[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/co/ - Comics & Cartoons

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: whinycunt.png (77 KB, 791x592)
77 KB
77 KB PNG
I am so sick of these whiny, spoiled, entitled fucking selfish artists pretending "art theft" is the antichrist. Posting art is not theft you fucking retard, learn what fair use is. If you don't want it reposted don't put it on the internet you shit brain.
>>
>>122810426
ok art thief
>>
>>122810513
t. actual art thief
>>
Nobody who acts possessive of every fan art produces anything of lasting value.
>>
stolen any good pieces of art today, OP?
>>
Their labor is completely worthless in any actual value to civilization and yet they demand reward equal to as if it was. If you hate the job so much stop bitching and go do something that actually matters. Also, what man-children will hold up as evidence cartoons are for all ages, with universally good storytelling, are in fact the most poorly constructed, toothless, hypocritical, immature and lazy plots the industry has ever seen. Furthermore, artists seem to go ballistic over “art theft” because they are too stupid to realize posting anything on the internet is an automatic forfeiture of their sole rights to post it, so unless they are monetizing it or actively claiming it’s theirs, STFU learn what fair use is and stop treating people as the antichrist for reposting a drawing.
>>
>>122810701
If the labor was worthless, why would it be worth stealing?
>>
>>122810847
It's internet art. It's not stealing if it's still fucking there, you braindead moron. It's not even locked behind a paywall.
>>
>>122810543
Guy is based for once?
>>
I try not to be surprised by this shithole anymore but the amount of people here who profess their hate of artists in boards dedicated to art is always baffling.
>>
>>122811012
Intellectual property cannot be physically stolen. Copyright laws are bullshit.
>>
>>122811129
Artists should stop being so hateable and hateful themselves then.
>>
>>122811164
This. I can understand shit like not wanting people to be able to claim ACTUAL ART As your own, but you don't get to copyright a series of 1s and 0s
>>
>>122811164
>Copyright laws are bullshit.
This. We unironically need to return to the days where entertainers were one of the lowest positions in society. Giving those idiots power was a mistake.
>>
>>122811216
Artists should make art. Anything else besides that is your problem, not the artist's.
>>
>>122811129
Well hate is like 50 percent of what 4chan is made of nowadays. As an artfag myself it's not really a surprise that people go to their anonymous "safe space" to spew their shit opinions.
>>
File: blackheart what.jpg (369 KB, 616x616)
369 KB
369 KB JPG
>>122810426
>literal who
>deviantart
>yugioh
Why is this thread here?
>>
Don't like art theft, options:

1. Don't upload it or share it digitally with anyone else.

2. Make it a NFT.
>>
File: 1460688886507.jpg (18 KB, 574x564)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
>>122811439
>>122811164
>copyright law is bullshit
Spoken like people who never created anything worth copyrighting. Get back to consooming, while I draw whatever I like and make money off it.
>>
>>122811826
So post your stuff, hotshot. Prove that you're actually a creator worth a damn.
>>
>>122810426
You sound like a Disney exec
>>
Creators need protection from publishers publishing their works without consent. The rest however is bullshit.
>>
>>122811639
It's their problem when they decide to do other shit, smartass
>>
File: save.png (2 KB, 187x108)
2 KB
2 KB PNG
>>
This is the pic she's sperging about, btw
>>
>>122811807
>Make it a NFT
lol that doesn't even stop you from copying the image. It stops you from copying the receipt but no one wants a fucking jpeg of a receipt anyway.
>>
>>122811665
I myself am about 80% hate but I'm not uncritical about my hate, I try to reflect on it and direct it towards more specific and fruitful targets than "artists".
>>
>>122810426
^^^^ this so much

fucking goyim crackers should be thankful we even lay our eyes on their trash. only stuff worth paying for are art made by PoCs
>>
>>122812004
Looks fine.
>>
>>122810426
Should've just used a watermark.
Also i'm willing to be this is a woman.
>>
File: 1479114005604.jpg (95 KB, 1093x1117)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
>>122812004
So what's your personal beef with this person, anon? It doesn't seem like you're posting this to bitch about art theft
>>
>>122812217
https://www.deviantart.com/fireflea-san
>she / her
might be
>>
>>122810426
>>122810701
If you hate being bitched at so much stop stealing or posting without credit
>>
>>122811439
You mean the 20s?
>>
>>122811807
*an NFT. Learn how to properly read an abbreviation.
>>
>>122812217
Mother fuckers scrub/blur them or crop them consistently
>>
>>122810426
Off topic. Report this.
>>
>>122810543

t.incest pedo.
>>
>>122810426
Hi Butch Hartman
>>
>>122810426
I'm an artist myself and I somewhat agree.
That said, art theft is shit. But people overreact and not just about this but everything, including getting mad at people using their art as avatars or phone backgrounds, which is something that makes me actually happy whenever I see someone doing it with my art.

The other thing is that people are fucking paranoid about art theft. And the shittier an artist is, the more afraid they are. There are even idiots that fill their art with fucking watermarks to "prevent theft".
Imagine saving such an artwork or caring about it, when you can barely see half of the pic because it's all shitty watermarks.

Another thing is the screeching about quote retweets. Yeah I get why they don't like it, not a fan either. But if someone does it with me I am thankful regardless because they mean it well and most people actually click on an artwork when they see it instead of only clicking the thumbnail you see in the quote post. Imagine blocking someone just because they comment how much they like your pic while retweeting it.

I blame US artschools. Every asshole artist I see is 1. American and 2. in some artschool 3. doing it for money and spamming their patreon shit everywhere.
>>
>>122811129
If so many artists weren't hateful people to start with, they wouldn't be met with hate.
>>
>>122812601
>literally 30 and still draws like this
>literaly 30 and spergs out like this
>>
>>122812004
So she made a drawing of someone else character and art, didn't really change anything, and is now claiming people have stolen "her" art.
Sounds like she has some serious guilt issues and is projecting.
>>
>>122814021
Why the fuck shouldn't artists be hateful when everyone else is. The artist is selling you their art, anything else is because you were looking for shit to get mad at.
>BUT THEIR ART IS ABOUT X AND EVERY ART SHOULD BE ABOUT Y
no one is obligated to make art that panders to anyone else and no one is forced to buy any art they don't like.
>>
>>122814080
She doesn't even mean stolen it seems, most angry artist misuse that word. What they usually mean is repost.
A repost is different from theft. Still not great but not as bad because there is no bad intention behind it. Art theft is when you literally pretend you have made that art. Reposts are just people sharing it, usually even with a linkt to the source.

Makes me wonder how such people would react to 4chan posting fanart all the time without links. I mean anons have the brain capacity to google the image, but somehow I have never met a single person outside of 4chan that knew what a reverse image search was.

t. sometimes posting even my own art and never source anything on /a/ or /co/
>>
>>122810426
>artist has only 1k watchers

this is a literal nobody. Why the fuck did you make this thread?
>>
>>122810426
OP DA artist is weak. Getting your art posted somewhere else is fine in my opinion, but two things turn it into art theft:
>said art is claimed as someone else's/misattribution
>said art is monetized in a way that you, the artist, don't agree with

So unless OP pic's art is now circulating as bootleg t-shirt design in some third world market, or someone else claimed it's not OP pic's art, they need to take a chill pill and realize the free advertising.
>>
File: Illustration5.jpg (251 KB, 954x690)
251 KB
251 KB JPG
>>122810426
the plot thickens
>>
>>122811129
It's some weird chimp status crossed wires thing, artists are low status in their eyes but the art itself is or can be high status so they see red and want to rip someone's face off
>>
>>122812170
Is this the only reason you get involved with media for children?
>>
>>122811439
>We unironically need to return to the days where entertainers were one of the lowest positions in society.

As I was saying in >>122814268
>>
Copyright law as a whole is a bit of a sham at the moment. Corporates can infinitely lobby to extend it, so they own properties forever, and they can lobby to make it so you don't even own a product you purchase. You just own a "license" to it, which is the most greedy lawyer speak I've ever heard. Then you have those 500 page EULA's that you have to sign if you want to do anything, and even if you want to contest it, you need an expensive lawyer just to do so. Meanwhile, all some big corp has to do is drain you of cash through extended legal fees and you won't even be allowed to dispute any potential copyright case.
>>
>>122814265
How do these people even get into DRAMA all the time?

I am a multi fandom artist since fucking 2007 and I was never ever involved in drama or any kinds of arguments or threats or anything like that and I always had thousands of followers and reblogs/favorites/retweets and such. So while I am not one of the big ones there are enough users that know my shit or talked to me.
I genuinely believe that all of that shit comes from hidden drama happening in discords and the likes because these people always socialise with everybody they meet. Stay away from discord and don't post about politics and emotions and you are fine. It has no business with an art account anyway. When someone follows you for art they want art and no discourses.
>>
>>122810426
>explicitly or implicitly taking credit for an artist's work
>making money off an artist's work without permission
Pathetic and the artist is right to get mad.

>just posted on 4chan or used as an avatar or something
The artist is an unreasonable sperg if they're mad.

It's that simple.
>>
>>122814418
I didn't even click her account, so no. It's just an assumption because most angry artist call simple reposts "theft".
Even if it was there is no reason to make a clown of yourself by screeching on your deviant account. If someone steals your art you go there, report it and be done with it. Thieves won't care about rules anyway and usually the site they post the stolen artwork on are chill and everybody believes you when you sent them the .clip or .psd file with all the layers and such. It's enough to prove you are the original artist. I already did this a few times.
>>
File: image.jpg (308 KB, 1333x1777)
308 KB
308 KB JPG
>>122814466
Oh you freaked the f*** out. Bet you fantasize about how many young fans you could get involved with if you could draw like me. But if you have no soul, like yourself, you can never draw like me.

Also you probably spent like 10 times, 20 times as much time obsessing over this study of a model sheet as I spent doing it. How about 25 times? It keeps going up.

Stop calling yourself everyone BTW
>>
Art theft is NOT

>sharing a picture on 4chinz
>using a picture for your dumbass social media icon or whatever
>using a picture in a non-commercial/professional purpose
>saving a picture
>not crediting a piece of art in a non-commercial/professional capacity because you either don't know or don't care

Art theft IS

>taking credit for a piece of art you did not create
>using that art in a commercial/professional capacity without consent from the artist

Anyone who says otherwise is either a hysterical, mentally ill social media addicted twat, or an actual plagiarist.
>>
>>122811164
Copyright laws protect the artist's property, his creation his property? Did you create it? No? Then you have no right to it.
>>
>>122814434
>explicitly or implicitly taking credit for an artist's work
>making money off an artist's work without permission
Copyright law is what protects these creator's rights.
>>
>>122810543
guy is making sense, it must be opposite day or something.
>>
Why do so many literal children on this board have an autistic hatred for artists? Did some guy on deviantart trash your sonic oc or something?
>>
>>122814534
>Oh you freaked the f*** out. Bet you fantasize about how many young fans you could get involved with if you could draw like me.
holy shit, i've never seen such blatant projection
>>
>>122814434
Also using the artist's work is any way the artist does not approve and does not want his work to be associated with. If some sjw started using my work to promote woke ideology, I would use that piece of shit. I do not care if they are not making a profit out of it, I do not want want my work to be associated to ideas I hate.
>>
>>122814615
Because we didn't beat the living shit out of them on time and look where that lead. Parents need to go on DeviantArt and beat their children up for stealing intellectual property from YuGiOh.
>Muh art
We should send a C&D to every one of these "artists" and dox them. Let's see how arrogant they are after shit gets real.
>>
>>122814615
Because artists are lesser beings and entirely worthy of derision. They're like jesters and exist solely for entertainment.
>>
>>122814633
>free speech!
>no you can't do that kind of free speech
Do Americans really?
>>
>>122814657
And this attitude is why tumblr style and calarts exist, because of parasites like you treating artists like shit.
>>
>Yes, I do post my art exclusively anonymously. How could you tell?
>>
>>122814682
You can't put words in my mouth. My work is associated with me, and I don't want to be associated with the shit YOU say, not me.
>>
>>122814683
Tumblr and calarts are just unfunny jesters, and in a more enlightened past, they would be executed for being unfunny and wasting their better's time.
>>
>>122814646
>>122814657
Holy shit I was just joking, I didn't realize this really is just underage posters venting about their deviantart drama on /co/. How the fuck did we get to this point? Will jannies ever get rid of you brats?
>>
>>122814702
Tumblr and calarts are the only art that's being produced because it's the only art parasites like you won't taint. Parasites like you should be exterminated.
>>
>>122814701
>heh, critique my work, will you? Well, I don't want my art associated with your negativity! You can't say anything about it at all!
Do Americans really?
>>
>>122814724
>NOOOOOOO NOT MY HECKING FANARTARINO, NOOOO YOU CAN'T SHARE IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION, THIS IS THEFT, AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

*takes a picture of a public sculpture and shares with friends*
*saves a publicly posted jpg and shares with friends*
Heh... nothin personell... kid...
>>
>>122814726
>critique = this work is promoting my idea
Wow you're stupid.
>>
>>122814782
>no, THIS nonprofit association is fine, NOT this one
>I will coerce your speech because I am a self-righteous authoritarian
Do Americans really?
>>
>>122814778
Well not if the work is behind a physical or metaphorical paywall, no. If you have to pay money to utilize it, distributing it for free violates the creator's right to have his terms and conditions to utilize his work respected. The creator owns it, the creator decides the terms and conditions to utilize it. That's the basics of private property.
>>
>>122814832
>no, THIS nonprofit association is fine, NOT this one
Exactly. It's called author's moral rights. If a bunch of nazis want to use the artist's work to promote nazism and the artist hates nazism, even if they make no profit out of it, it's the artist's right not to be associated with nazism.
>>
>>122814883
>Exactly. It's called author's moral rights.
>Your free speech offends my moral rights, it's not allowed
Do Americans really?
>>
>>122814918
>Do abericans really :DDDDDD
Do europoors really?
>>
>>122814918
It's not free speech to distort someone else's speech. The art is the work of the artist, and the artist wants nothing to do with nazism, it's his right not to have anything of his associated to nazis. Why are you trying to put words in someone's mouth so bad? You are the one that's violating the artist's free speech to hate and reject nazis.
>>
>>122814850
>saves as
>scrubs metadata
>reposts for free because you can't own non-physical data, and the artist is only charging for access to see that particular hosted incarnation of the image
Good luck, I'm behind 7 proxies.
>>
>>122813040
announcing a report is grounds for ban, r-tard.
>>
>>122814619
He's a known mentally ill shizo on /co/, ignore or make fun of him/it/whatever.
>>
>>122814706
You projecting turd. I won't kill you Tumblr/Twitter, I will torture you for reducing the majority IQ of the world.
It wasn't the jews after all. It was always internet drama warriors, especially female landwhales you fucking landwhale.
>>
>>122814954
Do Americans really?

>>122814975
>Nazi's
Whoa buddy, it was wokies up here >>122814633; don't tell me that you're misrepresenting your own position with a shitty appeal to emotion?
Tsk, for shame anon; first denying the right to freedom of speech, and then flip-flopping for a gotcha. For shame.
>>
>>122814981
>scrubs metadata
That's plagiarism, pretending the work is not the artist's own work, and that's a crime because it is the artist's own work. And it is also a violation of the artist's property because you are not allowed to touch, alter or modify someone else's property without the owner's permission. The artist owns the image always, no matter what. Enjoy your jailtime.
>>
>>122814543
>>saving a picture
I genuinely wonder what these people think about saving art, which should usually be your goal. Because people that save your art must like it quite a lot.

It never even crossed my mind until one guy has literally asked me if he could save a pic he really liked and show it to his friend. I was perplexed. At first I assumed it was just done as a meaning to show the appreciation for my art, but I am not so sure anymore after seeing so many people getting angry at everything that isn't pumping likes to their accout and giving them clout.
>>
>>122815102
But anon, that's not the artist's work, that's a digital copy of a digital image that I have creatively re-interpreted to (coincidentally) remove tracking data while preserving the visible portion of the image, including the artist's signature (if present to begin with).

They've still got their entirely unedited "original" copy with all their precious metadata, I haven't done anything to it.
>>
>>122815063
Not letting people misrepresent someone else is not denying the right to freedom of speech. In Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), the Supreme Court said that there is "no constitutional value in false statements of fact". That is why we have libel and slander laws, you can't claim falsehoods about someone and expect no consequences. In the artist's case, associating the artist to nazis violates his freedom of speech and is a falsehood about the artist, because he does not want to be associated to nazis in any way at all. You are denying the artist's freedom of speech and committing slander/libel. Enjoy the defamation lawsuit.
>>
>>122814615
What if I am an artist myself but consider lots of these posts overreactions? Lots of western artists are quite assy somehow. The newest hot take was, I shit you not, getting angry at people who praise their talent on twitter.
Yeah that's it. It's people raging over fans praising them. The reason behind this is that to them it's offensive to talk about talent because they believe the capacity of doing good art was 100% democratically distributed among people and that talent doesn't exist and all art is just the result of tons of work and nothing else.

The irony is that the good artists barely even use tipps and training. They just draw and they were already good when they were still little kids. Everybody had at least one of those great artists as a classmate in schools. That's because talents are actually a thing that exist.
But even if they weren't. If a fan praises the talent of the artist they mean it well. Attacking these people because they used the wrong word or aren't experts because they aren't artists themselves is just an absolute snobtier asshole move and such people deserve every unfollow they get.
>>
>>122814657
He said and comsumed his next anime, game or comic.
>>
>>122815168
The image in all its formats and appearances is the artist's work. Naruto Uzumaki is always Kishimoto's work and property regardless of whether he appears on your screen or on a t-shirt. Removing the artist's signature and metadata is not "creatively re-interpreted" because the image is still the same, there is not enough difference to be a different image which is a fundamental requirement for reinterpretation. Removing the elements that identify the original artist explicitly shows you only want to plagiarize, not reinterpret.
It is always the artist's work and you are a thief, that's why you should be killed.
>>
>>122815236
But anon, implied associations are a matter of subjective opinion, not fact. If I were to say that the art was pro-Nazi, and/or that the artist was a Nazi, you'd be right, but otherwise it's just a personal interpretation of a piece and its meaning to an individual :^)

After all, there is no objective meaning behind art, right? The creator's intention has no more value than that of a random observer.

So again, why are you denying people's freedom of speech by selectively interpreting case law for your fallacious argument? In a way, by using that judicial decision to support your ridiculous tyrannical beliefs, you are associating those fine judge's intellectual creation (their analysis of the law) with something the supreme court does not represent. That's slander, isn't it anon?
>>
>>122815383
But anon, I left the visible signature alone, it's still clearly the original artist's. You're accusing me of things I never said, that's slander and I will see you in court for this defamation of character, you here me?

But first I'm going to subscribe to a couple of patreons, make a few harmless copies, copy+paste them into an image editor, resave to get rid of all that nasty steganography, and share the visibly unaltered images for free, as information being free is the right of all free people's :)
>>
File: 1619026733739.png (360 KB, 566x328)
360 KB
360 KB PNG
>almost 100 post thread about some autist's drama on fucking deviantart
just nuke this fucking board already
>>
>>122815512
There is no good cartoon airing right now and the few comics I read get postponed all the time.
>>
File: edc.png (394 KB, 802x722)
394 KB
394 KB PNG
>>122815054
>>
File: pepefroggie.jpg (35 KB, 780x438)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>122814633
Yeah good luck doing anything if that ever happens
>>
>>122815540
So you decided to shit up /co/ because of this?
>>
>>122815390
Anything that can be perceived as defaming and morally damaging to the artist is up for suing and accusations of defamation. If the artist does not want himself and his work associated with you, a nazi, it is his right to stop you from using his work in a way he does not approve, because he hates nazis. You do not have the right to use his work; he has the right not to be associated to you nor anyone like you. You using his work to promote nazism or any idea the artist rejects is enough to create an association he does not want and he has the right to put a stop to to.

>The creator's intention has no more value than that of a random observer.
False. Anything that may detract from the artist's relationship with his work automatically enables the artist's moral rights to protect himself and his work from associations he does not want himself in. It is the artist's work, therefore his association trumps that of any random observer who did not create the work.

Once again, you are the only one denying the artist's right to not be associated with nazis, in any way, not through himself not through his work. Ever.
>>
>>122814706
We had a thread about some retard drama on facebook or something that was literally invaded by one of the idiots from that facebook drama that went full sperg in the thread. I don't get why there are so many westerners that act like fucking 12 year olds even when they are in their late 20s. If you browse social media for art 80% of the text posts sounds if some elementary school kid had made them but then you look at the profile and it's grown ass whiny adults.
>>
>>122815488
>including the artist's signature
>I left the visible signature alone
Man, you're retarded.

>get rid of all that nasty steganography
It's not nasty, it's part of the work. Once again, you are altering property that is not yours without the owner's permission, and you have no right to do that. Enjoy the patreon creators suing the shit out of you.
>>
>>122815641
> I don't get why there are so many westerners that act like fucking 12 year olds even when they are in their late 20s.

mouse utopia
>>
>>122815569
>you
Just because I am not literally putting a disclaimer over every post I make announcing that I am not the OP doesn't mean I am the OP. I just explained why I made a few posts here since I made some observations I wanted to comment on, that's all. Ask OP why he made the thread.
The point is that the topic isn't even about that deviant artist, it's a more general thing.
>>
>>122811826
Comissions are not fair use

You CAN'T legally profit by using other people character
>>
>>122815559
go back to sucking dicks on reddit
>>
>>122815673
>mouse utopia
?
Do you mean something disney related?
Could maybe explain shit. Because it's always americans that act like that and the US is the only place where disney seems to be more than just movies. I heard there are people who even buy disney merch and all that shit.
>>
>>122815582
But anon, all of that is completely wrong, and you're relying entirely on the emotionally incendiary use of Nazi to buoy your fallacious argument. Why don't you go back to using "wokists" like you did at the beginning of the thread, or any other half-objectionable group? Or do you admit that emotional manipulation is the only thing you have left?

It's especially egregious that you're using the concept of Nazism to argue against freedom of speech; it's really disturbing and sociopathic, now that I think about it.

In any case, no; the artist's intention has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the common observed meaning of their piece. They can swear to up and down that they meant X, but if people believe that the piece means Y or Z instead, both interpretations are equally correct.
>>
File: blue eyes toon dragon.jpg (18 KB, 480x360)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
>>122812004
Is this tracing? Original show pic.
>>
>>122810701
>Their labor is completely worthless in any actual value to civilization and yet they demand reward equal to as if it was.

Ah, so they're comparable to e-thots on twitch and instagram.
>>
>>122811439
so... never?

literally never in recorded history and by the long example that provides across hundreds of well-attested cultures, almost certainly never in prehistory until we get well into the region of shitting where we eat and sleep in a goddamned cave and dying of dysentery?

you can read, right? how about instead of furiously masturbating to your own unreadable reply you just go read some history and archaeology you stupid cunt
>>
>>122815645
Oh, so you're just illiterate.

>while preserving the visible portion of the image, including the artist's signature (if present to begin with)
As in, the signature is part of the visible work. What grade are you in, anon? You need to keep up on your homework.

>It's not nasty, it's part of the work.
Nah, it's nasty and is a separate quality distinct from the work.

>you are altering property that is not yours without the owner's permission, and you have no right to do that.
But it's not their property, it's a copied image that I created with my own resources ;^)

>Enjoy the patreon creators suing the shit out of you.
How are they going to do that when I removed their tracking L M A O

You sound like the kind of person who shills for corporate rights.
>>
>>122815751
Actually yes. Even the shadows are traced.
>>
>>122815689
he's profiting from his own labor, not because of the character
>>
>>122811826
ngmi
>>
>tfw nobody but you likes your husbando so nobody would pay for art of him but you can't concentrate on other shit
People that like popular stuff should be happy.
>>
>>122815734
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink
>>
>>122812004
Cool, can someone photoshop the watermark off?
>>
>>122810426
>>122815751
>>122815848
Can you even claim a traced pic?
>>
>>122814278
Go back to sucking panpizza's dick on twitter
>>
>>122815747
>that is completely wrong
No, it is completely right. Educate yourself on moral rights.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/moral_rights

>As defined by the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, an international agreement governing copyright law, moral rights are the rights “to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation.”

>the artist's intention has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the common observed meaning of their piece
And that's wrong too, because if the observed meaning is wrong and detrimental for the artist, the artist has the right to sue for defamation as your interpretation is blatantly NOT correct, the artist rejects it.
>>
>>122810426
So many entitled little leeches in this thread.I feel bad for artists.
>>
>>122815960
This is really weird. If anything people have less company nowadays than before, at least in my country. Back in the days life wasn't as anonymous as it is now when it's normal that nobody can name their neighbours and that most people are living alone and everybody is a single child. Maybe it's different in the US, not sure.
>>
>>122816015
>"this is a moral right because we (legally) say so"
lmao

>NO!!! You can't interpret my work in this way it's WROOOOONG NOOOOOOOO
LMAO
>>
>>122815974
No.
It's what I said earlier. The angier and more paranoid the artist, the worse they are at drawing. I never see talented people watermarking their works or crying about reposts or anything like that.
>>
>>122815841
Everything in the work is the visible portion of the work, and that includes the metadata, as I can quite clearly see it.

>it's nasty blah blah blah
It's not. The artist considers it a fundamental part of his work, work which he does not want altered or modified in any way.

>it's not their property
Yes it is. The image depicted is the artist's property in all its forms and incarnations. Naruto Uzumaki is always Masashi Kishimoto's property regardless of where and how he appears. The image is the artist's, a copy does not transfer property of the image to others.

>How are they going to do that
>find unauthorized copy on the internet
>track those who shared it
Enjoy the jailtime, thief.
>>
>>122811349
>I can understand shit like not wanting people to be able to claim ACTUAL ART As your own, but you don't get to copyright a series of 1s and 0s

I can understand shit like not wanting people to be able to claim ACTUAL ART As your own, but you don't get to copyright a series of paint pigments.

I can understand shit like not wanting people to be able to claim ACTUAL NOVELS As your own, but you don't get to copyright a series of As Bs and Cs

I can understand shit like not wanting people to be able to claim ACTUAL MUSIC As your own, but you don't get to copyright a series of sound waves
>>
>>122816092
Yes, it is the artist's moral right. You have no right to imply "this artist is ok with this" because the artist is not ok with that at all, it's disgusting to him, he would never be ok with that shit. A dead artist can't fight back, but a living one can and will sue the shit out of you for defaming him.
>>
>>122816092
I legit hope you get your shit kicked in.
>>
>>122814434
>Pathetic and the artist is right to get mad.
They are tracing you fucking retard, they are the art thief >>122815751
>>
>>122816158
>as I can quite clearly see it.
No you can't.

>The artist considers it a fundamental part of his work
The artist can consider a lot of things, but that doesn't make them right (as artists are quite often disturbed)

>Yes it is.
No it's not; the character and visible arrangement of elements is there's, but that particular set of 1's and 0's currently saved on my HDD is mine. I could manipulate that series of bits anyway I like (such as setting them all to 0 and deleting the file, for instance), and it has absolutely no bearing on any other copies in existance. QQ moar.

>Enjoy the jailtime, thief.
Lmao, man, you love licking that boot. Corps are people too, amirite? Follow the law no matter what, right?
>>
>>122816277
I can already tell you're a republican
>>
>>122810426
Nigger did you seriously go on DeviantTard to pick out some literal-who dumbass whining about random shit, and then screen capped it to make an entire thread about it to bitch on fucking /co/?
>>
>>122816277
Yes I can. Anything can be seen in a file, stupid.

The artist has the right to define his work, it is his work not yours. You have no right to speak for the artist and say "no that is not part of your work", that violates the artist's right to define his property as he pleases and constitutes an attack on the artist's moral right to the integrity of the work, as it detracts from the artist's relationship with his work and that's a violation of his rights.

>the character and visible arrangement of elements is there's
Meaning if you remove it you alter the work and that's a violation of the artist's private property, enjoy the jailtime. You are not allowed to modify the artist's work in any way, and you distributing the altered work is a double violation of the artist's work.

>Corps
Masashi Kishimoto is a corporation? Are you retarded?
>>
>>122816218
>Yes, it is the artist's moral right.
And the People's Democratic Republic of Korea is for the people, democratic, and a republic. Calling something a thing doesn't make it true.

>You have no right to imply "this artist is ok with this" because the artist is not ok with that at all, it's disgusting to him, he would never be ok with that shit.
That's the funny thing, whether or not an artist is "okay" with an interpretation is entirely immaterial. It does not matter, because the artist's interpretation does not supersede anyone else's. They can seethe all they like about people not respecting their creative vision, but it's a fart in the wind.

>>122816241
You're mom suck me good and hard thru my jorts
>>
I swear one day I will become a mod only to look at the IPs to prove something, because I am sure there are certain people I recognize in every damn thread and they are almost permanently online and talk exactly the same and they are always angry and most likely have some mental issues (there is more than one of them and they show different types of anger and different triggers, but I am convinced recognize them).
>>
ITT: people trying to defend a tracer right to claim their traced pics for themselves
>>
>>122816375
But anon, I'm not the one arguing for the restriction of freedom of speech in favor of nonmaterial moral "rights"

>>122816451
>The artist has the right to define his work, it is his work not yours.

>take picture of a sculpture from a different angle
NOOOOO THAT'S NOT MY VISION YOU'RE MISREPRESENTING MY WORK AAAAAAAAA MY RIGHTS

>Meaning if you remove it you alter the work and that's a violation of the artist's private property, enjoy the jailtime.
Too bad it's not their property ;^)

>Masashi Kishimoto is a corporation? Are you retarded?
Oh, you're a weeb. Why do I care what you think?
>>
>>122816471
>You're mom suck me good and hard thru my jorts
Keep telling yourself that, anon. But all this projecting is never gonna bring your slut of a mom back.
>>
>>122816636
>n-no you!
Dude your mom could suck a golf ball through a garden hose, I could feel it all the way up in my kidneys.
>>
>>122816471
It is not calling something a thing, it's showing you that other people have rights which you are bound to respect, parasite. The artist's work is his private property, with all rights that entails. You have to violate the artist's rights, leech.

>the artist's interpretation does not supersede anyone else's
Yes it does. That is why artists can sue and put a stop to people who distort he artist's work in any way the artist finds damaging to himself. It is the artist's work, the artist has the final word on his own work.
>>
>>122816087
We're hitting our carrying capacity. Similar to like that of japan, when you have everything you want, why even communicate/socialize, or reproduce? In America's case, human desire is infinite and we physically can't keep up with demand here. and it's finally caught up with us.
>>
>>122816579
Were you allowed to take a picture in the first place? A lot of places do not allow any pictures, or only allow it from a certain position. Congratulations, you have violated the owner's terms to utilize his work, time for jail.

>it's not their property
Yes it is. The image depicted is always the artist's property. Naruto does not become your property just because you printed out his face on a shirt, it is always Kishimoto's property no matter what.
>>
>>122816540
Not one of those anons but there is a lot of artists lurking in this board both from the industry and people who do comissions for a living so I dunno why youre so shocked over some of thembeing offended by people saying that they shouldn't be paid for the career their invested their. entire lives on.
>>
>>122816579
Yeah, you're arguing to be a fucking thief. Glad Trump lost, and no amount of screaming "voter fraud"! can change it.
>>
>>122816692
>these are my rights because I say they're my rights
lmao no

>Yes it does.
No it doesn't. You keep falling back on the law as an ultimate authority because you're a small, cowardly person.
>>
>>122816828
These are my rights because they are recognized as my rights. Artists have protested for their rights too, you know.

>No it doesn't
Yes it does. The artist made the image depicted, the image depicted is the property of the artist. You have no right to steal other people's property, you disgusting thief.
>>
>>122816688
>more stupid revenge fantasies
I truly pity you anon. You would always be seen as a joke if people knew the real you.
>>
>>122816888
Trips confirm.
>>
File: 258252.jpg (40 KB, 536x187)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>122816698
Like always, Jojo was right even decades ago.
>>
>>122816828
>you're a small, cowardly person.
The utter projection here.
>>
>>122816774
Weeb

>>122816818
>has no arguments so he's just blindly flailing in the dark, hoping some adhom will stick
You're giving far too much credit to rightoids by implying that they share my position.

>>122816888
>rights are derived from law
lol, lmao
>Yes it does.
No it doesn't. I'm not stealing it, because you still have it. Yarhar fiddle dee dee, friend.

In any case, Captcha is getting annoyingly long so the jannies are telling me its time to wrap this up. Been fun, retards, peace out.
>>
>>122816779
I didn't even mean the artist posters to be honest but someone else.
>>
>>122817014
Ah, so you're an Antia/BLM retard. Hope you get shot at protest.
>>
>>122817014
>No it doesn't
Yes it does.

You are stealing it because you are pretending the artist's work is not his own. That's plagiarism, a form of theft that's rightfully punished. Don't plagiarize people.

And you admitted you are modifying the work, which is another violation of the artist's property, since you don't have his permission to modify his work. Death penalty should be enough for the likes of you.
>>
>>122812601
I think Deviantart has mandatory pronouns in bio now
>>
>>122817209
Doesn't seem like it. I am still just "some artist".
>>
>>122817090
I hope you're not defending OP example.
>>
>>122817497
OP is a fanart, and fanarts have less rights compared to original works because fanartists use someone else's work and property without permission, so they are not in the right in the first place. The rights and laws I quoted apply to original works, unless the original artist explicitly gives his permission (and then it becomes more of a collaboration/adaptation) fanart is not protected by the law.
>>
>>122817497
Nobody even talks about OP anymore after the first 10 or so posts.
>>
>>122810426
IMO in this day and age where you can literally search images up, you'll eventually find the artist if you search hard enough, so posting art without adding credit shouldn't be that big of a deal.

I also never EVER understood the artists that watermark the hell out of their images. Literally just put your fucking name in the corner, that's all you gotta do if you know your art is liable to be reposted. I've seen so many good art pieces be ruined because the artist is hell bent on having people know it was them that made the image.
>>
>>122817615
>I also never EVER understood the artists that watermark the hell out of their images.
They're scaredy type that things if they just put their signature someone will quickly erase it on paint and claim the art as their own.
>>
>>122817615
I am absolutely not defending the bitching from OP's image, but you vastly overestimate phonebrains and normalfags. I have never met a single person on social media that knew how to search an image. I mean there are some, but it's like one out of 100.
Just last month someone casually met me in a discussion and was all hyped they coincidentally found the artist whose art they saw before but never found. I actually upload my art on tumblr and pixiv, so it appears on every google search or whatever other add-on or link you are using.
These people are just too fucking dumb to do the simpliest things online. Most of them are phonefags anyway, and phonefags can barely even boot a PC.
>>
I feel bad for wiki mods, I mean I already admire the mods here even though they are not forced to talk to autists, now imagine the guys from that wiki
>>
>>122817605
>>122817497
Though to be precise I must add, fanartists are still protected from plagiarism because in the end, they made the drawing, not someone else. Years ago stealing japanese artists' fan works and posting them on DA pretending they were your work was all the rage, but those pathetic plagiarists got immediately busted because as soon as they posted anything they actually created the difference between the japanese artist's work and their own was abyssal, they were so shit it was obvious they could not have created the art they stole. And yeah, people noticed the work was also posted on the japanese artist's site and started asking questions. So even a fanartist is protected form plagiarism as in they can say "I made this, you did not" but they have no rights other than that. They can't claim moral rights on the characters/works they depict because they are not the original creators, they can't claim economic rights because they are not the original creators. If the original creator gets pissed at them, their fanart has to go, because the artist's original work has more rights than their fanart.
>>
>>122812170
>>122813269
Quick rundown?
>>
>>122817839
>fanartists are still protected from plagiarism because in the end, they made the drawing
OP example is a tracer, the pic is traced, I highly doubt they can "protect" that pic in any possible way.
>>
>>122811807
>NFTs
>>
>>122817839
I like that by now doujinshi culture is embraced in the west as well. Well maybe not for disney shit, but I don't watch disney. The comics and cartoons I like have creators that are actively part of the fandom and retweet your art and participate in anthologies or fanzines themselves which is pretty cool.
>>
>>122817954
True that. I was reminiscing the times when DA artists got publicly humiliated for pretending they really made that awesome fanart, when it was actually the work of a Japanese dude, and the DA retard was mocked everywhere for his retarded attempt at passing off someone else's work as his own. Social media is too globalized these days for people to even think about pulling off some pathetic shit like that.
>>
>>122817978
>retarded soijack poster doesnt like NFTs
Its funny you think youre insulting NFTchads somehow
>>
>>122818010
Depends on the creator. Some are cool with it always, some are cool with it with stipulations, some are never cool with it at all. In the end, it's the original creator's right to choose what he or she wants to be associated with and what he or she doesn't.
>>
>>122818042
It's just weird how this tracer is bitching about "art theft" when Deviantart always (or used to) witchunt tracers and call them art thieves every single day.

Is the deviantart community cool with tracers now? Are those guys protecting tracers now?
>>
>>122817209
Its mandatory to put, but you can choose to not show
>>
>>122818137
Quality for and on art sites took a hard dive in the late 10s. I don't even use pixiv anymore because it's full of shit when it was once a place for guaranteed high tier art. Back then people who weren't particularly good didn't even dare to post there, or didn't know that site to begin with or how to operate there, before they installed the dumb english option.

Today, if you want good art, instead of following tags or whole websites you have to follow good artists only. The amount of people that draw increased thousandfold since phonefags came to the net and with them the average quality went down the drain.
>>
>>122810426
Were you B1bl1kal?
>>
>>122818137
I have no idea. I stopped using deviantart in 2010 when they tried to shill their worthless virtual currency.
>>
>>122818309
The Green Pug was right.
>>
Be honest, how many of you guys are constantly foaming because artists make money from selling comics?
>>
>>122810426
If you post art online, it becomes the worlds. You basically forfeit everything. People will save it, edit it, whatever.
>>122811129
>>122811665
You know what I tire of? Being unable to talk comics on here. It's either casuals or hardcore fanboy autists
>>
>>122818457
>You basically forfeit everything
Thank god that's not how it works.
>>
Can I just say watermarks over art is the dumbest and most self-centered thing ever that can ruin even the best pieces? Look I can understand wanting credit for your work, but just sign the damn thing on the corner. If you don't even wish to share the original work with the world, to be open to good and bad critique, then your mastery of the art is merely a wasted effort of self-indulgence
>>
>>122818507
I understand copyright just fine, and profiting off another's work is wrong. However you're a delusional fool if you think art will not be reposted
>>
>>122818360
I don't get angry about it. I am also an artist myself so I could do it too, but it's too random. I need 1000 a month to pay my rent, good luck making as much with art. Even if I did, it's too unreliable. People might want less commissions in some months than usually, or patreons might go away because of financial crises, covid and so on. Barely anybody can make enough money to live from this and even some official comic artists I follow have full-time office jobs aside from their comic job.

Every artist I see living from their art gets literally paid by their upper middle class parents.

Aside from all that I also don't want it because I hate tainting my hobby with work and stress. I love drawing my ideas or already existing characters I like and it's some sacral thing to me. No commissions or anything, art should just be fun.
>>
Speaking of art, anyone know of any decent artists whom have reasonable prices and enjoy stuff like character redesigns or the like?
>>
>>122818593
Why pay? Twitter will turn your white character black for free.
>>
>>122818624
I just wanted to create cool costumes.....
>>
>>122818556
But I EXPLICITLY put 'do not repost' on my drawing, surely that will be enough to stop everyone
>>
>>122818593
You should search for artists that draw the stuff you want I think.
I mean that if you like mecha/transformers, you should definitely look for artist specialised in that, because even talented anime artists might suck at drawing robots, since it's not what they are used to do and they are harder to draw than anime girls. Same with bara, furry, aliens and so on. I would first decide what specific genre, type and style I want, and then search or ask for artists.
>>
>>122811129
Yeah it's a weird phenomenon. People will spend a significant amount of their time and base a significant part of their personalities on consuming media, but treat the people who make that media like the scum of the earth.
>>
>>122814615
Because they don't see artists as human beings, but as machines to dispense entertainment that they are entitled to.

They'll talk all day about how art is worthless, artists should get real jobs, nobody should try to make a living off of art, etc. But if an artist is so much as a day late on delivering an update to their free webcomic then by God there's gonna be hell to pay.
>>
>>122818706
>You should search for artists that draw the stuff you want I think.
I wouldn't even know where to begin
>>
>>122818557
>Every artist I see living from their art gets literally paid by their upper middle class parents.
Meanwhile 3rd-worldchads get to benefit from the US dollar being worth more
>>
>>122810701
t.person who can only draw stick figures and reposts art on the daily
>>
>>122818734
People can't deal with shit anymore for some reason. You can't even call anything good anymoree without triggering at least one retard that will sperg out about it because you called something they don't like good.
I mean when you make such a post it's subjective anyway, but that should be a given and other people should treat it that way. I a kind of tired to either pretend that shit I like was bad or say what I really think and get dragged into never ending arguments for this that somehow always end up with people comparing you with Stalin or Hitler because you like a cartoon they don't approve of.
>>
>>122811129
>>122818881
The more I consciously think about it, the more I’m starting to piece together that this board is just an alternate /r9k/, it’s just that compared to /r9k/ this board has a lot more people that are just mentally stunted at the age range where children sort of just expect everyone and everything to bow to their whims and then have a tantrum when other people turn out to be more than meat puppets that obey everything they do.
>>
>>122818734
>>122818968
You know what else people can't do anymore? Separate art from the artist. It's like when a musician is outed for doing bad shit, and then everyone wants to ban their content. I can understand not giving money to them, but we can acknowledge a creation is worth something even though the artist is a piece of shit in this circumstance. You know?
>>
>>122818937
Money value is fun. I remember being fucking rich for a month when I visited Iran.
Literally paid 30 cent for longass taxi drives and 1 euro or dollar for a full meal in a restaurant. Imagine how hard it was to spend all my money before going back. Even bought some 5 kilo statue, vases and some small carpets since I would have needed a year to get rid of the money otherwise and I didn't want to change it back again.
Think by now this has changed too since they have way more tourists. Back then my group was the only one aside from a few Italian or German old people.
>>
Is it any surprise at all that drawfags are abandoning this board in droves?
>>
>>122819081
Eh it's not just criticism. Most artists flee here to go to pateron, twitter, etc as a means to earn big bucks (if they can).
>>
>>122819034
Well fuck yeah you are right. This isn't even just a wokeoid problem but a general thing. And it's not even serious shit man.

I get that you wouldn't want to pay for Burzum's music after the murder and the burning churches, but someone can still enjoy the music itself because it doesn't get better or worse. And let's be real the things people usually get mad at is always some fucking harmless shit, usually even private things and opinions, lifestyle or anything else that shouldn't even concern them. Or a tweet they disagree with the author has made 5 years ago.
>>
File: iTAmc.gif (3.92 MB, 446x360)
3.92 MB
3.92 MB GIF
>this entire thread
>>
>>122819081
I am here since 2007 and too dumb, uncreative or autistic to talk on twitter so I only use it for posting art.
>>
>>122819081
Drawfags are entitled attention whores, who needs them anyway
>>
>>122819081
the people who post art on an anonymous imageboard for free are not gonna pack up over their art getting reposted.
>>
File: 1618459423761.png (324 KB, 760x760)
324 KB
324 KB PNG
>>122819081
My small theory is that the culprits behind that, more often than not, are most likely /ic/fags intentionally chasing people away, due to the fact that this board very likely has the largest overlap with /ic/ to begin with, and /ic/ is notorious for being filled with whiny, untalented shitheads who insist on trying to drag other people down with them.
>>
File: 1523862192138.gif (1.91 MB, 480x270)
1.91 MB
1.91 MB GIF
I don't exactly like the term "art thief" but what really gets under my skin is how insidious it is a lot of the time.

What I'm not talking about is people innocently reposting stuff they think looks cool and not crediting the artist because the thought didn't cross their mind.

What I mean is the people who go out of their way to be assholes about it. Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook let you share the original artist's post with all their info in tact with a single button. Very easy. But these reposters take the extra effort to download the file, reupload it on their own page, sometimes remove watermarks/signatures and put in a new caption and tags.

Then there's the people who do it with videos. They'll download the video, cut out the intro/outro, crop or blur out the watermark. And then on top of all that, they have the fucking audacity to edit "WHO MADE THIS? XD" onto the video. YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHO MADE THIS. They exert extra effort into making sure nobody knows who the original artist is. Extra effort to be an asshole.

And then if they get a big following from reposting stuff, they'll start selling promos and shoutouts.

Most of the time artists aren't asking for the world. They just want credit. Instead, people do extra work to make sure that they're not credited, and then profit off of that.
>>
People who are trying to make a living off of art need to realize that commissions are their job and everything else is advertising. if you put it up for free, it's gonna get passed around. put your name on it and stop bitching.
>>
File: lugia approves.png (64 KB, 320x237)
64 KB
64 KB PNG
>>122814543
I will be screenshotting this, great post.
>>
>>122811807
NFTs are the reason this person is spurging out. Because someone is making money off of their work.
>>
>>122815751
>>122812004
>Literally steals art via tracing
>Threw a tantrum other people “stole” her art
>>
>>122819446
This.
I stealth-post my art all the time to shill my unpopular husbando.
>>
>>122812611
Stop being a faggot and get over it, I'll do as I please on the internet
>>
>>122814265
but wait, there's more!
https://www.deviantart.com/fireflea-san/art/Satsuki-Junketsu-460027778
>>
>>122814547
It's not his property, I have the right to do whatever I want with freely available resources on the internet.
>>
>>122818881
>entitled
Oh but when they feel entitled to a paycheck for a drawing that's ok. Artists are propagandist vermin, stay mad
>>
>>122819780
>a paycheck
*a living wage
>>
>>122819780
Based 5-figures wageslave
>>
>inb4 OP is the guy that artist is angry at
>>
>>122819780
Holy shit dude you are more obvious than you think.
Are you literally some 12 year old that paid for a commission he wasn't happy with and now your mom is angry at you for using her credit card?
>>
>>122810426
The chad "Yeah I know people are going to repost my art so I put a watermark in the corner somewhere so people would be able to trace it back to me."
vs
The virgin "Someone may steal my picture so I'm going to ruin it with an ugly ass watermark on the whole thing and make it less enjoyable to view."
>>
>>122820142
In the end, having a recognizable style associated with you is the best insurance people will trace your art back to you.
>>
>>122820643
Who dat
>>
>>122810426
so what is your stake in this OP? is there a reason you came to show us this?
>>
>>122820868
Red Panels
>>
>>122820868
>>122821075
>r/antifastonetoss SEETHING
>>
>>122821030
internet man make me angry
post angry about internet man
>>
>>122820868
Stonetoss of course. Best generator of tears and butthurt on reddit, twitter and /co/ since forever.
>>
>>122821084
>r/
?
>>
>>122820868
Racist Shmorky
>>
>>122821030
It's too specific and it's some small artist so nobody that would search for raging artfags would find this specific thing, which means that OP is most likely someone that knows that artist and is seething over her for some reason.
>>
>>122817741
This is sadly true from what I observe. Even here with a built in reverse image search you'll get people who can't even do the bare minimum of checking saucenao on an unedited and uncropped image.

Reposting isn't that big a deal but it's when someone takes credit for it or uses it to build their shitty aggregator page for clout and ad revenue like >>122819484 describes that it becomes an issue. No one likes to be taken advantage of and disrespected.
>>
>>122821210
nice try reddit
>>
>>122821401
Yeah. This is why I made a post earlier that distingushes between reposts and theft. Reposters don't want to hurt the artist, many of them even just want to spread their art on websites the artists aren't using. Not the best thing every maybe, especially since most reposters are on pinterest and pinterest users cannot link properly to save their life, but I guess many are new on the net or teenagers and don't know any better.

Theft on the other hand (so people that repost art and claim it was their own work) is done assholes and shizos and both care about attentionwhoring more than anything else. The weirdest shit is when you look at the other stuff they stole and see how every damn pic has a completely different style, atmosphere and proficiency and yet their followers somehow never wonder about how every pic these people "make" can be so different.
We truly live in a brainless consoomer culture. Sometimes I am even pleasantly surprised when others notice little details I built into a pic, because most people scroll, see something they consider well drawn, like, reblog and scroll further and switching back and forth between twitter, tiktok, youtube, reddit, discord and probably 15 other social media places.
>>
>>122820868
Amogus
>>
>>122810426
ok art thief
>>
>>122819484
>they have the fucking audacity to edit "WHO MADE THIS? XD"
Now THIS is something always fucking wondered about and you are the first person that makes me realize what the answer could be.
Social media shit is full of such posts you look at and know they have a high potential for becoming popular but then the post is always saying "LOL Who made this?".
It's especially weird with videos because where the fuck do you even get videos without seeing the source? They are usually not shittily downscaled enough to come from shitholes like 9gag or whatever its clones are called. Not to mention that these shitsite slap their watermarks on everything anyway. If they did it on purpose though it makes sense.

People do everything for clout. It's like when you often see a viral tweet and search for the exact same phrase there are 100 other matches that are older.
>>
>>122810426
stop stealing art
>>
>>122810426
If they don't want their shit stolen, then don't post it online. Simple as that.
>>
I only follow hentai.
>>
>>122813269
even they are better senpai
>>
Artist in OP traced it and the post was made 2 years ago. Who cares?
>>
>>122810426
Adoptables are the biggest scam, imagine paying money for a character design that’s just bits of data under no legal protection whatsoever. What’s to stop somebody from stealing it?
>>
File: maximum dab.gif (3.27 MB, 324x480)
3.27 MB
3.27 MB GIF
Only attention whores care about their art being stolen.
>>
>>122823833
Ostensibly if you buy an adoptable you own the copyright. Which means it's actually the artist getting ripped off because they charge pocket change for adoptables.
>>
>>122810426
this kind of shit is why i dont sign or watermark anything i draw. its just obsessive to try and corral people so they know you made it. chances are nobody cares, and if they do care, it probably isnt even that hard to hunt down who made it. if you have trouble finding someone from their art, they just have bad online presence.
>>
>>122824007
Same. This.
The best you can do is drawing a lot and being good/getting better. Even if someone should steal your art or repost it people will be more likely to recognize it's yours or find you one day if you keep making art for the same series. Someone liked a pic I made a lot but it was probably reposted without source on facebook (I neither own a FB account nor instagram and such) so he didn't know who it was. At some point he found me because he was on twitter too and people from that fandom share art I make, so they find you sooner or later if they care.
>>
>>122823833
Paywalling content affiliated with the given design such that only the purchaser has access to it.
>>
Remember that comic that /co/ always gets triggered over about the guy who's bike gets stolen, then he realizes the thief will probably like it better than he does?
>>
>>122824473
What about it?
>>
250 post + this one, unfortunately, over some literally who's DA rage from 2019

We need to start splitting up this fucking board /v/ style. There is no saving this.
>>
>>122821030
>>122812423
She swept the rug from beneath a wiki I was on with her bitchy entitlement
>>
File: 1396410502556.jpg (69 KB, 637x480)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
>>122824970
Evil wiki? Vs battles wiki?
I guess it doesn't really surprise me that a person who draws sailor moon/yugioh/digimon/pokemon at the age of 30 is bitching about her traced art being reposted everywhere.
What's with the kids wb anime crowd growing up into these kinds of people?
>>
>>122810426
>>122810543
The artists who flip out over art theft usually suck at art and/or draw cringey shit that gets posted to forums like 4chan where it gets made fun of and they find out it was posted elsewhere. They are so full of themselves and do not realize they are being made fun of but actually think people like their art
>>
>>122821619
>The weirdest shit is when you look at the other stuff they stole and see how every damn pic has a completely different style, atmosphere and proficiency and yet their followers somehow never wonder about how every pic these people "make" can be so different.
I imagine in this case, the followers are just using the guy as a curator, finding good shit and posting it on his account so everyone else doesn't have to.
>>
Artfag here
Been a fan artist for years and am somewhat popular. Gets art reposted with no cred a lot and honestly has not hurt me nor inconvenienced me in any sort of way. If anything it has given me more followers because peoplle are not stupid and do not to be spoonfed the source. If they like the art enough, they can easily find the artist on their own.
>>
>>122824912
retards on /co/ want artists to be the guy in that comic, happy with people stealing their shit
>>
lmao. this guy doesnt deserve to be whiny if its from a property not his own. i would understand somehow if it was OC and lets say someone other than him sold it on a tshirt or something
>>
Some topic a while back made me re-watch the South Park episode about memes and internet money.

These kind of people who have a meme image or reference pic get re-posted a million times and want that to magically be leveraged into free money or free subscribers. But that's not how money works. You don't get paid for being popular, you pay for creating content. And if they don't think you're going to create more content then they don't pay you. It's like thinking you deserve money for making an ass of yourself on live television and making it to the national news. If you don't have a structure for monetization then you don't get monetized. That's just life.
>>
>>122817741
Yeah, but. Are those even the kind of creatures that know to follow content creators rather than just consume straight from the google algorithm hose?
>>
>>122811865
>>122815945
Cope and seethe
>>
>>122810701
>Their labor is completely worthless in any actual value to civilization
Then why are you on a board dedicated completely to said labor? Are you so retarded that you enjoy worthless things?
>>
>>122811439
t. Stalin
>>
>>122819406
People who enjoy comics and cartoons ;^)
>>
>>122819710
But anon you have no rights, is anyone gonna do anything about what you do? No. But you aren't entitled to do any of the shit you do on a daily basic with what you find on the internet.
>>
>>122819577
h-homo
>>
>>122810426
FireFlea-San sounds based. OP is a nonartist faggot, artist put a lot of effort and should get recognition, not everyone is a 4channer who wants to stay low.
>>
>>122819612
Stop being a faggot and whining about being called out. Others will do what they please on the internet.

We all know I'd kill you IRL you pussy. Don't act tough online.
>>
File: 6aa.gif (74 KB, 467x398)
74 KB
74 KB GIF
I literally made this stupid wojak gif and a few others years ago and I found it pretty amusing there's so much redbubble merch and useage in YT videos. Dunno why people freak the fuck out about things beyond their control.
>>
>>122827419
No but yeah this is what I am trying to say.
I see everybody whining about algorithms when you can actually, well, just follow the good people and see everything appearing chronologically on your timeline.

Not sure if it's some phoneshit. I only use desktop PC and know that phone twatter is vastly different. So maybe nothing is shown properly there, but then people should start to get smart enough to instal addons to improve it or simply use PCs like every normal human.
>>
>>122811216
The problem with artists is that they pursued a career everyone knows is difficult to make money off of and now are mad and 'need communism'.
>>
>>122831826
Yeah this is what I noticed. The artist that do it for fun are all chill, it's only americans that think they can make a living with this without ever pursuing a real job.

I don't even know how they can live. The SAME fucking people whine about how hard their life in the US is when I would never ever be able to pay a single month worth of rent from art and I am not even living in the US.

My only explanation is that they get literally paid by their parents and that the art is just some extra money. Regardless what it is, they are damn privileged and crying a lot for people that can literally go by with just a few hundred self earned dollars a month.
>>
>>122815967
Sure, gimme an hour.
>>
Digital art, by it's very nature, encourages copying and borderline "non-ownership" once you set it into the wild.

don't like it? work with traditional media instead.
>>
>>122812004
Looks like shit with those watermarks.
>>
>>122819034
When an artist turns out to be a rapist or a murderer or whatever I just start stealing their work instead of paying for it.
>>
>>122825545
How would you feel about someone who took your art, removed the signature and claimed it as their own? Amusement? Contempt?
>>
>>122828374
>communist!
Do you realize how ironic your accusation is? Especially given the ideology of the people that tend to complain about this stuff? Also, I have complete respect for *physical* property, just not intellectual "property".
>>
>>122832523
I have a hard time taking this post seriously because while I might believe the first part there is a 0 chance that the second part is true unless he is literally only talking about 4chan. Social media fags are way, waaaaay too dumb to even know what reverse image search is, let alone using it. And even if they could do it they wouldn't, because 98% of the people out there are fast paced ADHD consumers that rush through every pic they see without caring much.

Barely any of them even bothers clicking a profile when they retweet a pic they like. I test this some times. Someone retweets my latest shit, maybe even follows me. I retweet a pic I made just a week or so earlier that was still openly visible on my profile since I don't make text posts, the person retweets it the instant I retweet it, because then it appears on their timeline. There are other methods to test their behavior. Point is, they just like and reblog/tweet what someone else is feeding them. They don't make any own effort to search for things and they would never search for the original source of a pic, even if they knew how it works, which they usually don't.
>>
As an artfag who is unpopular, never gets any attention and would feel absolutely thrilled and honored if someone """"stole""""" my art and reposted it, I fully support the crabs in a bucket mentality with these egotistic spoiled fuck artists whose autism renders them incapable of handling the meagerest internet fame for good. Fuck them all, they deserve to be as poor and attention starved as me and the rest of the silent majority internet hate mob.
>>
I cant even imagine how someone could feel contempt for someone else appreciating their art in some way, regardless if they directly profit from it. The internet makes everyone a jew.
>>
>>122833201
Yeah I bet you would be cool with someone taking a book you wrote for free and publishing it, making profit from it and taking all the credit.
Like that 4koma comic retard that is happy for the guy stealing his bike.
>>
>>122833109
Post an example of your art
>>
I’m real curious, does anyone hear know of any example of “stealing” NSFW art that isn’t some sort of shitty character photoshop/headswap? Art thievery honesty seems like a SFW-exclusive problem.
>>
File: Toon BEWD no WM.png (289 KB, 600x622)
289 KB
289 KB PNG
>>122832000 (You)
>>122815967
>>122812004
Sorry about that, missed the masking. I think that about does it, did I miss anything?
>>
>>122833109
>tfw such a shitty artist even a repost with fake attribution would be an improvement
>>122833840
Pretty sure it's bait. The last sentence kind of gives it away. Though you can never be sure, phonefags made the the average online IQ sink to 50 or something.
>>
>>122833900
People will take and repost art from behind a paywall. Panda's actually pretty good for taking down such content at the request of the artist.
>>
>>122831895
You're completely clueless dude, doesn't seem like your attitude about art has evolved from being a teenager. Professional artists can make thousands of dollars from one commission.

But, the most important thing is that if you're unwilling to ever financially support artists, then you should expect nothing from them. I doubt there's anybody who talks this way about art who doesn't get angry about the output of artists sometimes. Youre low rent dude, not where professional artists live
>>
>>122833900
People often mix things up with makes it more confusing.
Art theft =! reposts.
Most art is just reposted art that was freely available, just not on the specific website it's reposted on. Commonly happening when you post to tumblr, pixiv and twitter, but not instashit and pinterest, so people from there might repost your art. If they are somewhat smart (so, rarely) they know how to link. Usually they are too dumb for that though so they either mention your name or do nothing and just repost.

Art theft is obvious, it's false attribution. Someone pretending they did a pic they didn't make.

What you mean is just simple reposting, but since NSFW is usually hidden behind a paywell these days it's unlikely to be reposted because the random guys that do this just browse websites and repost it, they don't pay for art or log into that twitter nsfw place (forgot the name) to see stuff since they are lazy downscrollers. And the people that pay for nsfw are usually fans of the artist and don't want to rip their things.
I recently found a website that had a lot of locked nsfw art from twitter freely available. But forgot the name.
>>
Art isn't a difficult career anymore, that was true when you needed decades to reach the level of a well known professional artist. What's difficult now is having any art jobs at all in art industries as an artist who isnt Woke. They'll besiege your social media profiles, all in all you should find an alternative path.
>>
>>122834239
But I was talking about specific people I see or follow. They don't make more than maybe 300-500 a month, due to commissions, since they are all fandom artists for franchises that aren't as big as Harry Potter or SNK. I know you can live from it once you have like 50k followers, but everybody in that fandom has maybe 5k if they are good, only the official comic artist has 10k.
>>
>>122834299
The world isn't the US.
There are 0 art related jobs in most countries. Only France and maybe Arabia make some cartoons. Otherwise you can only do manga/comic, but this is nothing you can live from unless you make something that is as big of a hit as Naruto or something.
>>
File: genewars_12.gif (118 KB, 640x480)
118 KB
118 KB GIF
guy has arrived



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.