fchan

discussion

thread for discussion of the cc matter

Pages:1
1Report(capped)
Xenofur at 14 Feb 2006: 08:09

.

2Report(capped)
Xenofur at 14 Feb 2006: 08:09

#4483

koomori

cute cubs mmm ^_^ . please post more
-----------------------------------------------

#4484

Very nice :)
Where did you find it?
-----------------------------------------------

#4507

Sylern  

He got it off the private Section of Cub Central thats where :P.
-----------------------------------------------

#4521

User  

I will also not show this
artwork to, or allow it to be viewed by any person not also agreeing
to these terms. I agree that all artwork in the archive is copyrighted to the
original artist, and will not allow it to become distributed in any
form, electronic or otherwise, unless explicit permission is given
by the copyright holder.- CC ToS - nice going
-----------------------------------------------

#4547

Swishy Raccoon  

Of course, if you want to see any of the material in the CC private section, all you need to do is go to cubcentral.org and get a free pass.
-----------------------------------------------

#4563

sorry koomori  

i m sorry , i got it from here f-chan long time ago. i didnt know, (please forgive me) T_T
-----------------------------------------------

#4570

theforgottencoon  

>>4547

No thats not true I have tried SEVERAL times to make an CC account and they KEEP saying no to me. So thats not true.
-----------------------------------------------

#4573

>>4570

Same here.
-----------------------------------------------

#4574

fruitcake  

>>4547
I wish I had a paid-for e-mail address! :P I'm really close to trying my university e-mail address... laughs
-----------------------------------------------

#4581

paw#f9pt0ssQVc  

You can only get into CC if you have a paid for email account, which a lot of people don't. Most people use gmail or yahoo or w/e. Your uni address will work tho.
-----------------------------------------------

#4582

paw#f9pt0ssQVc  

For the record, I think the CC pics need to start having some kind of CC marking on them now. I've got a whole ton of pics that I've gotten from here that may originally have come from CC, and I have no idea what's what. It's unfair to be harsh on a poster who grabbed stuff from here when it was fine, and then reposted it, not knowing the original source. It puts everyone in a bad situation.
-----------------------------------------------

#4612

File: 1138233584950_Friends_forever.jpg -(167919 B, 700x509) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
James  

Would anyone happen to be able to sponser me so I can get into Cub Central? The manager/operater/what-the-hell-ever is denying even a photocopy of my DRIVER'S LICENSE. Yet, oddly enough, they'll accept some complete stranger's word saying "Yeah, they're good."
-----------------------------------------------

#4618

Aerdan#bl.H46zIz6  

>>4582 Anyone can take a picture of a driver's license. It doesn't even have to be their own. And, if you don't have an email address with your ISP, go get one from an ISP that offers free email, such as tiskali.co.uk.
-----------------------------------------------

3Report(capped)
Xenofur at 14 Feb 2006: 08:09

#4631

06/02/10(Fri) 

>>4582 Isn't that what they do for anything that comes outta Tailswish Studios?
-----------------------------------------------

#4678

Jeremy Mikales 06/02/10(Fri) 

>>4581
Not entirely true. That's mostly a bit of security to make sure that you're not spammers, and that you are who you say you are. I suppose that's not the most effective thing, but it's balancing funcion with nessessity.

Anyway, the other way you can get into CC is to get to know an already accepted artist and get them to put in a good word with Nicol for you.

-JM (AKA Jeremy Skunk on CC)
-----------------------------------------------

#4688

James 06/02/11(Sat) 

>>4678 Know any?
-----------------------------------------------

#4717

File: 1137869569048_richterben.gif -(18196 B, 489x624) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
James 06/02/11(Sat) 

>>4678 Or better yet, would you be kind enough to offer your services? n.n;
-----------------------------------------------

#4860

06/02/12(Sun) 

>>4581

ACtually its any paid account that is NOT AOL...
-----------------------------------------------

#4890

File: title.jpg -(10925 B, 204x219) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Cub Central Nicol#7GzOswROKY  

OK, one mega-reply here to keep the off-topic-ness down:

>>4582 I like the concept, but I think putting Cub Central branding on images just because they were downloaded from there is going a bit far, and as you said, the real problem is images that are already in circulation that should never have been posted in the first place.

>>4612 I like the invite system, and it worked well enough to make gmail popular :)

I'll leave a long discusson on our accounts policy for somewhere else rather than spamming the board here with it.

>>4717 This image has also been taken from Cub Central's private area, BTW.

>>4860 Does anyone with a clue actually still use AOL? Their email system is hopeless, and blocks a number of legit sites, including Cub Central.
-----------------------------------------------

#4892

>>4890
I'd have to question how one can know if something came from CC's private area. I don't think there are many artists that only have one archive.

Also, given that DNP lists are opt-out instead of opt-in, if an artists happens to want their art shared, but has their work on CC's private area, they no longer have the option of posting it to places like this. Personally, I don't see how such a thing can be mandated, since CC doesn't have exclusive (if any) control over the artwork posted in the private area.
-----------------------------------------------

#4894

It would be good to know who exactly are contributing in the private section, and is it worthy even to try getting an account. The quality of the public section is pretty depressing...
-----------------------------------------------

#4896

Sylern  

Actually the reason that cub central private is kept from being posted is because alot of those in private would prefer only those who are actually into cubs be the ones who see it. We had one debacle where people were posting an artists private pictures here...and he started getting e-mails. He's still around..but made a half decent stink over his stuff being posted.

So its made simple..if you find artwork on the private section of cub central (you know the part you need a membership to enter) then don't post it here unless the artist has given prior consent.

Its kept private for a reason...assumeable because some artists don't want their artwork posted willy nilly..or because they wish to not advertise the artwork they do there, but still enjoy making it.
-----------------------------------------------

#4900

Ben Coon  

>>4717 has actually been posted on my personal gallery, and I guess I don't mind it being reposted here.

There are actually very few CC artists that post other than CC. So far, I think it's actually just been me, Mathias, Karavan, and Rex.

what's the point of secret art? Lucus V Rocket 11:17 No.4901   PostFocus 

what i don't understand is this:
when you put a subject to a medium your creating art. the point of art, is for people to view and spark SOMETHING. (a.k.a. FEEELINGS) now, here's where i'm confused. if you decide to put art down AT ALL, then why on earth would you not want it to be viewed? it's insane! if that was what art was for, the world would be dull, bland, and horrid, we wouldn't have ANY past history at all, none of you (me included) would have ever even known about things such as greek mythology nor egyption (and we all know some of us think anubis is a hotty). ok, now i'm past that part. the other thing on my mind is, if all your doing is just saying, "oh wow, this artist's work is mind boggling!, look at the anger expressed in the strokes of the oil, folow the trail of thought though the sharp edges of the graphite as it smears and explodes through the clouds!" ect ect. why are people getting soo uptight about that? now i can understand if you draw something and someone else is like "hey! look what i just drew!" yeah, that would irk me, but still. why keep art just to yourself? i really don't understand that... art is far to important to just bottle up and hord so no eyes can ever view upon it's unspeakable beauty. but if that's what you wanna do, that's your thing, then i guess i'll just settle for the millions of other artists that don't give a flying (exploitive deleted) where there art is, and push it forcing you to view thier medium.
-----------------------------------------------

4Report(capped)
Xenofur at 14 Feb 2006: 08:10

#4903

Lucus got it a bit over, i think. When "art" is about underage antromorphic animals, i don't think it hardly has any cultural value. Though, that's why the private gallery seems rather discouraging to me, since don't want to contact anyone and tell that i'm zoopedophile :S
-----------------------------------------------

#4905

>>4901

The reason why a majority of the artists on CC want to keep the art they post on CC only there and nowhere else is because most of CC's content is a either a legal grey area(US) or legitimately illegal(Canada and a lot of Europe), and with CC's private viewing that alleviates a lot of the threat of that. If they wanted to have that art distributed elsewhere, they'd post it around. A lot of the artists there do other work that they don't mind if it's distributed.

None of the art on Fchan has any cultural value...

There are a lot of artists on CC that have art exclusive to CC, it's usually pretty obvious.
-----------------------------------------------

#4914

File: yuntougen.jpg -(261695 B, 531x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
James  

>>4890 >>4717 This image has also been taken from Cub Central's private area, BTW.

Didn't know that. I had found it here in the last ten cub threads. Here are some cute kitties to drive the chatter away.
-----------------------------------------------

#4916

Culture. Musuko  

The art on FChan IS cultural...the smut a society creates defines its culture just as much as anything else. If a creation says something about the people that made it, it has cultural value...even if it just says they have a sick imagination. ^_^
-----------------------------------------------

#4929

>>4896
"Actually the reason that cub central private is kept from being posted is because alot of those in private would prefer only those who are actually into cubs be the ones who see it."

And a lot of artists that post their art online would want only the people that visit their site to see the work. Doesn't stop no one here, though.

"So its made simple..if you find artwork on the private section of cub central (you know the part you need a membership to enter) then don't post it here unless the artist has given prior consent."

Then what about other sites? You have to sign up to see adult stuff at places like FA, yet it's okay to post stuff from there here.

"Its kept private for a reason...assumeable because some artists don't want their artwork posted willy nilly..or because they wish to not advertise the artwork they do there, but still enjoy making it."

You realize there are plenty of artists not in CC that feel the same way? At this point, you're guessing what an artist is thinking when they're putting art online. Even if it may be true for some, that hardly means it's true for most. And I don't think chan-boards have a habit of working on guesses of how artists feel about their work being shared.
-----------------------------------------------

#4941

>>4890 Yerf does the jpeg watermark thing to images uploaded to it's servers. Or used to.

>>4894 The point of the private section is to be private. If my name was posted up as being in the private section, then everyone would know I did cub art, and then I might as well just make it public. :P

>>4901 Some forms of insanity have biological similarities with creativity, make of that what you will.

>>4916 iawtc.

Though really, overall, the security of the private section of CC has already been violated by asshats who disreguard artist's feelings about their cub work, so it's a pretty moot point. If artists don't want anyone to know they draw cub stuff, they should likely just never post it anywhere, ever. Or use a good alias and develop a 'second' style... :P
-----------------------------------------------

#4942

Sylern  

>>4929

And at that point..those artist come here and say 'hey don't post my stuff on this board'. That is exactly what CC did..the moderator came here and said 'hey don't post anything in the private section here'. And that is why the rule is now in place.

I don't see why you decided to get on me about this. Nor why you wanted to nitpick my post. If the artist is upset over their artwork posted..then just do whats proper.

Get ahold of the moderators and say 'hey stick me on the DNP' list. Then if they see artwork here...just hit that little link that looks like a bell..thats for reporting what shouldn't be posted. And heck..even users will do it for artists from time to time.

The only reason Cub Central gets such 'special' treatment. Is because they requested to be on the DNP list. That is infact what the private section of the archive is for. So I don't see the reason for the post. I don't see why such a response was required. When what Cub Central has..is a service that ANY artist can ask for..and, like Cub Central, they must request it before it is taken into effect.
-----------------------------------------------

#4997

>>4942

I'm "getting on you" (if you wanna call it that) because this doesn't really make sense to me.

But where on CC's TOS does it say CC's moderators can dictate what is or isn't done with art posted on it? CC doesn't own the art, doesn't have the copyright for the art, nor have the legal authority to dictate where else it may be posted. The CC mods are basically saying is "We didn't make the art, we don't own the art, and we don't have claim of the art.. but we don't want it posted here anyway."

I mean.. [another furry chan board] has as much authority to say the art posted there may not be reposted here as CC's mods do for the art on CC. Neither place owns, or has any legal stake in, the art that's posted on it.

As well, how can you know that a piece of art came from CC's private section? As mentioned before, some artists put their art in multiple places. But because it's in CC's private section, and the alternate source may have been lost to time, forgotten, or just not available anymore, means it's automatically DNP, regardless of what the artist may or may not want?
-----------------------------------------------

#5004

Nicol#7GzOswROKY  

>>4997 Cub Central is setup the way it is, and has all the annoying rules it has because that's what the contributing artists and authors have asked for. I'm pretty sure we're doing what they want, because they wouldn't upload content to the site otherwise, and without that we wouldn't have a website!

I'm happy to answer all the questions in this thread point by point, but fchan's rules discourage such discussion here, so may I suggest contacting me privately or joining Cub Central's mailing list?
-----------------------------------------------

5Report
at 14 Feb 2006: 08:22

I am >>4997, in response to >>5004

I'm not saying CC has annoying rules at all (I re-looked over them just now, and they do seem quite sensible). All I'm saying is, CC does not have the right to dictate what can and cannot be done with someone else's art. CC doesn't have the copyright on the art, therefor it has no say in what is or isn't done with it.

I'm quite sure the situation would not be the same if a FurAffinity moderator came here and said you couldn't post art that's marked adult on FA (and thus members-only). There's no way for you to know a given pic came from CC's archive, as opposed to somewhere else on the digital ether. Only the artist could say if it could've come from somewhere else, and at that point they could quite easilly add themselves to the DNP if they wish. And even if there was a way to tell, that doesn't absolve the fact that CC doesn't hold legal claim on the art.

6Report
Sylern at 14 Feb 2006: 11:28

And that dosn't change the fact that, no matter what.  Those people who sign up to have their pictures posted in the private section....get the 'don't repost these images anywere' protection as part of the deal.

The private section is FOR not being posted elsewhere.  If they want it to be allowed elsewhere they don't put it in the private section.  Thats all.  If they want it posted elsewhere..they mark it as public.

That is what marking it as private is for.  It is something the ARTISTS requested happen.  It isn't because CC is trying to lay claim..they are just trying to keep up their end of the bargan.

Artist have it in private because the WANT CC to do that, if they didn't it'd be in the public section.

And to re-iterate.  CC isn't trying to lay claim..they are trying to do what they promised the artist they'd do.  And that is make sure the artwork stays in the private section.  if they didn't want that they would stick it in public.

so once again i don't see what your problem is.  The artist want CC to do this.

7Report
at 14 Feb 2006: 20:42

"It isn't because CC is trying to lay claim..they are just trying to keep up their end of the bargan."

Something that CC doesn't have the authority to do. If this is truely what CC is after (that anything posted in the private section can't be reposted), then the TOS should state that anything you post in the private section you give exclusive rights to CC for it, and in return CC will make sure it's not reused or reposted anywhere else. I bet artists would throw a sh*tfit if something like that was there, yet that's the kind of thing CC is trying to enforce here.

And my questions have yet to be answered. How can you know it came from CC (just because there's a copy there doesn't mean that's the only place it is/was)? Where is CC given the right to control the artwork of others in this manner?

If I made a website, and allowed a friend's art to be displayed there, and I found the art being posted here, do you think I could come in and say "I know the artist of those pics and they don't want it reposted"? No, I'd get told "Tough, tell the artist to email and request DNP".

8Report
at 14 Feb 2006: 21:29

>>7 So, then you're rather I just added myself to the DNP just because I have less than a dozen images posted on the CC private section that I don't want posted anywhere else, including here? 

Even though I'm perfectly happy to have folks redistribute everything else I draw? 

Why don't you let the artists on CC decide what rights they want to let the admins of CC 'claim', and stay the fuck out of it? 

A few artists have already moved stuff from the private section to the public section of CC because they understand that otherwise it falls under the DNP.  If other CC artists want to have their stuff allowed on Fchan, they'll do the same thing. 

We (CC artsits collectively) are fully capable of deciding what we put where on CC, and for what reasons, we don't need you to crusade on our behalf. 

9Report
at 15 Feb 2006: 00:04

>>6


It was never stated by anyone of any relevance that CC was going to restrict it. But, the artists upload the art to CC with the intent of it not being distributed. Hence, why only *they* or people with permission from *them* should redistribute it.

10Report
at 15 Feb 2006: 00:08

Its simple.

The artist has GIVEN PERSMISSION to CC for such action.  They LET CC fight this battle.

And once again.  How do you know its from CC only?  Simple..if there is a copy there, in the private section.  The artist does not want it distributed willy nilly.

Please..read what it said..don't just take a line of what is posted and make assumptions based on what you want to hear.

The private section has certain rules.  One of those rules, and this is something all members agree to.  Is that you don't take a post in the private section..and distribute it..you don't even discuss who is in the private section.  This is why you see any posts from me about private being heavily vague when refering to artists.

The private section is there EXPLICITLY for such protection.  All artists who post to the private section put their art in private to NOT BE DISTRIBUTED.  That is why they stuck it there,.

Here let me put it simple.  CC is not laying claim to the artwork.

CC private is on the DNP list for one simple reason.  Any and all artists who post artwork in the private area..do not want their artwork reposted.  And that includes to this board.

The DNP section might as well just name all of the artists on the CC private section.  however for the sake of artists who wish to be anonymous..and because its just simpler.  The page just puts it simple.

If its on CC private..DO NOT POST.

How hard is this to understand?  Seriously?  I'm trying to break this down in as many ways as possible..but you still don't seem to understand.  And I don't know what I'm explaining incorrectly.  You seem to think that CC is somehow laying claim to this artwork since its up there.  It isn't..it isn't saying the artwork belongs to them.  The artists can always take the artwork and move it to the public section..the artist can always remove any and all artwork from that section.  Infact several members have...yaknow why?  Because people were posting stuff in the private section.

The private section is a general warning to the viewing public at large.  All artists in the private section don't want their artwork shared.  That is all it is.  It isn't a claim of ownership by cub central.  It is not Cub Central trying to say the artwork belongs to them.  It is not Cub Central stealing the artwork.

Its the artists saying 'Hey you, yes you, yeah the one who is viewing this art.  Don't post it anywhere.  Its my stuff, and I don't want you putting it elsewhere.'  This is why the private section of CC is DNP..the artists of CC as a whole, have asked their stuff to not be distributed if their art is in private.

CC will sometimes represent the artist..but all they reiterate is the will of the artists as a whole.  Who made this agreement the moment they got a membership.  Here let me copy/paste a part of the Private Membership agreement.  This is something any member of cubcentral agrees to..even artists.  If they don't agree with it..they don't become a member (or they break rules and hopefully get banned).

Please notice this agreement is for the private section only..this does not apply to public..which any artists can, at any time, choose to have any of their artwork flagged as such.  Yes an artist can even have some private artwork, and some public artwork.  Amazing isn't it?

1 I understand that any artwork downloaded from here may be stored on my computer in its UNMODIFIED FORM ONLY.  I will also not show this artwork to, or allow it to be viewed by any person not also agreeing to these terms.

2 I agree that all artwork in the archive is copyrighted to the original artist, and will not allow it to become distributed in any form, electronic or otherwise, unless explicit permission is given by the copyright holder.

3 I will not make reference or otherwise to any artist or works contained in this archive in any group, place or forum where such subject material may be considered offensive or inappropriate.

11Report
at 15 Feb 2006: 01:23

"The artist has GIVEN PERSMISSION to CC for such action."

Then, according to the rules, they need to email Nadia and let her know that CC has the ability to say what can and can't be done with their work.

"And once again.  How do you know its from CC only?  Simple..if there is a copy there, in the private section.  The artist does not want it distributed willy nilly."

It's not in the CC TOS. Funny how an artist, who's known to not like their art redistributed, can put "Do Not Distribute" in big bold letters on a picture and no one will give it a second look before posting it, nor is it subsequently deleted, yet you assume everyone posting in CC's private section doesn't want that art redistributed and this big stink is raised.

"One of those rules, and this is something all members agree to.  Is that you don't take a post in the private section..and distribute it."

And again, how can you know that something came from CC's private section? Is there a watermark on the file that says so? Just because it's in CC's private section doesn't mean that's the only place the artist put it. Say someone puts a file in CC's private section, and I get the same file from their own site, or from them persoanlly. That means the file I got automatically came from CC? How would that work?

"So, then you're rather I just added myself to the DNP just because I have less than a dozen images posted on the CC private section that I don't want posted anywhere else, including here?"

Then put only your cub art on the DNP list. Is FChan that inflexible that if you email and say "I don't mind my art being distributed, except for my cub art. Please don't allow it on your site." they won't honor it?

"Why don't you let the artists on CC decide what rights they want to let the admins of CC 'claim', and stay the fuck out of it?"

There's no reason to get pissy. I'm simply bringing up something that doesn't make sense to me, and asking why. I have no problem with the artists deciding what rights to give CC. But in accordance with FChan's rules, since it is not stated in CC's TOS, you have to write to Nadia and let her know. Feel free.

"we don't need you to crusade on our behalf."

I'm not. In fact, this doesn't have anything to do with CC specificly (just that it's the site that happened to bring the issue to light for me). This has to do with how FChan is operating, and why the rules are being applied differently to people who happen to post at certain sites.

I have no problem with CC claiming all rights to the images via their TOS, if they want. I have no problem with FChan restricting art on a per-(non-pay)site basis, in addition to a per-artist basis, if they want. But in the latter case, I think it requires a change to the rules, because it's not expressed or implied.

12Report
Sylern at 15 Feb 2006: 01:35

*twitch*

hey, read the posts before you even reply ok?  Read the entire friggin post.  I answered one of your questions earlier.  But here I'll re-iterate the post.

It is in the CC TOS.


1 I understand that any artwork downloaded from here may be stored on my computer in its UNMODIFIED FORM ONLY.  I will also not show this artwork to, or allow it to be viewed by any person not also agreeing to these terms.

2 I agree that all artwork in the archive is copyrighted to the original artist, and will not allow it to become distributed in any form, electronic or otherwise, unless explicit permission is given by the copyright holder.

Here is the first two points in the CC membership agreement.  This is part of what is agreed to.  It tells in very simple terms.  Unless the person who holds the copyright says its ok to post in other places..DON'T DO IT.

13Report
VashDragon#VINFyqCmDM at 15 Feb 2006: 01:48

>>11
I think >>10 said it pretty correctly.  The reason Fchan is making such a rule is to respect all the artists who want those pictures to only remain in the CC private section.

As far as i can tell there is no flexibility in the DNP list.  The main example i can think of is some of Zen's pictures that were done as commissions that were not supposed to be distributed but found its way on Fchan.  From what i could tell, zen couldnt say that perticular picture was DNP.  He would have to add his name to the DNP list, or repeatedly ask that specific pic to be deleted every time i showed up.

I never saw the end to that little bit, but thats the basics of it that i remember.  Yould really have to ask the mods on how the DNP list can work.

However, its just far easier to say an entire site is DNP list due to the sites contents, rather than the artists having to put themselves on the DNP list.

Oh and how can you tell if its from the private CC site?  Well its quite simple, if you get it from the private gallery, dont post it.  If you got it due to someone redistributing it on another site, Well thats them breaking the TOS.  Basicaly, Fchan is just trying to enforce that little rule on CC.

Fa cant do this since its basicaly a public gallery.  It doesnt do anything to keep the contents of its site private, other than a basic age verification system.  CC can because its a private gallery with a TOS that covers the subject. (And as i said, Fchan is just trying to appease the rules of CC.)

I think its a very nice system.  Artists wanted to keep those pictures private so they post them to a private gallery.  And fchan is just trying to keep that gallery private.  If there are any other private galleries, im sure Fchan would do the same for them.

14Report
at 15 Feb 2006: 02:31

>>12 Okay, fine. Though you realize, if you take that to mean that the artwork itself that's put up in there can't be shown to others who don't also agree, that means even the artist themselves are restricted similarly, regardless of where the copy comes from.

>>13 I know there's at least some flexiblity. Already in the DNP list, you can see this entry:
Robert Holiday (only for any pictures dated before 2000)
..which shows its not an all-or-nothing deal. But you're right, that's up to the mods to decide (and you won't know unless you ask).

"Well its quite simple, if you get it from the private gallery, dont post it.  If you got it due to someone redistributing it on another site, Well thats them breaking the TOS."

And if you get it from the artist themself? Or, from another site the artist has allowed it that doesn't have similar rules? Unless you're agreeing with the assessment I made on >>12 in which case, that's your perogative and there's no point to continue to discuss it.

15Report
Nicol#7GzOswROKY at 15 Feb 2006: 20:55

>>11  The way I tell whether an artist has allowed copies of their work to be distributed outside of Cub Central is to ask them, of course.

But really, I have better things to do than scan all the image BBSs for 'illegal' reposts of images off Cub Central, the main reason I asked for a DNP entry was to let artists who spotted their work here the option of immediately reporting it and getting it removed.

>>14  As others have already pointed out, your argument is mostly pointless because you have your cause and effect the wrong way around:  Artists choose to post images in the private galleries on Cub Central BECAUSE they don't them spread around elsewhere.   While they pass on copies to their friends too. 'keep this to yourself' is the most common thing I hear from artists when being passed a private copy of something.

And back to the bottom of >>11  I'd really like to see Cub Central getting similar respect to pay sites, we check email addresses, they check credit card numbers, but otherwise the setups are similar.

16Report
VashDragon#VINFyqCmDM at 15 Feb 2006: 15:35

>>14
If the artist gives you some other means to see the art then its no longer private and shouldnt be in the CC private gallery.  However, whether you got it from another site or not, i still feel its important for Fchan to police the CC private gallery issue.  Lest some art that really does mean to remain will stay that way.

And as the other person said, if your really not sure, ask the artist in question, or link back to the place you got it from, then there should be no problems.

17Report
VashDragon#VINFyqCmDM at 15 Feb 2006: 15:37

*....Mean to remain private will stay that way.*

Sorry i forgot to type a word.

18Report
at 15 Feb 2006: 15:40

>>11 "Then put only your cub art on the DNP list. Is FChan that inflexible that if you email and say "I don't mind my art being distributed, except for my cub art. Please don't allow it on your site." they won't honor it?"

You miss the point - If I'm ArtistX and I happen to draw a tiny bit of cub art compared to my 'normal' stuff, and I want to share it in a place where cub fans can see it, while Furryfan128, who hates cub art and thinks all cub artists are evil bastards, won't see it, I post it to cub centrals private area. 

I don't want anyone who hates cub art to know that I draw cub art, because frankly I don't need the hassle of close minded morons calling me a pedophile everywhere I go on the net.  Nor do I want to have to issue my artist's statement 3 times a week rationalizing why my cub art is drawn for reasons other than my own interest in young folks/cub (since I have absoluutely not interest in children, cubs, or even people roleplaying as such).

So it I add 'ArtistX (cub art only)' to the DNP, guess what?  Whoa, everyone knows I draw cub art, but that they can't see it, or repost it.  Now Furryfan128 goes around telling everyone what kind of sick freak I am, and suddenly I get all that hassle I didn't want. 

Which leads me to having to put my name on the DNP for *all* my work, not just cub art.  Which means now nobody can share my other 200 images on Fchan, just to avoid anyone being able to post my dozen or so cub pics.  Shitty deal for everyone.   

19Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage