/fur/ - Furry★

I have a tell-all letter ready to send to every legit news outlet out there

>meaning no Fox or Breitbart

in case my account is ever banned.

Why the fuck didn't people abandon this back when that imuv company? This is like bitching about your digg account being banned.

>didn't abandon when the Zaush shit came out

>didn't abandon over the fake "undersea cable got cut" outage excuse when FA didn't pay hosting

And go where? Aside from DA where do porn artists go? FA is for content DA doesn't allow or for banned DA users. Sheezyart? Probably died long ago and as many rules as DA anyway. Hentai Foundry? May as well be dead. Sofurry? Never amounted to anything. IB? For people who had to leave due to the cub ban, that's all. Weasyl? Did that ever really pick up? Tumblr? SJW central and they are unfriendly to NSFW accounts.

I think the "alt-right" bans were an excuse to ban people they disliked, every rule they have on the books is meaningless because staff do whatever they want and the "rules" only apply if they hate you. I've sen too many people get no punishment for clear violations, others banned for nothing.

I expect my account to be banned by the end of the week, now that I hear of this. Why? Why not? I'm not popufur and whenever we do anything that isn't "kiss popufur ass" we're accused of harassment. It's probably a miracle I was not banned years ago but all things come to an end eventually.

>>80746

MUH PAGEVIEWS

>>80697 (OP)

Any proof of this I made a quick search and all the results are the same

>>80748

>Sheezyart

good times that never will come back.

>>80697 (OP)

Dacad got hit at some point

>>80745

Share the letter contents

>>80697 (OP)

Sadly no.

>>80753

Same with Blitz but they got their account back on track in a day or so

>>80697 (OP)

>Specific characters, like pokemon, post dating back years are being picked off and are now bannable.

It's possible FA is now being paranoid over how people are selling pokemon drawings as their own original designs to people and are afraid Nintendo might crack down on it.

>>80776

See, we didn't even need TPP to get passed to kill fanart. Companies will just send more C&Ds out and lawsuit threats, they don't even care anymore if they look bad for it.

Nintendo has been especially Nazi-like in their hate of fan stuff since Iwata died and the new Nipponese Honuru CEO took over.

>>80697 (OP)

>like pokemon

Good.

I've seen people posting pokemon characters.

What kind of pokemon are they banning?

>>80748

Aside from the creepy comments involving cubs, IB is probably the best site, in terms of security.

>>80771

>Blitz

I think I know that guy

>>80789

Wait, what?

Japan has had the doujin market for years. You try to sell unofficial comics based on any US IP in the US, you can expect a lawsuit. This is the land of rich musicians who scream that piracy is killing music, film studios claiming piracy is why films fail at the box office, and a current president that says he considers piracy to be a serious issue. We almost got ACTA/SOPA/TPP because of corporate greed, and if we had, the rest of the world would be told "go along with it or you are our enemy". The wealthy in the US equate piracy to actual murder.

The main reason most companies let fan stuff slide is because of bad press when they do go after it but that's been getting less & less now. Secondary reason is even the legal department sending a C&D form letter costs money so going after free projects is barely valuable. Hasbro aimed at people selling pony porn & plushes but have left the free stuff alone because it's a money sink. That aside they could legally shut down every fan project out there and would be in the right, on paper.

And when you think about it, is that fan-made game 100% reliant on the IP? Can it be changed to something new without affecting it? Popular IPs are used for sequels, reboots and fan stuff because it's a better draw than an original property.

>>80805

>is that fan-made game 100% reliant on the IP

In some of these cases the fan game was made into its own IP. Like Zelda creator was made into something different.

With something like AM2R it's impossible to turn it into its own IP when the very point of it was to be a remake of Metroid 2. A lot of the time the only reason these projects got started and had people help develop them was because of their fangame status. And if they started as indie games they probably wouldn't have had any recognition.

>>80823

Furry Network was doomed from the start because it had absolutely horrible site design that bought into all the memes of modern webdev.

Everyone who delivers search results via infinite scroll rather than via pagination needs to be forced to eat a keyboard while having their fingers broken with a mallet. It makes it impossible to look for art more than a few weeks old because your browser will crash long before you find it, something that should be immediately obvious if even the slightest amount of thought is put into usability rather than aesthetics.

Conversely, people who paginate articles that could fit into a single page need to be boiled alive in a big pot of honey.

>>80777

>>80789

>kill fanart

Yeah well fan art was never legal. It just so happens companies would overlook violations in order to avoid the negative publicity and alienating their audience. Because if people were truly aware of what copyright truly is about and how it actually works, it would get repealed overnight.

It's simply astounding how hypocritical retards demand no one else 'steal' their shit while making money off someone else's IP.

The rule is: if you don't have rights to it, you're breaking the law. Even if you're parodying something you can still get sued.

>in Japan it's viewed as theft.

what the fuck. If that was the case, doujin wouldn't exist today.

>>80748

What about e621?

>>80925

>Yeah well fan art was never legal

in-order to sue someone for fanart you generally have to claim damages. This is really hard to do with something like fanart unless the creator does something like they attempt to sell it in competition with the original work. Or they make zero effort to distinguish their work as "fanart" and not an official work.

https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2010/05/13/the-messy-world-of-fan-art-and-copyright/

>It just so happens companies would overlook violations in order to avoid the negative publicity and alienating their audience

No they have gone after it. Numerous creators have. Like J.D Salinger and Anne Rice. The biggest thing though is that there's almost no money in it because people who make fan works don't usually have money. It's why they tend to try and sue websites that host this content over the individual creators. They also tend to specifically go after works that compete directly with their own. Like you commonly see this occur with creators who create fanfiction sequels to works and then having Cease and Desist letters filed in their direction.

>The rule is: if you don't have rights to it, you're breaking the law. Even if you're parodying something you can still get sued.

Parody is protected speech and has a very long history of creators attempting to go after parodies of their work and losing court cases because of it.

https://corporate.findlaw.com/intellectual-property/parody-fair-use-or-copyright-infringement.html

This web page lists a really good example of this rap group parodying a song and it eventually going to the supreme court where it ruled that it was protected speech as it "reasonably could be perceived as commenting on the original [Oh, Pretty Woman] or criticizing it, to some degree."

>>80939

e621 is a booru not a gallery. It has no community to speak of, every upload needs mod approval (nothing that could hurt feelings) and you can't edit posts. You can't even control the tags on an image

Worse of all it's owned by Varka

>>80720

It's been that time for like 4 years+

>in-order to sue someone for fanart you generally have to claim damages.

IIRC they can argue you're hurting their work because your work prevents them from using similar plot points/designs/creative elements to the ones in your derivatives.

Fan art generally features trademarked terms and characters. That can open you up to lawsuits on that front (especially if commercial).

In practice no one bothers suing fans because it's throwing money into the trash can to piss off fans. Except maybe for trademark violations because you're forced by law to enforce trademarks to keep them.

>>80959

>Parody is protected speech and has a very long history of creators attempting to go after parodies of their work and losing court cases because of it.

Nobody gives a shit. Fair use is merely a defense in court. Megacorporations can sue you anytime, and you'll almost certainly give in and pay the settlement like the little bitch you are than waste years and tens of thousands of burgerbucks defending yourself.

>>80825

Not to mention the site is exclusively catered to the same Popufur artists you probly already know. If you arnt a popular artist or character owner, you arn't featured at all. FN has no Discovery, and they couldn't get the basics down. Shit that even fucking Weasyl did before launching BETA.

The Final straw was when they bent over to the demand to ban cub, I hate cub myself, but Im a rational enough guy who can learn to use a god dam keyword filter.

FN could have been amazing.....but Varka fucked it up, BAD

>>80937

I really want to disagree with this, but I haven't heard of any IB drama at all.

Companies actually steal fan art all the time. Only artists with piles of cash can even hope to win in court when ti happens, which is why the civil courts in this country are broken. Companies should get ONE lawyer on equal footing to the people they steal from.

Hasbro are massive IP thieves. They rip off other toy company's ideas, the blatantly stole a real band name for that shitty SJW Jem cartoon and then told the band to go screw themselves. They've been known to use fan art and even make retail versions of customized toys they find online. Recently they tried to due DC Comics for the name "Bumblebee", which DC had back in the 70s, all for that fucking Transformer everyone is sick of. They only lost because they went against another megacorporation, but imagine if they won, what that would do to the legal system

>hey we know you had it first but we're rich so we're taking it, courts are on our side!

>>81222

It's gotten to the point that whenever someone makes an outlandish claim that a megacompany stole something from them, I'm inclined to believe it. Like that guy who said he approached Disney with literally the entire story of Zootopia, they rejected it, and then went ahead and copied it anyway without paying him a dime.