darkSpyro

//forum.darkspyro.net/spyro/rules/

I like the added details on some of the rules.

Though I wish their were some information or rules explaining about seem of the sections. Like best example I can think of is fanart, because people are thinking it's okay to post other's art without permission. Like if someone were to post my art on furaffinity, without my permission, things can get into legal trouble.

It seems dark52 rushed to get the changes done, though. I'm seeing slight punctuation and grammar errors. While it's not 100% bothersome to me, this website can almost be considered official at this point. No offense dark52, but you need to be just a little bit more conscious than you were right there.

Wow,much change, very obvious. Wow.

I don't see any updates to things that weren't said the last week. Like advertising, swearing, or offtopic. Because those things get looked over all the time for reasons unknown.

Quote: Windbringer

[...]this website can almost be considered official at this point.

...by whom?

Quote: UncleBob

Quote: Windbringer

[...]this website can almost be considered official at this point.

...by whom?

I really don't know by whom, but it's full of the largest community for its supported franchises.

Quote: Windbringer

It seems dark52 rushed to get the changes done, though. I'm seeing slight punctuation and grammar errors. While it's not 100% bothersome to me, this website can almost be considered official at this point. No offense dark52, but you need to be just a little bit more conscious than you were right there.

does it really ****ing matter

Quote: Windbringer

I really don't know by whom, but it's full of the largest community for its supported franchises.

It is the largest community BECAUSE it is unofficial. If it were official, it would have all these crazy rules and restrictions designed to keep Activision out of trouble, but would drive away posters.

Quote: ReshiramForever

Quote: Windbringer

It seems dark52 rushed to get the changes done, though. I'm seeing slight punctuation and grammar errors. While it's not 100% bothersome to me, this website can almost be considered official at this point. No offense dark52, but you need to be just a little bit more conscious than you were right there.

does it really ****ing matter

Well, I meant illustriously official, like it seems so official, even though it isn't.

It's not really official when there ARE official Acti boards and the subreddit.
Either way let's not make this about 'is the forum official or not.' The thing is, Dark updated very quickly and saying it wouldn't change much, well it really won't if you just add a rule or two, edit a few others and call it a day.

imo the rules still aren't good enough

still no elaboration on the advertising rule :T

Quote: undefined

[...]because people are thinking it's okay to post other's art without permission[...]

Wait, is this an actual rule?
Because I'm looking at a thread right now that pretty much consists of one person taking the art of other people and re-posting it.

Quote: UncleBob

Quote: undefined

[...]because people are thinking it's okay to post other's art without permission[...]

Wait, is this an actual rule?
Because I'm looking at a thread right now that pretty much consists of one person taking the art of other people and re-posting it.

It was a suggested idea. But it is a rule to most websites involving art and art sections.

Ah.
It makes sense as a rule, but if it's not, then I guess it's okay.

It's only okay if you're not an artist that's getting reposted without permission or even art stolen by some kid who wants to be a copycat.

That's kind of a rude thing to say don't you think?

No, and the fact that it's not a rule yet during 2015 is still kind of frustrating. There are a ton of Spyro and Skylanders artists out there that pretty much live off commissions;if someone is stealing their art and claiming it as their own, they're the ones getting commissioned for something it's not theirs. If the art is reposted without proper credit, the exposure to the artist doesn't happen and once again they don't have opportunity to sell art. Watermarks don't even do enough; either you ruin your picture with something that'll distract the viewer to know it's yours or you make it hidden enough that someone that's feeling like being a jerk will edit out and steal.

Well, claiming art as one's own is wrong, sure. But simply reposting it without express permission from the original artist? As long as you credit them, that would seem to be okay.

Not permission, I said it there that it's usually without credit. Especially in places like tumblr where instead of actually reblogging people just save the picture for themselves and remove the artist's blog. I don't really check Fan Art a whole lot, but I saw quite a few times people just posting 'hey look at what I found' with zero credit unless you go digging around in the URL, and that's only if it's from DeviantART.

So, as long as you credit the artist, then it's okay? Even without their permission?

I think it depends on the artist. I seem to recall seeing works that say something along the lines of, "Do not repost under any circumstances."

As an exercise, I'd be interested in seeing what the community that is active in the Fan Art section would come up with as a rule to govern that section of the forum.

i think its more of a common sense thing to not repost people's artwork without their permission and credit :x
but since people think they can actually do that(for some reason which is beyond me), it should become a rule here

The problem is, there's a few different things once can (reasonably) do on the Fan Art forum:

A.) Post his/her own artwork.
B.) Post the artwork of someone else with his/her express consent and credit them.
C.) Post the artwork of someone else with his/her express consent and not credit them.
D.) Post the artwork of someone else without his/her express consent and credit them.
E.) Post the artwork of someone else without his/her express consent and not credit them.

I'm sure we can all agree that A is perfectly fine and E is not really okay.
B & D seem to be some points of confusion, but I'm not sure C is really something that would ever come up.

The only time Example D (Misread C) came up was when Loco was around making these "memes" in fandom. But of course he edited the artwork while giving credit. I had back trace to the artist to let them know about it. Since they had no clue that happened.

So, what say you on B, C, and D? If you were supreme ruler of the Fan Art Forum, which would you allow/disallow?

B - is good I allow it.
C - Okay I may allow it, as long as they show some evidence of such permission.
D - Not entirely okay with it, But it's really depending on the artist. I would check up on the artist by searching the image and see who made it and see what's up.

So, really, the only thing you're 100% against is posting art without credit to the artist and without permission from the artist, correct?

What, as supreme ruler of the art forum, would you suggest be the punishment for someone who does this *knowing* that it isn't accepted? Like, not "Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't read the rules..." but "Hey, I know you don't like this, but here's some art with no credit or permission."

Honestly I would let them know that they should credit, and ask permission from the artist.

If they refuse the permission part, I can just go ahead and let the artist know through back tracing.

If they refuse on the crediting, I'm kind of working on that. I mean I have tried to make a person give credit to original artists before. I just left them alone afterwards. Since I did get a mod to change their post to credit the artist. Now if I were a moderator I believe a edit and a warning be issued, if it continues on their might be a more of a post deletion and if it continues, the more and more severe the punishments become. You know that stuff.

So, what about this thread:
//forum.darkspyro.net/spyro/viewposts.php?topic=110825

Takes art from artists.
Doesn't have their permission.
Does not credit the original artists.

What do you believe should be the punishment for the OP of that thread?

unclebob what the hell is this
why are you asking trix this? it's as if YOU'RE expecting to become a mod and you're taking suggestions as to what action should be taken. it's as if YOU'RE making the rules.

Quote: UncleBob

So, what about this thread:
//forum.darkspyro.net/spyro/viewposts.php?topic=110825

Takes art from artists.
Doesn't have their permission.
Does not credit the original artists.

What do you believe should be the punishment for the OP of that thread?

Actually that is from the official comic series. And they did basically gave credit. With this little thing,
Quote: Op of topic

Copyright (c) All Skylanders related content belongs to Activision, Toys for Bob, and other related companies.

Did you just skim through the topic?

Quote: undefined

Actually that is from the official comic series. And they did basically gave credit. With this little thing,
Quote: Op of topic

Copyright (c) All Skylanders related content belongs to Activision, Toys for Bob, and other related companies.

Did you just skim through the topic?

I did read the topic.
You are correct. OP took art, official or otherwise, from the comic series. OP does not have permission to repost or edit the art. OP did not credit the original artist. The generic disclaimer does not name the individuals who worked hard to create those works of art. If someone reposted a piece of your original artwork of Spyro and did not credit you, but, instead, merely "credited" Activision (as the character is still copyright Activision, regardless if you drew him), would that be okay with you? Or, do the individual artists responsible for the original pieces of art (which have now been chopped up and redistributed without their express permission) not count for some reason?

See, this is why discussing a proposed rule is *good*, instead of folks having a knee-jerk reaction to a minor or uncommon event, then wanting to go overboard-crazy trying to create rules without considering the long-term consequences of those rules.

No they did technically. They said "All Skylander related" and "Other Related Companies" which works. And it's rather hard to get permission from companies, so you have to put that copyright label and say who it belongs to. Since it's hard to trace down comic works, since so many people made it.

Now if it were let's say, this closed topic, where as you can see they did neither of the following, crediting, or putting up the copyright thing. Then that is where things are an issue.

I have a brief question. Why are you asking me such questions?

Because *you* proposed the rule.

Crediting a generic company name is in no way the same as crediting the original artist. Too hard to trace down who made the art? I'm willing to bet it's listed, likely on the inside cover of the comic.

Too hard to get permission from companies? That's because, generally, they do not *want* you to reproduce their copyrighted materials.

Again, if a generic disclaimer is good enough, could I repost your artwork featuring Spyro and say "Spyro is copyright Activision" and call it a day?

Quote: UncleBob

Because *you* proposed the rule.

Crediting a generic company name is in no way the same as crediting the original artist. Too hard to trace down who made the art? I'm willing to bet it's listed, likely on the inside cover of the comic.

Too hard to get permission from companies? That's because, generally, they do not *want* you to reproduce their copyrighted materials.

Again, if a generic disclaimer is good enough, could I repost your artwork featuring Spyro and say "Spyro is copyright Activision" and call it a day?

It maybe on the inside true. By they as a whole are a company.

If that was true, then they probably would take down most images on here.

No that's entirely different. Similar, but different. Because I made the work, And you are claiming it as your own. Their for I can have every right to sue you for using my fanart of Spyro. The character belong to the company, not the art.

So, what you're saying is that some individuals deserve to get credit for their hard work and some do not?

Quote: UncleBob

So, what you're saying is that some individuals deserve to get credit for their hard work and some do not?

You're twisting this about. I'm not willing to say anymore of the subject and I'll be getting a mod to close this topic. Thank you, take care, and think before you speak to anyone.

Not sure why you think you have the right to force a mod to close this topic or why you think tha just because you no longer wish to participate in the topic, then it should be closed....

^That mod bit is a little Hypocritical coming from you. Since you always ask for a mod when things get "derailed".

Only when the derailing is being done by the exact same folks who repeatedly accuse me of doing it. Like, just now in this very thread - you no longer wish to discuss the rule suggestion *you* brought up, so you make some snipes at me and try to get the thread closed.

Quote: UncleBob

Only when the derailing is being done by the exact same folks who repeatedly accuse me of doing it. Like, just now in this very thread - you no longer wish to discuss the rule suggestion *you* brought up, so you make some snipes at me and try to get the thread closed.

She isn't tryng to get the topic closed. She simply doesn't want to talk about the art subject anymore. Apparently you're accusing her of "trying to close the topic", which is sad.

Well, Trix wasn't the one going on and on about the fan art section and not going 'hey shouldn't we be discussing the other needed rules as well' after it clearly reached a point where it's just going in circles. Just replying to that discussion.
But of course, every thread about the rules has to be short-lived for some reason or another which are actually all the same problem.

Bottom line is that I don't think anything specific with regards to operation of the Fandom section is going to get put into the rules. Although I suppose more specific suggestions could never hurt. Unless someone would generously like to hire an expert independent properties attorney (most of whom are quite pricey) to outline everything in detail. <.<;

Quote: undefined

She isn't tryng to get the topic closed. She simply doesn't want to talk about the art subject anymore. Apparently you're accusing her of "trying to close the topic", which is sad.

Wha...?!?!

Quote: undefined

I'll be getting a mod to close this topic.

Um...
Quote: undefined

Did you just skim through the topic?

...I'm sorry, but when will this trolling of yours ever end?