Rip off (split off of kry's work)
This one ROz (sorry for derail btw lol)

I''m liking these so far, my attempts ate screenshot art were erm....well, I never showcased them rofl.
Lessa
17 years ago
hes a moron *grumbles some more*
ROzbeans
17 years ago
That chick credited rainfeatherpearl in her sig. Maybe she asked permission.
What a fucking idiot.
Is this a witch hunt? I'd say more of a fucking riot but seriously this could be SO much worse than it is. And sabby, you're just way nice. There's nothing wrong with that.
Once we are contacted we will ask for the copyright paper work and personal information to verify that the paperwork is authentic. All copyright information has a seal and is notarized from my understanding.
Upon receiving that information, we will then ask the person to discontinue using the information.
Failure to provide the necessary proof will result in no action taken by Gale.
What a fucking idiot.
Is this a witch hunt? I'd say more of a fucking riot but seriously this could be SO much worse than it is. And sabby, you're just way nice. There's nothing wrong with that.
Darsa
17 years ago
Does anyone have a link stating that copyright to a piece of artwork does NOT have to be notarized and bloodstained and fingerprinted and all that shit that they could maybe pass on to this *cough* person?
Just because my stuff isn't good enough to rip off doesn't mean it doesn't annoy me, fer sher. The fact that people think anything out there is for them to use as they see fit is what really ticks me off.
Just because my stuff isn't good enough to rip off doesn't mean it doesn't annoy me, fer sher. The fact that people think anything out there is for them to use as they see fit is what really ticks me off.
Lessa
17 years ago
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html#302
(3) Elements of notification. —
(A) To be effective under this subsection, a notification of claimed infringement must be a written communication provided to the designated agent of a service provider that includes substantially the following:
(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.
(iv) Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(B)(i) Subject to clause (ii), a notification from a copyright owner or from a person authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner that fails to comply substantially with the provisions of subparagraph (A) shall not be considered under paragraph (1)(A) in determining whether a service provider has actual knowledge or is aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent.
(ii) In a case in which the notification that is provided to the service provider's designated agent fails to comply substantially with all the provisions of subparagraph (A) but substantially complies with clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph (A), clause (i) of this subparagraph applies only if the service provider promptly attempts to contact the person making the notification or takes other reasonable steps to assist in the receipt of notification that substantially complies with all the provisions of subparagraph (A).
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512
I dont read Law well, I loike Roz's better hehe
§ 302. Duration of copyright: Works created on or after January 1, 19784
(a) In General. — Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author's death.
(b) Joint Works. — In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors who did not work for hire, the copyright endures for a term consisting of the life of the last surviving author and 70 years after such last surviving author's death.
(c) Anonymous Works, Pseudonymous Works, and Works Made for Hire. — In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. If, before the end of such term, the identity of one or more of the authors of an anonymous or pseudonymous work is revealed in the records of a registration made for that work under subsections (a) or (d) of section 408, or in the records provided by this subsection, the copyright in the work endures for the term specified by subsection (a) or (b), based on the life of the author or authors whose identity has been revealed. Any person having an interest in the copyright in an anonymous or pseudonymous work may at any time record, in records to be maintained by the Copyright Office for that purpose, a statement identifying one or more authors of the work; the statement shall also identify the person filing it, the nature of that person's interest, the source of the information recorded, and the particular work affected, and shall comply in form and content with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.
(d) Records Relating to Death of Authors. — Any person having an interest in a copyright may at any time record in the Copyright Office a statement of the date of death of the author of the copyrighted work, or a statement that the author is still living on a particular date. The statement shall identify the person filing it, the nature of that person's interest, and the source of the information recorded, and shall comply in form and content with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation. The Register shall maintain current records of information relating to the death of authors of copyrighted works, based on such recorded statements and, to the extent the Register considers practicable, on data contained in any of the records of the Copyright Office or in other reference sources.
(e) Presumption as to Author's Death. — After a period of 95 years from the year of first publication of a work, or a period of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first, any person who obtains from the Copyright Office a certified report that the records provided by subsection (d) disclose nothing to indicate that the author of the work is living, or died less than 70 years before, is entitled to the benefit of a presumption that the author has been dead for at least 70 years. Reliance in good faith upon this presumption shall be a complete defense to any action for infringement under this title.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html#302
(3) Elements of notification. —
(A) To be effective under this subsection, a notification of claimed infringement must be a written communication provided to the designated agent of a service provider that includes substantially the following:
(i) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(ii) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
(iii) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material.
(iv) Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted.
(v) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
(vi) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
(B)(i) Subject to clause (ii), a notification from a copyright owner or from a person authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner that fails to comply substantially with the provisions of subparagraph (A) shall not be considered under paragraph (1)(A) in determining whether a service provider has actual knowledge or is aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent.
(ii) In a case in which the notification that is provided to the service provider's designated agent fails to comply substantially with all the provisions of subparagraph (A) but substantially complies with clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph (A), clause (i) of this subparagraph applies only if the service provider promptly attempts to contact the person making the notification or takes other reasonable steps to assist in the receipt of notification that substantially complies with all the provisions of subparagraph (A).
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#512
I dont read Law well, I loike Roz's better hehe
ROzbeans
17 years ago
www.whatiscopyright.org
Copyright is a protection that covers published and unpublished literary, scientific and artistic works, whatever the form of expression, provided such works are fixed in a tangible or material form. This means that if you can see it, hear it and/or touch it - it may be protected. If it is an essay, if it is a play, if it is a song, if it is a funky original dance move, if it is a photograph, HTML coding or a computer graphic that can be set on paper, recorded on tape or saved to a hard drive, it may be protected. Copyright laws grant the creator the exclusive right to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute, perform and display the work publicly. Exclusive means only the creator of such work, not anybody who has access to it and decides to grab it./
When visiting a web site, it is so easy to click and save with a mouse button when one sees a graphic image or photo that one likes, or to view the source code and copy part of or all of the HTML coding because one "likes the way this or that was done" or one "wants a similar layout", or to copy original writings because "that person expresses this or that so well". The general (and incorrect) notion is that anything that is on the internet is public domain and may be taken without permission from the creator/owner. Some people actually think (incorrectly) that just because bits of web pages may be stored in one's cache, or because certain browsers allow one to do "file save as" moves or anything similar one may use such material as one wishes. This is false.
Just because your driveway is not inside of your house, is it in the public domain? Does that give anybody off the street the right to stay on your driveway without your permission, even if they can see it from the street, or easily access it? The same basic principle applies to material published on the internet. Material found on the web may be copied freely only if the information is created by the (i) federal government, (ii) if the copyright has expired or (iii) the copyright has been abandoned by the holder. Therefore, "internet" and "public domain" are not synonymous. Any work published on the internet is not automatically placed it in the public domain, unless the material in question complies with one or more of the characteristics mentioned.
ROzbeans
17 years ago
Fucker. Show him that.
What if I take someone else's writings, text, HTML or graphic image and change it around to suit my needs? I own the "new" version, right?
If you did any of that with the original owner's permission, and according to his/her terms and conditions than you own the "new" version. If not you may be committing copyright infringement and/or plagiarism.
Fucker. Show him that.
Adiene
17 years ago
yup exactly what I thought when I read his remarks ... WTF is he on .. He needs to be noted and linked the information and tell him thanks for your efforts but you are sadly misinformed on copyright here are some links to the actual copyright laws/guidelines ... now go educate yourself ... ya fucktard
ROzbeans
17 years ago
God it makes you want to reach out and bitch slap someone.
'LISTEN FUCKER...IT'S MINE. YOU STOLE IT. GO FUCK YOUR MOTHER.'
Or something like that.
'LISTEN FUCKER...IT'S MINE. YOU STOLE IT. GO FUCK YOUR MOTHER.'
Or something like that.
Kelefane
17 years ago
Roz goes on a rampage!
tamaelia
17 years ago
When Roz is angry it makes me hot.
/purrr
But, seriousnesstime, Roz is right, he is a fuckwit and they should just grow a pair and tell the thieves to stop displaying stolen art. Or they may well be in a world of pain.
/purrr
But, seriousnesstime, Roz is right, he is a fuckwit and they should just grow a pair and tell the thieves to stop displaying stolen art. Or they may well be in a world of pain.
Sabby
17 years ago
(ii) if the copyright has expired ---
What does that mean? I mean if we have ©Sabby, 2007 - is it expired?
What does that mean? I mean if we have ©Sabby, 2007 - is it expired?
Lessa
17 years ago
:)
Copyright in a work created on or after January 1, 1978, subsists from its creation and, except as provided by the following subsections, endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author's death.
ROzbeans
17 years ago
Nope.
When you see several dates in a copyright statement, it simply means that certain things were created in one year and modified later. It could also mean that new things were created and added in a later year. It most definitely does not refer to the date that a copyright will expire. Expiration of a copyright actually takes place much later, and this period of validity begins from the date that you see in the copyright statement. The Berne Convention establishes a general and minimum period that lasts the life of the author and fifty years after his (or her) death. Cinematographic works and photographic works have a minimum period of protection of 50 and 25 years upon the date of creation, respectively. This applies to any country that has signed the Berne Convention, and these are just the minimum periods of protection. A member country is entitled to establish greater periods of protection, but never less than what has been established by the Berne Convention.
So, what does all this mean? This means that if a copyright statement reads, "© Copyright 1998, 1999 John Smith" and John Smith is from a country that has signed the Berne Convention, he created his works in 1998 and 1999, and his copyright is not going to expire until at least fifty years after he dies (this period may be greater - remember that member countries may establish longer periods of protection). Until that time his works are not in public domain.
Nope.
Darsa
17 years ago
Pleasepleasepleaseplease Roz contact this guy! And then keep us posted!!
I really think you should; you're MUCH better than the rest of us at this kind of thing, and it looks like he needs a FIRM hand to guide him ;)
I really think you should; you're MUCH better than the rest of us at this kind of thing, and it looks like he needs a FIRM hand to guide him ;)
Lessa
17 years ago
I noted rainfeather and she wanted to know who was the guy to contact to get her stuff removed from the site. ?
Vex
17 years ago
guys.
you're doing it wrong.
you say "i don't give a fuck if you want proof or not. I can contact your webhost and I'm sure they'll gladly take your shit down because you're distributing copyrighted artworks without permission". if he thinks its a shallow threat then by all fucking means, contact his god damn webhost.
aside from all that shit.
i truly do not care if someone asks me for permission to use my art. i get a LOT of pm's on DA requesting tags, sigs, all this other shit. all i ask for is a credit. and they happily oblige.
I saw one guy on EQ2 forums with some of my art and i know he didn't ask. I sent him a PM and said if he wants to use it I would like a linkback. So he did.
its when they take commissions or gifts without asking and butcher it that i want to fuckin cut a bitch.
otherwise, like someone said last page~ whats the bloody point in making art for hobby if you don't want to share it? Its just irking the fuck that these people don't give us small time artists credit. We aren't BROM or KEITH PARKINSON. people don't know our art by the picture alone. :(
you're doing it wrong.
you say "i don't give a fuck if you want proof or not. I can contact your webhost and I'm sure they'll gladly take your shit down because you're distributing copyrighted artworks without permission". if he thinks its a shallow threat then by all fucking means, contact his god damn webhost.
aside from all that shit.
i truly do not care if someone asks me for permission to use my art. i get a LOT of pm's on DA requesting tags, sigs, all this other shit. all i ask for is a credit. and they happily oblige.
I saw one guy on EQ2 forums with some of my art and i know he didn't ask. I sent him a PM and said if he wants to use it I would like a linkback. So he did.
its when they take commissions or gifts without asking and butcher it that i want to fuckin cut a bitch.
otherwise, like someone said last page~ whats the bloody point in making art for hobby if you don't want to share it? Its just irking the fuck that these people don't give us small time artists credit. We aren't BROM or KEITH PARKINSON. people don't know our art by the picture alone. :(
ROzbeans
17 years ago
Yeah! Of course I don't even know who Keith Parkinson is but yeah!
And you don't want me contacting this guy. I'd just be a raging bitch about it and that's probably not a good idea. I agree with Vex though.
And you don't want me contacting this guy. I'd just be a raging bitch about it and that's probably not a good idea. I agree with Vex though.
Lessa
17 years ago
hes the guy who did the original EQ art.. I think :p
Vex
17 years ago
oh my god roz.
we aren't friends.
we aren't friends.
ROzbeans
17 years ago
Oh he's done D&D stuff. Oops.
/begs forgiveness
/begs forgiveness