|
|
Post by Akiyama Shinobu on Sept 7, 2009 13:57:28 GMT -5
Continued from the copyright thread in announcements.
Fair use is a right granted to the public on all copyrighted work. Fair use rights take precedence over the author's interest. Thus the copyright holder cannot use a non-binding disclaimer, or notification, to revoke the right of fair use on works. However, binding agreements such as contracts or license agreements may take precedence over fair use rights.
Also, watermarks are nothing more than a way of marking your property. They in no way disable fair use. It's the same as tagging a work with the (C) your name, this date bit we all know and love.
As for citing... It's actually not required. It only helps to make sure that it's deemed fair use. The citation is only required when using a fair use law in a profitable manner, such as using the art/writing in a book.
As for whether or not it's fair use, we got to cover 4 things...
Purpose and Character: The purpose is to represent a character visually in compliments to the written work we've done. So the art is purely supplementary. We can do without it on a technical basis. As for character, one image is kept in whole, the other cropped. Alone, this would not likely constitute fair use, however, it's in combination with the next three factors that fair-use is determined.
Nature of the Copied Work: They are already published works, published to the internet, under an artists name. So in the avatar and likeness' case, their representation as creative works is diminished.
Substance in Relation to Purpose: The purpose of the two images is to A) show the character's face. And B) To show an idea of how the body/clothing looks. An avatar image cropped down to the face is minimal needed to accomplish A, whereas B can be accomplished only through a full-body shot. Both uses are considered necessary to accomplish the needed tasks.
Effect on Work's Value: We are not diminishing the value of the art by having it here. In fact, it could be considered promotion of the art by having it on display here.
While we don't need the art in question to do this stuff, the way we use it is very much necessary to our task. It is not diminishing the value of the original art, and the art is already published under a name. In all likelihood, this is fair use because the four factors that the court uses to determine fair use on a case-by-case basis turn up in a positive light for us, the RPers.
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 7, 2009 14:15:40 GMT -5
Actually, you completely misinterpreted that.
Those four fields are what legal eyes use to determine whether or not your use is Fair Use.
Purpose and Character means why you used it (if it counts as academic/educational, commentary, parody/satire, or news report -- these are the ONLY things that count as fair use) and whether your use of the image/writing/etc was in standing with that.
Nature of the Copied Work means what sort of copied work it is, how it's made available, etc. For instance, if you're not supposed to have a copy of it unless you paid for it, etc.
Substance in Relation to Purpose means if you used it for a report, for parody, for news, commentary, then it should have something to do with what you're talking about.
Effect on Work's Value means whether its use affects its monetary value (whether ot could sell) OR if using it is deemed to be degrading or insulting in nature to the artist or the work itself.
It is explicitly stated in the copyright sections of art sites that you have to have permission, and to not obtain it is pure laziness. Most artists will gladly say "yes" if you ask.
|
|
Jenn
Unaffiliated
Posts: 9
|
Post by Jenn on Sept 7, 2009 19:14:44 GMT -5
Umm guys, did you stop to think that Zira locked the copyright thread for a reason? The administration was kind enough to make a compromise so both sides in this would be happy. It seems like it's time to leave it and get on with life.
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 7, 2009 21:03:39 GMT -5
There are no two sides to this. There is breaking the law and not breaking the law.
|
|
Jenn
Unaffiliated
Posts: 9
|
Post by Jenn on Sept 7, 2009 22:23:20 GMT -5
Yes, but we are not breaking any laws by being here doing what we're doing
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 7, 2009 22:47:43 GMT -5
If you obtained permission from your artists to use their work before you referenced them, then no. You're not.
I was merely correcting because the fine points of the law were being misinterpreted. Fair use is ONLY fair use if it is done for educational/academic purposes, for news reports, commentary, or parody/satire. Period.
|
|
|
|
Post by Akiyama Shinobu on Sept 8, 2009 0:26:00 GMT -5
It's decided on a case by case basis, actually, because new situations can arise at any time.
Thumbnail images for search sites went under fire for "art theft" at one time. That's not an academic, news, commentary, or parody purpose.
Also, satire is separate from parody, as satire can be done easily without taking advantage of free use, where parody requires it, so some satires are considered infringement.
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 8, 2009 0:38:05 GMT -5
Search sites technically count as referential material, however, which is why there isn't much to fan the flames anymore.
And it doesn't really matter if it's done on a case by case basis on a board that could get shut down with the first report.
|
|
Jenn
Unaffiliated
Posts: 9
|
Post by Jenn on Sept 8, 2009 9:36:34 GMT -5
Well the very nature of RP of any kind is fanfiction, which in it's self is a touchy subject, yes. BUT fanfiction sites and role play sites have been up for years and never touched for copy right issues. BECAUSE OF FAIR USE.
Not to mention the facts that copyright infringements are nowhere to be found in the proboards terms of agreement, which meant should someone report us they have no ground to walk on because it's not against the rules of proboards
So what exactly do you expect the admins to do? It seems the only way to make you happy would be to shut the board down themselves.
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 8, 2009 11:53:37 GMT -5
In the nine years I have been roleplaying, I have been on about four boards, three of them Marvel boards, that were shut down due to copyright infringement. One was because someone stole artwork from DA. Please don't talk fair use when you can't even comprehend what the law actually means.
Proboards WOULD act because if they didn't then they would be the ones sued.
What the Admins need to do is enforce a rule about art theft. If it's pointed out, then the person who has done it needs to either take the graphics down, or obtain permission to use it. That doesn't involve shutdown. That involves the Admins running their board in a lawful, orderly manner and expecting their players to behave like mature, intelligent adults and cover their bases.
|
|
Jenn
Unaffiliated
Posts: 9
|
Post by Jenn on Sept 8, 2009 12:47:28 GMT -5
The admins are in full compliance with the ToS AND the law and do not have to bend to your will.
Your previous boards were probably shut down because they were copying another board. In my 10 years role playing I have seen some pretty messed up stuff, but I have never seen a board shut down because of something it's users posted, image or otherwise.
Now put on your big girl panties and deal with it!
|
|
Birdy
Brotherhood
Sure thing, Boss.
Posts: 21
|
Post by Birdy on Sept 8, 2009 13:26:03 GMT -5
The admins are in full compliance with the ToS AND the law and do not have to bend to your will.
Wow, way to get personal. "Big girl panties" and it's my "will" and not me discussing real law. I'm astounded that you're getting so worked up over this.
You missed the point entirely. The point is that if an artist from an outside website complains to proboards that material was taken, then they will have no choice but to intervene -- which by the way is covered in the Content Restrictions section as "illegal activity". They have to act because otherwise they are held liable -- if they refused an artist from DA could get a LOT more money out of suing them than suing you or just asking you to stop. They have to do it. That's how the ToS works. This usually happens when an artist speaks to the admin of a site about someone on the board using their work and the admin refuses to take action. Then Proboards has to get involved.
The boards were shut down for taking content from art sites like DA, Elfwood, and Flickr (in that case photography) without permission. Why? Because whether it's a picture, writing, or a song -- if you take it and use it without getting permission or giving credit, it is lawfully considered plagiarism, and anyone with a High School Diploma or higher has learned that already.
If in your time on boards you've not seen these things before, then you are very, very lucky. I'm still telling you it happened.
This is becoming rather pointless. I've spoken to Zira on most all points listed above, and she has been very gracious and listened to everything I have had to say. I am continuing to discuss the matter here for your benefit. You, however, are not a concern of mine when it comes to convincing because you're not the one who owns the board. I like RPing with you and would like to continue to do so; I'm merely attempting to make you aware of how this stuff actually works.
So really, there's no need to take this so personally.
EDIT: I also want to add that I am only continuing the discussion here because there are still people here talking about it, and I am correcting misconceptions. This is not, in any way, a criticism against Zira because she has very patiently listened to what I have had to say already and has made good changes.
|
|
Jenn
Unaffiliated
Posts: 9
|
Post by Jenn on Sept 8, 2009 14:34:33 GMT -5
for those who care, birdy and I have talked things out over via im, , so lets just be done with this argument since we're all in agreement zira has done all she can do
please and thank you
|
|
