Single post in Regarding Art Theft

Thank you for the replies. And sorry for making it sound like I was completely against the new guidelines. I am not. Only bits and pieces feel unnecessary to me. I do think that this is a reasonable reminder and I understand the reasons behind it, even if it seems hopeless. After all, I fight a one woman's war against 90% of internet's users over grammar. ;P Just applying the rules a little less drastically could be beneficial. Niet;; I did read the copyright information before posting, I am aware of its existence. But it did not provide the information that I was looking for. It does not have a link to a "screenshot, PM, note, email, or whatever" that Nintendo has agreed that it is okay to use the sprites. I think I read in old PF regarding the matter that Nintendo had simply replied "We don't care", and I can believe they really do not until someone makes $5 billion out of their stuff. But I would still like to see it for the principle of it (and out of curiosity). It covers the main point of the whole site, after all. Same curiosity applies for Holly's NPC picture, I simply wanted to know who made it. Unless I missed a sentence, copyright just covered the code, UI graphics and sprites. Uzumi;; I mentioned Tumblr as that bad example precisely for the reason that people post whatever pictures they find however they want. I do not even use the service nor regard its users as particularly considerate people. I just pointed out that it happens uncontrollably and fighting against it might mean banning most of the people who join PokéFarm Q. And PFQ users do not even go to such extents as Tumblr users do. To be honest, I do not even post pictures in my blog, unless I took or made that specific picture myself. As nice as it would be to post the game's cover or a screenshot on a game review, I want to avoid being a thief on any level. And on whatever website I use, I always credit the art that was made for me. Crediting is what I find reasonable. But posting the original source and the permissions is what I disagree with. The source is sometimes someone's private Photobucket account. And I would not like to post screenshots of private discussions to prove that I have a permission to display something. Also, I doubt I could get a hold of Rumiko Takahashi to ask if I can use one of Ranma 1/2's characters as my avatar. Of course I will credit her. But getting a permission is practically impossible. I always give my art out for free and I am delighted if it gets used somewhere. Someone claiming that it is made by them is annoying and wrong. But someone just using it somewhere to display it? I never had a problem with it. Whether they credit me or not, someone thinks that my art is cool and that is fantastic. If I think that particular piece is good, I will even add my name to it and automatically get credit for it anyway. I know that some people have serious issues with their art being displayed in places. But that is the drawback of internet in general; if you put something in, you can never get it out. Posting it in public without copyright text all over it is probably not a good idea if the artwork is meant to not be used anywhere without proper crediting. It is sad that these extreme actions have to be taken in order for art to stay in control, but that just happens to be the way of the "wonderful" internet. I am not saying that stealing is acceptable, and I am not saying that these rules are be horribly wrong. I am simply pointing out that governing what seems to be the main functions of internet might not be realistic. Ravyne;; It was not a threat. And I never said that I would stop following the rules. Crediting an image is one thing. Adding original sources and proofs of permissions is another. Of course I give credit to the artist accordingly; but I do not feel the need to post the link to that person's personal Photobucket or posting screenshots of personal conversations to prove that I can use it when the person has no problem with it. I appreciate the effort to slow down art theft, and I mean to follow the rules as usual. I am just wondering to what extents the governing can go. Garthic;; I did read the first post, and I did read the copyright information before posting. But like I wrote in my replies above, "it did not provide the information that I was looking for" and "Crediting an image is one thing. Adding original sources and proofs of permissions is another." Thank you for telling me who made the Holly image though, I had been awfully curious about it. The copyright infringement story is, like usual, about someone using an image commercially and in public use. These people did it for a living and used someone else's photo on a public blog as if it was theirs. I have to carefully abide these rules every day at work, I know how important it is. I just see private life as a different thing. I never skip adding credits to each image I use. But getting banned for using artwork a friend made, to display their piece, without posting proper sources and permissions feels awkward... Why is crediting not enough, as long as they are fine with it? I do understand how artists feel, even if I personally like to give out my art out for free and free-to-use for everyone. And if other artists do not want their art to be used somewhere, I do not use it. It just might be impossible to govern. Nonetheless, I do hope that people will learn to credit the images they use - not only here, but on other sites as well. And I sincerely hope that the effect is not the opposite; people getting banned, feeling that they have been wronged and then continuing their theft practices on other sites twice as adamantly. A lot of people will probably not read these guidelines until the deadline.