Forum - View topic

INTEREST: Artist Apologizes, Deletes Chibi Maruko-chan Dōjinshi of Maruko as Drug Addict

Hypocrisy

You could make a doujin of this character in every sexual position imaginable, but if she smokes dope and doobies despite it being R-18 doujin anyway and not even glorifying drug use (It probably had a bad ending or straight up death like most of these subversions), they want it taken down. It had a right to exist.

Hoppy800 wrote:

Hypocrisy You could make a doujin of this character in every sexual position imaginable, but if she smokes dope and doobies despite it being R-18 doujin anyway and not even glorifying drug use (It probably had a bad ending or straight up death like most of these subversions), they want it taken down. It had a right to exist.

Other companies and creators have asked people not do to sexual stuff with their work as well. Uma Musume Pretty Derby is pretty well known for asking artists not to draw adult, sexual works of their characters. There was also a certain Pokemon doujinshi back in the day that Gamefreak did not like and asked the author to stop selling and they complied with their wishes.

If a creator asks you not to do something with their work, especially something like promoting harmful and hateful things like drug usage, it's generally a cool thing to respect their wishes. It costs nothing to be a decent human being and it's nice to see fans who know how to do that. Some other groups I can think of could take some notes.

i got the shivers! wrote:

Hoppy800 wrote: Hypocrisy You could make a doujin of this character in every sexual position imaginable, but if she smokes dope and doobies despite it being R-18 doujin anyway and not even glorifying drug use (It probably had a bad ending or straight up death like most of these subversions), they want it taken down. It had a right to exist. Other companies and creators have asked people not do to sexual stuff with their work as well. Uma Musume Pretty Derby is pretty well known for asking artists not to draw adult, sexual works of their characters. There was also a certain Pokemon doujinshi back in the day that Gamefreak did not like and asked the author to stop selling and they complied with their wishes. If a creator asks you not to do something with their work, especially something like promoting harmful and hateful things like drug usage, it's generally a cool thing to respect their wishes. It costs nothing to be a decent human being and it's nice to see fans who know how to do that. Some other groups I can think of could take some notes.

Yes, and all those creators were garbage for doing so too. Chibi Maruko's rights holders (not even the original author, since she's dead), Game Freak, and the Uma Musume people are all lame in that regard.

The US has protections against fair use because of free speech, but also requires IP holders to pursue legal action against copyright violations.

Juno016 wrote:

The US has protections against fair use because of free speech, but also requires IP holders to pursue legal action against copyright violations.

Wrong. You have to defend your trademarks to keep them. But nowhere does it mention and no way do you lose copyright even if you don't enforce it.

Blanchimont wrote:

Juno016 wrote: The US has protections against fair use because of free speech, but also requires IP holders to pursue legal action against copyright violations. Wrong. You have to defend your trademarks to keep them. But nowhere does it mention and no way do you lose copyright even if you don't enforce it.

Not wrong. It's not statutory law, but judicial made law. If you do not defend your copyright, a defendant can claim that you as the copyright holder abandoned it, and therefore are not entitled to seek protection now. If not terminating the case entirely, it can significantly diminish any financial recovery.

Blanchimont wrote:

Wrong. You have to defend your trademarks to keep them. But nowhere does it mention and no way do you lose copyright even if you don't enforce it.

Not wrong

Dark Mac wrote:

i got the shivers! wrote: Other companies and creators have asked people not do to sexual stuff with their work as well. Uma Musume Pretty Derby is pretty well known for asking artists not to draw adult, sexual works of their characters. There was also a certain Pokemon doujinshi back in the day that Gamefreak did not like and asked the author to stop selling and they complied with their wishes. If a creator asks you not to do something with their work, especially something like promoting harmful and hateful things like drug usage, it's generally a cool thing to respect their wishes. It costs nothing to be a decent human being and it's nice to see fans who know how to do that. Some other groups I can think of could take some notes. Yes, and all those creators were garbage for doing so too. Chibi Maruko's rights holders (not even the original author, since she's dead), Game Freak, and the Uma Musume people are all lame in that regard.

Uma Musume creators are especially on some BS pulling a stunt like that, it's an purely otaku franchise and very niche, and those kinds of franchises thrive on nearly any fanart it can get, especially sexual.

DRosencraft wrote:

Blanchimont wrote: Wrong. You have to defend your trademarks to keep them. But nowhere does it mention and no way do you lose copyright even if you don't enforce it. Not wrong

Wrong. Dead wrong. Again.

Copyright in US persists for the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death. (17 U.S. Code § 302)

It won't matter one iota whether you enforce it or not, you as the author will have the copyright for that period of time, unless you transfer the rights(based on agreements) or willfully(ie consciously and explicitly) abandon the rights in favor of public domain (case law)...

Critical thinking time. How do you demonstrate to a court that a plaintiff has willfully abandoned their rights? Answer; you argue that they knowingly failed to defend numerous other alleged violations of similar nature to the one in question, thereby you shift the burden to them to show that they have done the non-defined minimum necessary to show they haven't willfully abandoned their rights (usually at a minimum would be sending a request to cease the infringing action). Since "willfully", "consciously", and "explicitly" are not defined in any statute, not defined in this context in case law, it becomes a matter of interpretation at the trial level until a binding ruling is in place. Yes, an author can write an open letter and state "I will not contest copyright violations of "X" work. I submit "X" to the public domain." But that is not the only means or method.

How long does a copyright last?

The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years.
..
Do I have to renew my copyright?

No. Works created on or after January 1, 1978, are not subject to renewal registration. As to works published or registered prior to January 1, 1978, renewal registration is optional after 28 years but does provide certain legal advantages.

Myth #11: If I don’t defend my copyright I may lose it

False. Copyright protection is effectively never lost, unless explicitly given away or the copyright has expired. However, if you do not actively defend your copyright, there may be broader unauthorized uses than you would like. It is a good idea to pursue enforcement actions as soon as you discover misuse of your copyright protected material.

Copyright Myths: If You Don’t Protect Your Copyright, You Lose It

Copyright is not like trademark. Copyright has a set period of time for which it is valid and, unless you take some kind of action, you do not give up those rights.