ripped wolf dudes or half-naked dog-girls...

Yeaaahhh, about that >__>

 

[Xela-Dasi]

and if anyone wants to make this meme :

1. Open Google Images
2. Type in your characters species, use the first or second image as the FACE
3. type in your characters body weight OR type, use the first or second image as the BODY
4. Type in your characters hair colour, use the first or second image as the HAIR
5. Type in ONE defining features (scar, wings etc) and use the first or second as desired/needed
6. FINALLY google a place your character would live, use the first or second image as the BACKGROUND

aint nobody has time fo editing

 

[Croconaw]

It's a stupid meme, I'll give CC's annoyance that.

 

[Zeitzbach]

There's a special place in hell for people participating in this meme. Far more special than the one for furries.

2.8 - Content of poor quality (e.g. fuzzy audio, blurry images, incorrectly rotated) is prohibited. - they aren't really blury, or ill rotated. (at least the ones i've seen.) they've all been upright, and clear, even in thumbnail form.

Damn that quality standard.

 

[Fallowfox]

I like some of them, and provided the material used is copyright free and properly referenced, it's not problematic.

I did perform a search and some images did feature photographic pornography, or images of paintings that were barely edited.


At least we don't have droves of people doing this though:

It's because of ass-holes like those guys that year-long adult-level art training courses in England do feature two solid weeks of making collages from old crisp packets stuck to card, but don't teach any painting technique, composition and so on.

 

[Blekarotva]

It's because of ass-holes like those guys that year-long adult-level art training courses in England do feature two solid weeks of making collages from old crisp packets stuck to card, but don't teach any painting technique, composition and so on.

Duchamp's artwork had way too much to do with his context, trying to imitate him without fully understanding his relation with his historical moment on the art insitution is really bad, and it's even worse if someone is teaching how to do this works but won't teach the history.
Can't say I admire the guy but during the four years I went through college he's inevitably the most talked topic (besides dadaism). He knew how to draw and paint, so with those "modern" artworks, he was pretty much trolling art snobs.

Most of the avant-garde artists were decent/good enough on a traditional/classic technique of art, they had a deep speech behinds their modern works which "validated" them. Doing these works without developing them from the speech is problematic and shows ignorance. The minimal work is complemented by the speech, otherwise it looks empty and lazy.


Regarding this meme - I wish people went to deviantart or any other site that offers quality free stock photography, the difference in quality between the pictures put together is what bothers me the most :V

 

[Fallowfox]

Duchamp's artwork had way too much to do with his context, trying to imitate him without fully understanding his relation with his historical moment on the art insitution is really bad, and it's even worse if someone is teaching how to do this works but won't teach the history.
Can't say I admire the guy but during the four years I went through college he's inevitably the most talked topic (besides dadaism). He knew how to draw and paint, so with those "modern" artworks, he was pretty much trolling art snobs.

Most of the avant-garde artists were decent/good enough on a traditional/classic technique of art, they had a deep speech behinds their modern works which "validated" them. Doing these works without developing them from the speech is problematic and shows ignorance. The minimal work is complemented by the speech, otherwise it looks empty and lazy.


Regarding this meme - I wish people went to deviantart or any other site that offers quality free stock photography, the difference in quality between the pictures put together is what bothers me the most :V

I can't even pretend to find Duchamp interesting.

 

[Blekarotva]

I can't even pretend to find Duchamp interesting.

Neither I do, nor I like the avant-garde artists, conceptualism, minimalism, ready-mades, pop-art (I want to punch in the face anyone that adores Warhol), etc.
But I was given historical context to understand them, and I don't think they're the assholes. I think it was the snobs and the people who considered their stuffs to be terribly important that created the problem. As I said, Duchamp and dadaists were trolling with their "artworks".