it sounds like we are misunderstanding each other, but i believe the point jab is trying to make is random guy #1 can’t draw a wolverine comic and sell it for money.
Okay then.
You think theft is perfectly acceptable?
Why bother with gifs, when the rationale behind them is so one-dimensional in its badness?
Sent fqrom my thumbs, using SRK technology.
He is technically selling his services as an artists. The fact that he is advertising to people who would want him to draw images of copyrighted work is another matter entirely.
Yo Nickguy I don’t have any money but if I did I’d have you draw my team
If you create something, under contract, for someone else, with the express understanding that you are creating it for them, and forego any and all rights to said ceation upon remittance of the agreed upon pay for said creation, then you have no rights to said creation, as it, and the rights to it, were bought and paid for.
Basically what namingway said. But further, in that you ought not be able to manufacture pictures of someone else’s copyrighted ideation, and then make monetary gains from it, without the owner’s express approval.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
His post reads as selling pictures of people’s MVC3 teams.
Unless they mugened in their own creations, which is a whole other copyright violation, then he is advertising drawing other people’s copyrighted work for money. Period.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
Shaq woulda been sued a long time ago if it was up to Azure lol
gets mr fantastic tat on my cock
I understand this.
But it IS their legal property.
And other persons making a profit off of using their properties, is stealing, frankly.
Were they works of antiquity, it would be different.
There is no stealing going on when one manufactures a picture of someone else’s creative property. There is only an issue when and if they choose to make money off of it.
EDIT:
One cannot copyright a plot format or an archtype. THAT is corporate bullshit.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
Nope.
Just the tattoo artist.
But Marvel would probably view the artist’s having to touch your unwrapped tagging cock, as time served.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
When artists/creators are employed by Marvel or DC to work on Marvel or DC properties, they do so with the express understanding that everything they do is owned by the company that employs them.
If that’s “unfair” then go and work on your own creator owned property, like what guys do with Image.
There’s nothing unfair about it, it’s in the language of a standard contract.
Actually no, he’s selling work that is a reproduction or derivation of something that’s copyrighted. That’s copyright infringement. He has the right to refuse to be part of this copyright infringement.
Even if he didn’t sell the work, if he was just drawing like Wolverine in his own private sketchbook, that’s still copyright infringement. Doesn’t matter if it’s intentional or unintentional, in the public domain or private, for monetary gain or not.
The only question is whether Marvel will go after you for copyright infringement.
artwork, i was just speculating. honestly the dude should be ashamed for trying to charge to create that filth he was passing off as art.
And usually the only time they will, is if it involves $$$.
Or defamation of their characters.
Which is $$$ on another level.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
Yes, point is, EVERYTHING is copyright infringement. There is no good or safe legal stance you can take in reproducing a copyrighted property in any context. Even if it’s just a pencil scratching of Big Barda in your own private sketchbook for your own personal jerk off purposes and no one else in the world will ever see it. Still copyright infringement!
Just like jaywalking - technically any time you cross the street outside of a designated pedestrian crossing zone at the designated time is illegal.
The relevant and practical distinction here is who gives a shit that you’re doing this. Answer - nobody.
That depends entirely on the $$$ involved.
Sometimes even the principle.
Sent from my thumbs, using SRK technology.
Well, there’s still things in effect regarding parodies and whatnot. IIRC there’s a 20% deviation rule or something. Most notorious case was back in the 70s regarding someone’s epic Disney character montage portrait where they were all doing various deviant behaviors (I remember Mickey was shootin’ heroin, Snow White was gettin’ gangbanged by the dwarves, etc. I have a scan of it but it’s NSFW). The guy that did that work won the battle over copyright infringement due to this and has been a standard ever since.
EDIT: I take this back partly. I got my stories crossed. The Disney Memorial Orgy was in the 60s and Disney was tempted to sue but didn’t. In the 70s was the comic Air Pirate which WAS sued and Disney lost for the same reasons the Orgy portrait would have. My point still stands however, that it is not as black and white as it seems, as there are many avenues of fair use, even with money being involved.
fuck it, lets just start sueing everyone.
Oh?**
!!!
YOU DON’T SAY.
your sig makes this even better
RE: copyright law as it applies to comic art: it’s really stupid and weird. after disney had actually tried to ban selling prints at comic cons of marvel characters
Oh just post the Nic Cage face and get it over w-- oh, wait, I get it.