FA+
Shop
730
Views
Views
62
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / Comics
Species Vulpine (Other)
Size 898 x 2144
File Size 355.3 kB
Report this content
More from Fiz
truth
Category All / Comics
Species Vulpine (Other)
Size 898 x 2144px
File Size 355.3 kB
(and in before, yes, it's copyright, at least in my country, the trademarks are forlogotypes, isotypes and the like... I don't kow who was the genius who made it up 9_9 like when you ride a bike, the law says you have to carry a helmet with you, but since it doesn't says you need to actually wear it, our jurisdiction has a veredict in which a rider gor rid from a ticked for he had the helmet... hanging on his elbow)
People actually do that? O.o Maybe I should be glad I can't draw..other wise if I made fan art, I would probably end up having to deal with someone copying some of the fan characters I make, then bitching saying I drew it without permission. XD Or people stealing my art as their character picture. >.>
Way to ruin it for the idiots.
.....I like you :)
You may not be able to 'Copyright' a character.
But you can Copyright their referance sheet. What does this mean? Absolutly nothing, justs means no one else can use THAT referance sheet without permission. They can still take the character in it and do whatever they want.
I'm lucky, I wouldn't have to pay SEGA royalitys... my characters sprites are ripped off Megaman Zero sprites :P
Oh wait, the head ¬_¬
.....I like you :)
You may not be able to 'Copyright' a character.
But you can Copyright their referance sheet. What does this mean? Absolutly nothing, justs means no one else can use THAT referance sheet without permission. They can still take the character in it and do whatever they want.
I'm lucky, I wouldn't have to pay SEGA royalitys... my characters sprites are ripped off Megaman Zero sprites :P
Oh wait, the head ¬_¬
That means I've got to pay both SEGA and Capcom :'(
Well for the sprites at least. People who claim such things with copyright and trademarks have to remember that using SEGA's art styles for fan characters means they only pay royalties if they earn money from using them.
So everyone with donation links on their websites where they use such characters, 'could' run a risk since from a legal look they could be gaining that money BECAUSE of that character.
...or better sense, blah-blah, blah, balh, bla-di-blah
Well for the sprites at least. People who claim such things with copyright and trademarks have to remember that using SEGA's art styles for fan characters means they only pay royalties if they earn money from using them.
So everyone with donation links on their websites where they use such characters, 'could' run a risk since from a legal look they could be gaining that money BECAUSE of that character.
...or better sense, blah-blah, blah, balh, bla-di-blah
Capcom and others won't sue fans because fans who create their own characters get more attention to them. Plus they can't sue; copyright laws and similiar are only broken WHEN you make a profit from that material.
Yes there is theft, but it can be argued when you buy a copy of the game you have the right to use the material, so long as you don't make a profit from that material (excluding selling the game itself).
Yes there is theft, but it can be argued when you buy a copy of the game you have the right to use the material, so long as you don't make a profit from that material (excluding selling the game itself).
That last comment made me laugh so hard. XD And if everyone attempted to sue everone else because their character was similar (I don't been carbon copy) it would probably be like that one episode of Sliders where they where on the earth where everyone sued everyone else for just bumping INTO them.
The sad fact is that no ones trying to steal furries characters. Most furries are so horribly un-origional that even network producers wouldn't touch it.
I mean granted there are some very talented individuals that have very origional and worthy ideas, but the average fur won't need to protect thier characters. Unless of course it's from other furs who are so un-origional they have to STEAL a crappy character design from another fur.
The fact that someone could do that and validate the need for furs to throw legal terms on thier artwork is horrible, and those people should be beaten to death for being stupid faces. D: Not that it happens that often, most of the time it's just co-winkie-dinks.
I mean granted there are some very talented individuals that have very origional and worthy ideas, but the average fur won't need to protect thier characters. Unless of course it's from other furs who are so un-origional they have to STEAL a crappy character design from another fur.
The fact that someone could do that and validate the need for furs to throw legal terms on thier artwork is horrible, and those people should be beaten to death for being stupid faces. D: Not that it happens that often, most of the time it's just co-winkie-dinks.
What you CAN copyright is the artwork itself (singular, if anyone copies THAT picture and that picture only, it violates copyright law), or any story for a comic say. However, there is the grey area. The "critique or review" clause lets you use the material if you're taking the piss out of it. But yes, you have to trade mark any names, which range from product names and individual characters.
So most things considered, %99.9999 of all of you don't have a leg to stand on if I draw a cock on your characters head, even if you did have a lawyer, that even less of you do.
So most things considered, %99.9999 of all of you don't have a leg to stand on if I draw a cock on your characters head, even if you did have a lawyer, that even less of you do.
People who spread ©s all over their "art" pisses me off. I just put a © when I don't own the character, and I only mean that I didn't create it, not that the person has a registered trademark on it. I believe you can't do that unless the character was officially published...alirite?
I do this a lot, actually. :[
Like, at the end of a gift art's description, I put "??? is © ???", but not in a complete sense of stating copyright. For me, it's more of a short way of saying "belongs to" or "this is this person's character/alias which may or may not be totally original but it's still their character/alias". Still, I'm tempted to fix those errors with a TM, or find a completely different way of putting it without using a ©.
Like, at the end of a gift art's description, I put "??? is © ???", but not in a complete sense of stating copyright. For me, it's more of a short way of saying "belongs to" or "this is this person's character/alias which may or may not be totally original but it's still their character/alias". Still, I'm tempted to fix those errors with a TM, or find a completely different way of putting it without using a ©.
sonic fan art itself is funny to me. Guy looks exactly like sonic but a different color, dressed as an emo/goth and has wings and the guy honestly seemed to think it was a completely original character...he didn't run fast he could fly at super sonic speeds. I think his name was "Flash" or something stupid like that.
Some places you can copyright characters. You trademark names. Copyright characters. Say like SonGoku/Goku from DBZ... his name is TM but you can copy the crap outta him if you want.
But you are right... people are idiots. Some places you can't copyright characters... but it's stupid to © Sonic-esque characters because they are all a knock off f each other. I.E. that new raccoon character (don't know her name) and Cream.
I like that I don't draw Sonic characters anymore.
But you are right... people are idiots. Some places you can't copyright characters... but it's stupid to © Sonic-esque characters because they are all a knock off f each other. I.E. that new raccoon character (don't know her name) and Cream.
I like that I don't draw Sonic characters anymore.
Comments