/fur/ - Furry★

>>39163

We need a furry version of Richard Stallman; one who promotes using free and open source characters instead of trademarked video game/tv/movie characters.

>>39161 (OP)

>Pornographic fan art tarnishes the public image of the companies that own the characters

In the mind of a retarded business man maybe, although clearly not many. I can only ever remember Nintendo sometimes having porn for characters in a recent release being taken down, if that news was true, and it was short lived. And Nintendo is a special kind of retarded when it comes to business.

An attack on fanart porn is an attack on fanart in general, and anything widespread would launch an uproar like we haven't seen. I don't see it being a problem, although we'll probably run into someone seriously trying it eventually.

I predict that if the porn gets out of hand then credit card companies and paypal will start whitelisting artists based whether or not they do "obscene material." It already happens for many legitimate businesses, even if it isn't porn. In the eyes of Paypal and banks you're supposed to not support "extremist" sites like wikilieaks, or care about businesses that market open-source/free-software. There are stories where project funds were frozen because they infringed on some vague TOS from PP and such.

>>39174

I'm imagining backlash on the scale of the SOPA/PIPA thing, but with artists drawing more porn of the characters out of malice.

>>39168

We've already got Kiki the squirrel for Krita.

>Pornographic fan art tarnishes the public image of the companies that own the characters.

Yes.

>It would be in their best interests and rights to have it all removed.

No.

>When the software/AI advances enough to automate issuing takedown requests for what's legally theirs, what's to stop them?

Streisand effect.

Going against fanart outright will cause an uproar and will make the problem worse.

In the case of porn of some IP, the company is better off pretending to not be aware of it.

Why do you think no company has ever reached out to the furry fandom? The anthropomorphic theme is commonly associated with child fantasies. Furry originates from creating porn of media created to appeal to children, with the same style.

It would spell doom for a company before even being conceived.

Likewise, companies cracking down on furry porn of their IP, even when it's their own right to do so can backfire horribly. It's the reason why flavor of the month "artists" get away with profiting from selling "art" of copyrighted material.

All they have to do is pass laws to make IP infringement of any kind criminally illegal, that will let them deal with everything. We're already seeing companies go after negative product reviews using the DMCA and TPP was a massive attempt to criminalize anything that could be taken as "depriving a company of potential profits"

On one hand, throwing people in prison for 10 years because they didn't give you money is fuckign wrong-this is already law in the UK.

On the other hand, ti does suck that IP holders can't even protect what's theirs without "muh entitlement" public jackasses seeing them as the bad guy over it. Companies already have the legal ability to crush any infringement but the public backlash is why they don't do it.

Porn art? Well yeah, if a company that owns the character objects to them being depicted in that way, they should have every right to tell you to stop it. Why is it that drawing some other artist's character without asking is bad but doing it to major companies is acceptable? And no you really do not have the legal or even the moral right to make money off someone else's property.

>wishing Sega would go after the whole of the Sonic porn fandom and rid the internet of the autism and pedophilia that makes up that scene

>>39199

/pol/ here, kikes won't touch you because you help degenerate future generations of kiddies into grooming for pizza parties like >>39181 points out.

Then there is that if you ban it then it becomes stronger effect. It's either gas or ignoring it for now for both kikes or /pol/. Hell zootopia was explicitly marketed to furries at first. Fake jews won't touch you unless you start severely hurting the (((traditional))) porn industries.

Gas yourselves for wanting a richard stallman furry.

>>39201

holy fuck

How come the Shadow Masters haven't taken you down to the FEMA camps? You're too woke for this board, hell maybe even a little too woke for this reality.

A DMCA for furry porn is a bluff. No company is going to make a mockery of itself by actually going to court for porn based on a character they own the IP to.

In fact it might actually be a legal defense to talk to a judge and say "Any money they lost to me making lewd art of Judy Hopps, they're going to lose hundreds of times more in bad PR the second people know they sued a random person over this"

You could also fuck with them by stating that your character is a wholly original creation inspired by a companies original work. You can simply state that the bust/dick/cunt size is completely different and that the suing party is obligated to provide evidence of what the characters gentiles look like if they want to claim that you stole the likeness.

Companies send out DMCA's largely because they're legally required to attempt to protect their ownership of an IP. If the don't then an actual company could attempt to steal their shit and use their failure to go after fans as endorsement that people are allowed to use the property. They have to put it out there or they can LOSE the property. However none of these companies want the embarrassment of suing a person over naughty pictures, it would be a media nightmare.

My honest opinion? The DMCA's for porn pics are kinda necessary. I've yet to hear of a person who gets one for 1 or 2 pictures, and in many cases even dozens. However there are certain artists out there that do tons and tons of pictures of copywritten characters for money. They should probably expect a slap back to reality every once in a while.

>>39207

It's not about PR and even if it was, what kind of bad PR is "Disney takes to court degenerate porn artist over beastiality pictures of your children's favorite movie"? We are talking about furry porn ffs, nobody outside the fandom is going to defend the shit the artist is making, not even lefties.

>You can simply state that the bust/dick/cunt size is completely different and that the suing party is obligated to provide evidence of what the characters gentiles look like if they want to claim that you stole the likeness.

Have you ever heard the term "Striking similarity"? Just because you added and changed some things around doesn't mean you can get away with copyright infringement and good luck trying to pull that "lol my OC is not a copy! It has a different dick!" shit in a court against a team of lawyers of some big media company.

Like it says in >>39199 it's about money. Companies are not going to sue some random kid that made 15 bucks selling some recolored Sonic, they will only take legal action against someone that is worth the time and cost and since most artists are poor as fuck the most they'll get is a C&D letter.

>>39219

I believe that you missed my overall point, because you restate it at the end.

I just happen to believe that a headline "Disney sues man who drew Mickey with testicles" is something a company would avoid at any cost.

>>39201

>/pol/ here, [rambling about jewish conspiracy]

opinion discarded; fuck off back to your subreddit >>>/pol/

>>39168

The furry version of Richard Stallman is Richard Stallman.

>Sites like YouTube automatically detect and remove uploaded copyrighted audio and video content

Yes, and it can be fooled by zooming in or out, changing the aspect, slowing down or speeding up the audio, etc. It's not yet possible for an AI to speedily recognize a picture of Mickey Mouse, like a human can; it can only compare something to determine if it's an exact match. So it's possible to be detected if someone traces an existing image and adds a dick, or just recolors an existing Sonic image, or shit like that, but nothing more.

You also have to take into consideration the fact that literally all of youtube's videos are in a unified database that google OWNS, so they can just toss the copyright bot into and automatically take shit down. But I'm fairly sure that unleashing such a thing onto the internet at large would be a severe criminal offense. It's dodgy enough just letting them crawl the web to create their search results, but it's clear that there's manifold methods to shield your website from that process, too. There's not going to be any way for them to use a hypothetical copyright-detecting AI on websites they don't own, so unless they buy e621 and FA and inkbunny and 8chan and fucking everything else, the artwork will always be safe somewhere. Same with how you can get your copyrighted anime streamed on a hundred different sites that aren't youtube.

>>39213

>>39214

>This video contains content from WMG. It is restricted from playback on certain sites or applications.

>This video contains content from SME. It is restricted from playback on certain sites or applications.

Well isn't that just on the nose?

>>39199

>many of them obscene.

Obscenity laws should be illegal.

>>39168

90% of furry OC's look like pure crap through. The only reason most artists ever draw a decent character is because they see some furry character in a video game/tv/movie/comic/whatever and don't butcher its design completely in their attempts to give it a more human-like body.

>>39163

>>>/tech/771513

>>39199

this dumb cunt's stepped on hundreds of toes, she shouldn't be surprised she got stepped on right back. If she can't handle the consequences, she needs to stop being such a bitch.

Or she can fucking die, she's not worth the trouble, really. Only reason anyone tolerates her lies and bitchy behavior is because she's popufur and has tits. If she were a man she'd be- well, she'd be Steve Addlesee.

>>39330

>that's why I began the thread with "What's in store for the long future of"

Well, it's difficult to say. Though, I will note that it will be proof positive that the human race is fucking doomed if the first true artificial intelligence is designed to eliminate pornography of copyrighted characters.

>>39330

Only a true AI would be able to compare internet mass amount of data in any conceivable manner to pander censoring, but no one is actually retarded enough to release such monstrosity on the net, the reason is quite simple, there is no way to properly shackle a true AI with such a large scope, it could arbitrary censor everything based on possible "belief" or coded structure derive for a pure logical, even if flowed "reasoning"

In short don't expect it to happen, although partial helpers AI, something more similar to a smart tools are already under testing right now, and it was found out that they are relatively easy to fool, understandable, as their learning process has to be significantly hindered by not exposing it to the real events and information, carefully dosing what it's possible for it to see and learn

There is even an article on how easy is too fool so called smart system or even automatic driven cars, again lack of adaptability and limited understanding cripple it

You don't want the DMCA to take down your porn?

Get politically involved. Seriously. There's "The Next Great Copyright Act" planned for 2020. That is the time to lobby to protect fan works from the long dick of the DMCA. A dick we can castrate.

>>40312

>Get politically involved

You naive stupid child. Not even actual, real votes make a fucking difference in this country. Lawmakers do whatever they want, have zero accountability to the citizens, and always get reelected even if their approval rating is less than 20% because they wrote the re-election laws, themselves.

Will they be able to stop people drawing their art IRL? Impossible, and would never be considered by any company that cares about rep.

Now put it online and cram it all into one place like FA or Twitter then all you need is to send a simple DMCA takedown request or freeze the artists funds through Paypal.

You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:(g) items that are considered obscene, (h) items that infringe or violate any copyright, trademark, right of publicity or privacy or any other proprietary right under the laws of any jurisdiction, (i) certain sexually oriented materials or services

Easy as pie.

>>40399

This shit about Paypal is part of the reason everyone's going on Patreon now. You can't stop someone getting money for copyrighted shit if there is no legal proof that said money was in payment for it. It's impossible to police whoever people decide to donate to.

>>40404

I'm going to bet there are ways for Patreon devs to be "pressured" into removing the artists work or blacklisting them from posting mature work if things get out of hand for the copyright owner.

>>40409

That's fine. Then they'll all move somewhere else and Patreon will lose all that business just like Paypal did. There is a SHITLOAD of cash being made with drawn porn, and no end of website owners waiting to dip their toes in that pool to get their share. Should a "power vacuum" open up because Patreon is moving up in the world to sucking big corporate dick, it'll be filled almost immediately.

>>40454

I hope you understand it's not explicitly paypals or patreon or whatever sites fault. It's the credit card companies, which a vast amount of online payments are made, who dictate porn and their cards being linked together. And because they don't like porn, it means the site has to follow suit

>>39295

I know it's quite a bit late but... Boy oh boy I hope you are seeking psychiatric help. As a wise anon said, "Look into a mirror before you sperg out."

Words to live by.

Also, a question: What closet Nazi pretends to also dislike anti-SJW's? Don't they pretty much all fall into the anti-SJW side, & feel no shame in admitting that? If you're gonna make shitty memes, make ones that make sense please.

The fact is, the current copyright system means you aren't even allowed to use someone else's content except for certain allowances such as parody. Not even for free. Even then the definition can be up to an individual judge if a parody gets sued.

ACTA, SOPA and TPP were strong moves by a majority of major companies to criminalize any and all copyright/trademark infringement. No more lawsuits, just arrests, prison time and asset/money confiscation.

Think Trumpwill stop it? Like fuck. He only pretended to hate TPP because he has to pretend to hate anything Obama liked, even though he's a Democrat liar who voted Obama both past elections. He will eventually cook up something even worse than TPP. His administration considers piracy and other copyright "theft" to be a serious issue, not a surprise with all the rich people he's got on it, he's even had certain countries put on a list and is helping groups like the MPAA label any pirate as a "serious criminal". Once his "fuck poor people" health care bill is done he'll start jailing anyone who steps on the toes of celebrities or companies.

Not that he needs a successor to TPP with companies pushing separate laws. John Deere wants it to be illegal to work on a tractor you bought, and Nintendo is on that bandwagon. Repairing your own stuff? Illegal. Go to a service center. That software in the device means fixing it yourself violates the DMCA. Remember when all those companies tried to kill first sale doctrine? Companies want your money, but fuck you otherwise.

The only I mean ONLY way to fight this is with bloodshed. Kill the ones trying to strip your rights. Not willing to do that? Not a surprise. You "buy" digital games on Steam and accept DRM because convenience matters more than a physical copy you can use whenever. You commission artists who want to keep ownership of the finished art. You don't even give a fuck about your own consumer rights. You deserve these new laws.

>>40462

Fuck off, /pol/ stay mad because your ass got chewed out.

You're wrong, /pol/ is always wrong. You're the one in need of a mental hospital. That's sperging? Okay, you're either stupid or you have no argument. Fucking short attention span, no wonder you're stupid and like Drumpf.

It's a parody of that shitty "normalperson.jpg" that you faggots whip out any time someone doesn't agree with you.

>>40462

>If you're gonna make shitty memes

sorry but the original "normalperson.jpg" is a shitty meme and your ass got handed to you with a parody calling you the fuck out.

I'd tell you to stop sperging but you think gay marriage causes hurricanes, sperging is all you're good at.

>>40465

>>40466

lmfao, within seconds man, that took no time at all to respond. It's ok, I know you're the good guy here, I'm just saying you're a bit of an insane zealot. I haven't even ever been to pol, but that's besides the point. You seem a little unhinged, & further acting like an unstable schizophrenic doesn't help that image. Calm down.

Damn, a second response dude? I know it's really anti-SJW cliche, but it really does come off as projecting when you throw accusations around like candy. My point with the meme was that it didn't make sense more than it was shitty. I know, I hate the original "normalperson" too. But just some advice, when a meme is shitty, copying it & then mirroring it for your political view doesn't fix the shittiness, it only amplifies it.

I'll leave you with my assurance that /pol/ is & was always wrong. If you still think I'm some sort of Nazi spy, then I will continue to implore you to get your head checked, you may be hearing voices. (Hint, you're saying a gay person opposes gay marriage, and spoilers: I don't)

>>40463

This. So much this. Copyright is fucked.

>>40468

Eh, everything is fucked. We all contribute to big business fucking our ass, even though we usually don't have much of a choice. With how deep the roots of copyright bullshit & other bullshit lie, it really doesn't seem like there's much of a way out of being under the thumb of money. I guess our best bets are to hope that outrage catches on with the general populace anytime a corp does something insanely restrictive and money grubbing. Though, even when situations like this happen, the business always resorts to applying restrictions slowly, and we end up with it either way. We're kinda fucked in a lot of ways, but I guess at least we aren't quite dead yet.

>>40469

>Eh, everything is fucked. We all contribute to big business fucking our ass, even though we usually don't have much of a choice

Exactly. You know why people shop at WalMart instead of Made in The USA Grocery? Because it's fucking cheap, that's why; because it means you can buy enough food to last a month (and DECENT food, too, not just fucking bread and beans) for half the price you would pay shopping elsewhere. And why is that? Because of minimum wage being mostly stagnant while food prices have DOUBLED or TRIPLED in the last ten years. You ever wonder why Republicans want to stifle minimum wage? This is why! So long as people are poor, so long as they can barely scrape by month to month, they have no choice in who they buy from; they have one option only: the cheapest possible. That always means the big corporations, and that feeds directly into GOP pockets. They talk about trying to save small businesses by keeping wages in the shitter, but their tactic is purpose designed to DESTROY them, and it's working. This is basic fucking economics, and it's unbelievable how many people don't get it. They watch a fat cat billionaire politician shake the hand of some old fart businessowner, telling him that having wages low will keep him in business, but in the meantime all his employees' families can only afford to shop at WalMart. Oops, now he has no customers. Wonder how that happened.

>>40481

And now you've taken this completely off topic. I'm just going to say you should probably think about this a little more carefully.

>>40483

I don't mind it. It's a speech.