Forums » The Parlor Room » Read Thread

So...we should all know "Farewell, My Childhood Self", right?  Well, it was actually over a year ago, but I had contacted the author over the pictures used in that storygame (over dA private messages, which may or may not have been deleted by now by the stupid auto-delete thing), and I'm very disheartened to say...

...applegirl may or may not have not plagiarized, and the artist may or may not have been aware of it (as far as I could see during the PM conversation, which I'll post up in an image later.)

As good as the story on this site was, I'd rather not have people pointing to a work that may or may not have plagiarized another artist's own work.  There's not so much as even a little citation as to who made these pictures.  I've sorta been keeping this on the backburner of my mind for a while now.

^So why am I saying this now, and why this specifically?

Well, it's one of the site's better products, and yes, I do recall a thread made over a year ago where a couple of people found the artist (Meago).  But as much as we give praise to that, I find it a little more than unjust to not include the artist that actually made all those pictures.

For Ground Zero and many other stories, I don't find the pictures as particularly alarming, since we all know the Pip Boy and the Fallout stuff, and many other pictures are just stock images that could be cared about less / what everyone uses and the artist is fine with that.

The pictures in this storygame, though, are all given a lot of time and work for some other purpose.

Why bring it up now, though?  If you found out a year ago that the pics might have been plagiarized?

I can't find it atm, but I actually discussed this with someone here on the site in the past couple months.  They told me it was for sure that the artist was a friend of the author.

Why not just have an admin add a link to meago's deviant art profile saying it's their artwork? It's only plagiarizing if you don't give credit after all.

... *cough* As a footnote here, you can purchase artwork from artists on Deviantart.

The reason I'm saying this is mainly because that is what I did. While I happily gave credit to the artist who drew Layne and Melissa for my story (out of gratitude, admiration, and friendship) I commissioned the artwork. So, it's paid for and while I did not draw it ... it is essentially mine.

Deviant artists also have a tendency to give art away freely, though usually not art of high caliber unless the recipient is a very close friend. (I've been fortunate enough to receive multiple art gifts, myself, and I've also traded art pieces with a few people.)
 

Plenty of artists on Deviantart take commissions for practice as well, especially if they're just starting out. The quality varies. Also, most (at least, the ones I've talked to) don't mind other people using their art even without explicit permission, although they would prefer to be credited. The ones that really don't want other people reusing their art usually watermark their names over it.

(Also Kiel does art trades?! <_< Why is this the first time I'm hearing about this?!)

Ahh, I forgot about the watermark feature. That's right.

*awkward cough* Well, it's not something I advertise. The last time was four and a half years ago. I drew two, maybe three gifts, wrote multiple presents, and my trades were all written pieces, 'cuz--as I've said, I have no real talent for visual art. I had a few good days where I made fairly decent pictures, but they're amateurish and people respect visual art pieces on DA a lot more than written. Not many people were interested, so that's partly why I stopped.

Looking back, the last gift I made was an epitaph poem. =\ 

It turns out the higher majority of the pictures were intended for meago's online web comics.  Most of them are from the characters in there.

Grr. If I wasn't on my phone I'd link to the other topic about this.  It is not okay to take someone's stuff without asking "as long as you credit them."  

As far as I'm aware, if it's available to the public then as long as you don't claim it's yours, and give credit where it's due, there's nothing legally wrong with having the art. I take it you disagree or that I'm just flat wrong. Link then?

@Sethaniel

Quote from a previous discussion:

Copyright is not contingent upon profit or benefit.  You may not use another person's creation without their permission.  Period.    

What you are describing are the conditions for using work under a Creative Commons license.  Most work is not Creative Commons, and it will specifically state if it is.  (it's the cc in a circle logo)

Creative Commons licenses use one or more of the following rules:

Attribution:  You must credit the original creator

Non-Commercial:  You cannot profit from a work utilizing the content

No Derivative Works:  You may not change or alter the content in any way

Share Alike: You may change, alter, or adapt the content, but any work created must also be distributed with a Share Alike license.  (In other words, you can't put a traditional copyright on your work if it uses any part of a Share Alike licensed work.)

If the creation in question is not Creative Commons (or public domain) you may not use it without the owner's permission.  Doesn't matter if you credit the owner, doesn't matter if your work is "a labour of love," doesn't matter if you think you're doing the owner a favor by providing a wider audience for his work.  You cannot use another person's creation without their permission.

Copyright Law: 

The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

• To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
• To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
• To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
• To publicly perform the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works;
• To publicly display the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work.
• To digitally transmit sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission;

@killa_robot Basically, you are wrong if you think that just because the artist posted their work online that automatically means anyone can use the pictures as long as they credit the artist.  

Oh, and copyright in the US automatically attaches upon creation of an original work.  The artist/author does NOT have to register their work with the US Copyright Office.  (Registration puts the author in a better position if an issue arises, and allows them to collect monetary damages in infringement cases.)

How about attaching images that came from wikipedia.

how do we properly credited it?

or are we not allowing images that came from it. thanks..

Images on Wikipedia are almost always Freely licensed, fair use or in the public domain. I don't believe you really need to credit them.

It depends, Wikipedia has different types of picture licenses. Many of them are free to use because they're in the public domain, but others are only free to use if you properly credit the copyright holder.

Exactly. Always check the picture license to make sure. Some licenses come with certain conditions besides simply crediting the holder. There was a reason why I linked to a wiki with actual free-to-use images in the discussion Seth mentioned.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

This is a site full of images free to use, but some still come with conditions. For instance, some can only be used so long as the product created with the image has the same license as the picture.

So why are you bringing this up NOW, instead of over a year ago?

Busy with forum games, didn't think it was worth speaking out about back then, didn't want to bring a somewhat popular storygame here down, etc.

...Then why mention it at all? Dumbass.

I figured that even after 5 years, I'd still like the artist to be appropriately credited.

Because a crime doesn't go away just because you managed not to get caught stealing? (Not saying anybody did steal, just giving an example.) 

Swift wanted to make sure the story was using the pictures with permission since the pictures may have costed money if we had went to buy them ourselves.

It is unfair to not credit someone else's work or ask their permission to use it. Swift was just making sure other people knew and seeing if they could put up something to credit them.

Preferably that, unless the artist him/herself would wish otherwise or some other fix for this.

So you wouldn't mind if you made a work of art online and somebody used it elsewhere for their own uses? Not crediting you for the creation? You wouldn't mind if somebody stole your bike and rode on it while you were elsewhere?

(Fireplay, she was agreeing with you)

Dumbass.

Ah, I misread the very beginning as "It isn't unfair to not credit..." Sorry about that.

What do you mean 'may or may not'?

Applegirl said the artist was a friend (I believe). Do your PMs say otherwise?

They have since been autodeleted by dA's auto-delete-everything-after-a-certain-time.

Well, I could go ask her again.  The "may / may not" part is just me not jumping ahead in case I'm wrong (which I don't think I am, since the more images I look at, the more it seems like it wasn't intended to be used by anyone but her.)