Regarding Art Theft

@Domino I think it's literally impossible to track down the creator of a meme a good 90% of the time [Random percentage] and these are memes that haven't come from games/media even then it's hard to track. Most come from board websites such as 4chan, reddit etc. They are 'anonymous'. How can you cite someone who is 'anonymous'? Fact is internet memes are just plain crazy. There's multiple images of the same meme; and none of them are cited to the main source. Even if you cite one image they more than likely didn't cite the original; hence they're breaking the copyright law themselves. Bah, god my head is spinning just thinking about it.

Memes (such as the whole 'gif with text added on' or such like that) require no sourcing.

Honestly, Amitia, I sincerely appreciate your opinion on the matter, and also understand where you're coming from - but if you look at the first post, you'll find reasons as to why these rules must be enforced (and always have been). In comment to your note on "Who made NPC Holly and says it can be used". Well, that would be the PFQ-Staff themselves, or rather specifically, my girlfriend, Sei. She made it for the site, under the 'employment' (If you will) of the site. So the site's own staff made that image, essentially making it property of the site itself. As Niet also stated, there is copyright information located at the bottom of every page - Here's a screenshot for clarification on the location of the copyright information And whilst I must say, you are sadly rather correct about people doing what they want to do, or generally thinking that they can do as they please, just... relatively speaking... The fact remains that this simply isn't the case. People are not allowed to do as they please. Believe me, if we felt that it wasn't beneficial in any way to stop art theft, we wouldn't be enforcing these rules. But both morally and in terms of the law, we cannot simply forgo enforcing such a large rule. What do I mean by morally? Taking someone's artwork and not giving them credit is just wrong. If I saw someone using any single one of the 'Sona drawings that Sei has done of any of my three active RP characters without express permission, tables would be flipped - and where possible, action would be taken. If that means getting the images simply removed, then so be it. If that means forcing action through lawful threats because the images weren't removed, so be it. I am jumping steps there, I admit, but I'm just making a point and nothing more. A lot of this is simply about one very very simple concept. Respect. Something that, sadly, a lot of people seem to lack, these days.

---

That said, let me post something else to explain why we're enforcing this rule: CLICK THIS LINK FOR A COMIC! Not only that, but check it out! I asked the artist for permission to use this, and have even linked directly to that artist's tumblr account. Ain't I just amazing! - Permission to use the above comic Sarcasm and jokes aside - that took ONE DAY. That's all. Was it worth it? YES! DO YOU SEE HOW HAPPY I MADE HER JUST BY GOING OUT OF MY WAY TO ASK. DO YOU KNOW WHY THAT MADE HER HAPPY!? BECAUSE SOMEONE ASKED. THAT IS A RARITY. SOMEONE. ACTUALLY. ASKED.

So since my question seems to have been missed earlier and Garthic's post clarified somethings but not this one very much: Example: Before I had a picture of a mew eating a cookie. It's not mine, but it had a signature on it. It came from tumblr and I can't figure out the signature enough to find it on deviant and locate its true creator. to avoid trouble though I had put below it a disclaimer like the following: DISCLAIMER: This picture is not mine. Credit goes to its creator whose signature is on the work. I claim no ownership to this work. Would that be allowed in this case? Since obviously it was marked, but I couldn't discern the name in the mark or find it on deviant and thus disclaimed all ownership? In other words if you add a disclaimer would you be allowed to use the works of art of which you can't trace the original creator? Also now I use my own work do I still need to have a the consent thing there? In other words how does one prove one truly made the work of art? On another site I had a lot of issues with this as people would start arguing with me over whether or not I really owned that deviant account. It was long annoying and pointless and I'd like to avoid any trouble.

It's right on the first post Nataku. Saying "Credit goes to the artist" or "All rights to the proper owner" isn't enough, you still have to get permission from the artist if you want to use it.

Sorry for missing that one! Honestly, it's particularly easy to compare art styles - if people want to doubt things, then that's on them... But if you have various art pieces that all share a similar art style, or even if you try something new, there's always something there that gives some kind of hint away that "Yes, this is me." It's also easy to compare different accounts that host images. If they have varying degrees of art that are from different sources, then... The styles are not going to be similar. As for using your own work, that's generally fine because it's your own work. By all means - people don't have to list this stuff everywhere... Seriously, people can just make a journal post with permissions and everything in a single post and then link back to it... Well, honestly, just when asked. Y'know, it's not really any form of "trouble", plus after an initial "questioning", if you'll pardon the term, we're gonna know. So... Any further people thinking anything will basically end up being told that their report is appreciated but incorrect... We might check things behind-the-scenes every now and again if we feel the need to, but... Y'know. If you're not doing anything wrong, we're not going to do anything, either... It wouldn't make any sense if we did.

That was the more important part of my post.

Basically, yeah - you need to link back. Unless the artist states that it isn't necessary. A lot of this is basically down to the artist themselves. If they say it's free-to-use and they don't care if they're attributed for the work then... Well, that's it. They've blatently stated that they don't care. The problem there is that we, as enforcers of this rule, basically need to know that they have this stated. We can go looking for it ourselves, sure, but it's a great help if the artist stating "Yes, it's fine" is linked, or a screenshot is taken and posted, or something like that. If we have to go looking and the image has been removed from where you found it saying "Yes, it's free to use, no credit necessary", then... Y'know, we don't see that. You might have, but your word isn't proof. A screenshot is far more evidential than someone saying "It was to free-to-use". Save yourself any potential issue and take a minute to grab a screenshot. It really isn't that hard xD

Thanks for the answers everyone.

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.