fchan

discussion

DNP List Question

Pages:1 41
1Report
Ursa at 25 Mar 2006: 02:52

"Sage Nadia#Admin 06/03/24(Fri)10:16  No.5057   [PostFocus]
    >>5010>>5029>>5043
    Meet Rule 4 (e)If you do not want your work posted on our site, you will need to submit a request to added to this list. E-Mail Sage Nadia with your request and she will process it as soon as she is able. Only requests from the artist themselves, or their legal represenatives, will be processed.
    (Whine about "ZOMG ART THEFT~!" on the boards, and you will be perma-banned. No questions, no explanations.)"


Look first off I am not trying to start a fight I have a serious question.  I see admins make comments like the one above an I get a little bit annoyed.  As an artist I keep my commercial graphics art listed on an internet site known as Artwanted.com.  When my work is posted its copyrighted, and thus I dont wish it to be distributed without my consent.  I dont troll the internet searching for boards or whatever that might be posting my work, I simply expect a simple bit of respect from others not to post the work.

I look at the DNP list and I often wonder if this concept is the exact oposite of what should be allowed.  As an artist I would be insulted if some board admin told me I had to fill out a form to have my rights respected.  To me it would seem common curtosy to simply ask the artist if its ok to distribute their work if its not clearly marked one way or the other. 

If you dont know, then dont post.  Simple as that.

Would it not cover all the based if the DNP list was actually a List of Artists that allow their work to be posted?  If an artist hasnt said "Yes, its ok to post my work." how do you even have a clue on what their actual wishs are?

I seriously doubt that any admin, poster, or general surfer of this site can claim to know every furry artist, or what CD's, DVD's, comics, portfolios or whatever else they may have released for profit.  These items more than likely being items that should stay DNP in general.

Furry artists make the fandom what it is, and most furs wish they could or actively try to do art themselves.  Fchan provides a service to the furry community in providing artwork to the community in an easily accessable format.  The posters and admins have the job of make sure that furry artists are protected and they should be doing the leg work to make sure they know first hand what is allowed and isnt.

Maybe its time to rethink the simple DNP list and change it to an allowed artist list.  What harm could possibly come from actually knowing what the artist wishs?

This is just a thought, Flame on if you feel its nessicary. 

Ursa J. Major

2Report (sage)
at 25 Mar 2006: 03:16

>>1
Gah!  Honestly... "Furry Artists make the Fandom what it is?"  And you're posting about moderator arrogance.  Maybe I speak for a pathetic minority here, but I was a furry long before I started surfing for art, and to be honest, maybe 10% of my time as  furry is spent looking at, or even caring about art.  Most of my time is spent role playing and chatting, and my introduction to the fandom was through a MUCK.  A lot of furries I hang out with are the same... role playing and chat.  Furry Artists constitute a PORTION of the fandom, and quite frankly, even if furry art vanished without a trace, there would still be furries, and thus, a fandom.

Other than that, I assume you're referring to the system at Yiffstar FAP?  They have a post list... and I think there's about 30 posts a week there maybe?  It may be more fair, but if that happened to FChan, all that would happen is that people would go someplace where they could post their art... sort of how people post of FChan instead of Yiffstar FAP.

Besides, in the time it took you to make that post, you could have added yourself to the DNP, and the issue would be done.

3Report(capped) (sage)
Sage Nadia at 25 Mar 2006: 03:21

I don't see a fight at all.

I agree with you on part of what you are saying. But, first let me address something else.
In the quote you have there you neglect that it was in response to someone posting three times, effectively spamming the system with a complaint about Marc Leonhardts work being posted. At no point did this person follow the rules which tell him/her how to deal with a problem like this, even though they clicked the little I agree box before posting. Three times.
Myself, I find it easier sometimes to just copy/paste than type out yet another description. They will also find an explanation of what to do regarding the banning in Moderator Decisions.

Now, on to your points. I would prefer a design which works the way you suggest. However the nature of the board doesn't work that way. And yes, I agree with you on the "If you don't kow, don't post". However, the community here isn't exactly ready for that kind of move. And to be honest, I'm not certain I will ever be able to move into that set of rules. No reason I can explain other than to cite womans intuition.

It is also true that we don't know everyone. But as a community we do. And those who use the bell certainly help us with narrowing a lot of this down.

Anyway, Keeping it short. Feel free to carry on more everyone. However, lets all keep it civil. No flames please.

4Report
at 25 Mar 2006: 04:20

What about the flames of passion?  We all need those kind of flames... unless your dead... or undead.  Does Fossil need flames?

Anyhow, I thought the general rule of thumb was, don't post anything on the DNP list, don't post anything from paysites, and don't post anything with "Do Not Redistribute" on it.  That seems pretty fair to me anyway...

5Report
at 25 Mar 2006: 10:20

An "Only Post" list would be less convenient, I think.  Especially since I'm a lazy bum who'd never be arsed to e-mail anyone saying, "Yeah, they can post my work."  Then again, I've never cared if people repost my stuff.  So long as it's unedited, and they don't try to say they made it, I don't particularly mind.  Actually, it's kind of a pleasant surprise for me when I do find that someone else has posted my work.  It tells me, "Wow, this person thought so highly of my work that they would want others to see it too!"

6Report (sage)
at 25 Mar 2006: 12:36

>>2  Yeah, try to tell the furry con's that the fandom isn't about the art and artists - Somehow packing 1000 furries into a hotel so they can chat and RP online doesn't sound like it'd work really well. 

"Hey, FurryFox71, wanna spend a bunch of money to meet in a hotel and, ummm, do stuff?  Like...  Surf the net and chat?" 

The guests of honour would all be...  Ummm, the guy with the fastest typing speed, who can 'yiff' with 6 partners at once on IM?  Riiight...

If all the art dissappeared you'd have what...  A fandom of folks who were fans of...  Disney Cartoons?  You might have a group of folks who liked role playing and type-fucking each other on the net, but it certainly wouldn't be much of a fandom. 

7Report (sage)
at 26 Mar 2006: 10:19

A furry con is mostly abought the art, its also a big chunk lets meet other people we have talked with online before (for many purposes)
the non con setting is most assuradly not art eccentric.
you tried to apply concentric behaviour to day to day behaviour.
*insert buzzer sound*

8Report
at 26 Mar 2006: 20:47

>>6
So I wasn't a fan until I started looking at art?  Besides, I've never been to a convention, and yet, I still consider myself a furry.  Maybe furries need to be divided... like comic fans and manga fans.  Art furries, RP furries, commune furries, literature furries, all of the above furries, clean (non porn) furries, casual furries, and whatever furries I missed.  Seriously, I wasn't trying to take a dig at artists and their art.  I'm HERE after all.  I'm just saying that furry art doesn't constitute the fandom, it's just one aspect of it.

Sheesh, I know I gotta be careful what I say, but I didn't think the context was THAT obscure.  (And besides, I don't really like disney... I'm more of a fan of lycanthropes and such.)

9Report
Wookiee at 26 Mar 2006: 21:37

>>1
There are a lot of boards and sites out there that post artist's works without permission.  At least fchan has a DNP and strictly enforcing it rather than telling artists who complain to go ____ themselves.

Your way may be a better solution but for the time it took you to write up your concerns, you could have submitted a DNP request and your problem would be solved.

10Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 03:16

>>4
Unfortunately, that's not how it is. You may not post works done by anyone on the DNP list, or anything that's commercial. That's it. An artist can have their site littered with the statement "My artwork is not allowed to be reposted anywhere, you dumbass" and have their images watermarked with big bold letters "Do Not Repost Anywhere, Ever, Fucker", and it's fully allowed here. Though I agree, anything that has a Do Not Distribute message right on the image should be automatically DNP, but that's not how it is.

Personally, I do like FAP's system better. You can link to any image you find online by anyone, anywhere (as long as it's not an illegal redistribution, such as FXC or something), as well as post works by artists on their Allowed Artist list. The latter method puts it *permanently* on FAP's servers, so it's not reliant on the original source staying up.

11Report (sage)
Joan-Michele#LczDsoiSfY at 27 Mar 2006: 03:32

The allowed artist list would seriously dry up the supply of artwork being posted here because people who have heard nary a word about FChan would automatically have their work cut out from here. That might cause a few users to resort to impersonation to get around that and that....is intolerable. Encouraging the users to email the artist and ask for their graces might be a good solution but it runs the risk oc causing MASSIVE annoyance. Imagine having your eMail inbox flooded by requests to have your art reposted in some site you never heard of. ;)

Seriously though, asking to be placed in a DNP is just a couple of e-mails away and it is there to prevent impersonation. After that, you can choose to be given an artist tag so that you and only you can post your own work here. That might take a couple of hoops more to leap through, but it's no real hassle...really. :)

12Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 03:56

The allowed artist list would seriously dry up the supply of artwork being posted here because people who have heard nary a word about FChan would automatically have their work cut out from here. <

That's not true. You could still link to the image you find. For example, if I find an awesome picture by, say, J-C on VCL, she hasn't heard of this place (for the sake of argument, I don't know if she actually has), and thus isn't on the Allowed Posters list. I could still give a link directly to the image, and this place could even generate a thumbnail for the link. The only difference would be, the image itself isn't stored on this server.

Seriously though, asking to be placed in a DNP is just a couple of e-mails away and it is there to prevent impersonation. <
The problem is when these artists haven't heard of FChan. Imagine you're an artist that doesn't want your work redistributed without permission (you can even freely give permission if you want, just as long as they ask first). You have no idea this site exists, you have a polite "Please do not repost without permission" message on each of your images and on your official site(s), and all that fun stuff.

Then, you stumble across a place like this and find your entire collection of work posted without your permission. Wouldn't you be just a little pissed off? Right or not, moral or not, whatever. People went against your wishes, which were made absolutely clear. And not only did the person posting it not care, but the admis didn't either, unless you ask "properly" to be put on the DNP list (which makes it hard if it's only a portion of your gallery you may not want reposted, since it's usually an all-or-nothing deal).

But even so. Okay. You "follow the rules" and get yourself on the DNP list, so your work isn't posted here anymore. Woops, now another furry chan board popped up with its own DNP list. You don't know about it, and your work gets flooded there. You stumble across it. Get pissed off again? Either that, or just get apathetic.

Repeat ad-inifinitum

At some point, the artist's just going to give up and either become completely apathetic to the issue, or play their trump card and pull all their work down. Congratulations, you just pushed out another furry artist, so no one can enjoy their work anymore.

13Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 04:01

>>12
In addition to the first example, not only would I still be able to link to an image, you *automatically* find their archive, the rest of their art, and can then watch the place yourself for updates. No having to Google search for a potentialy generic name, no having to ask for the Sauce and pray to get a reply which may never come..

14Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 04:32

Simple, the rules as i see it are made to allow this place to reach a status of being the "ONE". They are easy enough to allow a great number of viewers easy access without having to worry about much. At the same time it allows the artists a great deal of control over their works.

Now what would happen if the rules were tightened even more? The people would leave and migrate to other chans that have less strict rules. This would reduce in even more harm than it would do good.

15Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 04:59

At the same time it allows the artists a great deal of control over their works.

Actually, they have very little control here. If you don't know about this place, you're automatically out of luck. As long as your work's not commercial, it's allowed here with no questions. Even if you do know about this place, you have to go through the "proper" channels, and even then it's an all-or-nothing deal.

I wouldn't say the artist has much control if all they can do is allow all-or-none of their non-comerical work to be posted (*if* they know about this place, *if* they email Nadia, and *if* they can prove they are who they say they are). If you don't meet all of the conditions, you have no say, and even if you do, you only have one option (barring the rare exception).

16Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 05:11

And how much control do they have on other *chans? None.

Also, it doesn't matter HOW much control they actually have. Tightening the rules even more would inevitably lead to a loss of that control.

17Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 05:14

And how much control do they have on other *chans? None.
Oh, well, as long as other people are doing it, it's alright. Hey, that bridge looks like a fun place to play, doesn't it?

18Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 06:02

Ok, since you are being thick, i'll go into more detail.

This is not about what is PROPER, this is about the relationship between cause and reaction.

You are saying we should tighten the rules more, since that would be proper. Now this would be a cause.
The reaction would be that people leave to other chans, chans that have less rules. We would have a place where artists have a lot of control but where no users are, because they are off playing in places that give artists less control.

This means in short: TIGHTENING THE RULES HERE WOULD LEAD TO THE ARTISTS LOSING A LOT OF CONTROL IN GENERAL.

Still too difficult a concept to grasp?

P.S.: Your last answer is really quite retarded. If you disagree on that: Prove how i said fchan should remove all the control that artists currently have.

19Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 06:31

>>18
This isn't about other chan boards. This is about FChan. While yes, things could be much worse here, that doesn't negate the fact that they could be better (nor does it mean they shouldn't try to make it better). I'm not arguing about tightening the rules, either (believe me, I already think some of the rules are too tight, while some others are too loose). I'm simply saying there's merit in other methods, such as how FAP works with an Allowed-Artists list.

20Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 06:44

They may have merit, as long as one accepts a miniscule userbase, which isn't feasible for fchan due to abovementioned reasons.

21Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 07:37

>>20
I wouldn't really call FAP's user base miniscule. And there's really no way to properly gauge this place's user base to compare since most people post anonymously (and even for the mods, people can have shared static IPs, or dynamic random IPs, and most "kids" who are using the family computer for the site probably clear the browser's cache and cookies, making it further impossible to properly track unique people). The only difference is the sheer volume of image posts.. of which, most here are reposts. FAP's quasi-permanent linking-style system keeps the images around so you won't be needing to repost the same image over and over and over again.

Even still, with a FAP-style board, you can post images to sites like imageshack or photobucket and link to it from there. But then it becomes the image poster's reponsibility if the artist wishes to take action against the redistribution, and we all know how people like to shy away from being held responsible for their actions (wouldn't doubt most people that prefer chan boards do so because they believe they're "more anonymous" and harder to track should an artist get pissed off enough.. disregarding whether they actually are or not).

As well, I can't think of many other FAP-type boards. While *chan boards are popular, I don't believe a forum like FAP has been tried enough to become popular.. though I can see why they wouldn't (see the previous paragraph about anonymity and responsiblity).

22Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 08:15

And there's really no way to properly gauge this place's user base to compare
Last quote from Xenofur: 2.1 TB used in february. Also FAP recruits it's userbase from the forum and the users of the story database.

About the linking: Bravo, perfect way to circumvent the DNP, you don't really expect the mods to actually implement that?
Just in case you don't quite see what i mean:
1. get server in some place where copyrights aren't worth anything
2. host bernal's life work
3. link on image board
4. ???
5. Profit!

Oh and nice side-attack on anonymous posting, Mr. #21.
Nonetheless, a little hint for you: *chan boards are more popular because they are easy and hassle-free to use, as opposed to complex and slow forum systems like this 5 MB monstrosity: http://hoxdna.org/yiffstar/phpbb/fap.php?fap_id=31

23Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 08:18

btw, they are really enforcing their "Do Post List": http://hoxdna.org/yiffstar/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=20048
yup.

24Report
Tanek Xavier at 27 Mar 2006: 10:41

Here's a poser..What if people don't know that Fchan even exists and their artwork is being posted up here?  Yes..I know..it's rare to fidn someone who doesn't know about Fchan if they're into the fur fandom..but it DOES happen.

Are you going to be held responsible for any repercussions thereof?  What if the person intends to sue for some reason? Like they sell their artwork for a living, and now it's posted all over Fchan, and nwo they're not able to sell certain images because they're already posted up everywhere else?  I've seen lots of artwork here that says "Do not redistribute" on it.  So that tells me that many people here don't really care for the wishes of other artists.

25Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 10:50

If they don't know about this place and suddenly find it with half their life's work on it, guess what?  They can talk to Nadia, get added to the DNP list.  BOOM all posts with their art gone.  Like magic, only it's not.

"Like they sell their artwork for a living, and now it's posted all over Fchan..."
Commercially available works are automatically DNP.  We don't distribute things you can buy, thanks.

26Report
Tanek Xavier at 27 Mar 2006: 10:53

Quote)You are saying we should tighten the rules more, since that would be proper. Now this would be a cause.
The reaction would be that people leave to other chans, chans that have less rules. We would have a place where artists have a lot of control but where no users are, because they are off playing in places that give artists less control.(Quote

So, your'e saying that an artist should have little to NO control over their artwork being posted in places they don't know about?  Sounds like a rather fishy and poorly thought out concept, if you ask me.

27Report
Tanek Xavier at 27 Mar 2006: 10:58

replying to post 25.

  DOes that matter?  All that matters is that peopel who did NOT pay for their work now have copies of it.  THis means that these people can now send these images to other boards that exist.  Mor epeople will get them, which means less money for the original artist again.

and as stated earlier, this kind of thing tends to push furry artists away fromt he fandom because they feel they can't trust the majority with their work.  Because you KNOW there's going to be several IDIOTS out there who're going to post the work just because they believe they can.

There is such a thing as malicious intent...though it's rare..it does happen...

28Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 11:03

The only way an artist will ever have COMPLETE control over their work is if they never let anybody have a copy.  This automatically takes the internet out of the equation, since anybody can download an image.  If you have the only copies, though, you have exclusive control.

Basically, once the art is online, the artist has pretty much lost control of where their art is being posted.  I don't mean that in the, "OMG IT'S ONLINE SO ANYONE CAN HAVE IT LOLZ" kind of way.  What I'm saying is for each one copy that's posted somewhere there are dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of copies created from it, by the people who download it.  Putting your art online, and expecting to be able to have complete control over it is silly.

That's not saying the artist has no right to say, "Please do not put my work up anywhere else!"  This, then, becomes the artist putting their trust in the viewers of their work that they will respect their wishes.  Most do.  It's completely on the honor system, and some people just aren't honorable.

29Report
>>25 at 27 Mar 2006: 11:22

>>27
It matters if we're still talking about Fchan.  Fchan does not allow the posting of commercially available works.  PERIOD.  If someone gets something they ought to have payed for for free, they probably didn't get it here.

If the artists are distressed by what the fans do with their work, they can simply stop producing it.  If the fans want to shoot themselves in the foot by causing the artist to react in that way, they deserve it.

30Report
Tanek Xavier at 27 Mar 2006: 11:31

Helllloooo?  How do we even know that the mods and admins even KNOW of EVERY....SINGLE....PAYSITE that exists?

31Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 11:45

>>30
They, alone, do not.  However, Fchan is VERY user-involved, beyond posting images.  See the pretty little bell next to EVERY post?  Clicking that will allow you to report a post to the mods/admin, and prompt you with a box to provide a reason for it being reported.  A person can say, "This is from a paysite" and once verified, the post will be dealt with accordingly.

An individual may know something, but everyone together knows everything.

32Report
Tanek Xavier at 27 Mar 2006: 11:54

Doesn't really help the fact that once it's on Fchan it's pretty much a worhtless work of art because now countless people would already have a copy.

33Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 12:07

Why isn't anyone asking why the people -posting- aren't checking on whether the stuff is redistributable or not? Why are they holding the mods strictly responsible?

While not perfectly implemented from a lawyer's viewpoint (what is?), fchan's moderators are making a stab at a good-faith effort to keep things on the up and up. The DNP and rules make it pretty clear that posting things that the artist might not want spread is a no-no. They clean up any messes tout de suit whenever they hear from the artist and not on just anyone's say-so (which is smart move on the mod's part- and that's personal experience speaking).

As has been noted, they don't have the time to check on everything that might be questionable. They're not required to do so and aren't accountable for that other than to remove the offending material when formally requested by the owner; which they do with no complaint and little delay. As with most services- paid and otherwise- it's not their resposibilty to check each and every thing that comes their way. Supposedly, the users are the ones accountable and responsible for making sure they have permission to distribute the things. Don't you think that the person uploading might be the one to direct your complaints to? I'm pretty sure the mods know who to direct their complaints about breaking DNP and put those complaints forward in a very persuasive manner, going by the number of people that have screeched about being banned for it.

34Report(capped)
Xenofur at 27 Mar 2006: 13:01

I'll probably only post here one more time:

No, we will never put a "Do Post List" into effect, period.

The main reason is that we have managed to reach quite a lot. Fchan is a place where furries can meet and share art and we are doing so by respecting the artists. Despite what people like to say, on average the community here is pretty good. But in order to keep this up we must provide an incentive for people to post here. That incentive is ease of use and hassle-free handling. If we were to drop that people would, as mentioned above, leave for places like onechan and wtfux, where artists are regarded as the dirt under their nails. This means that, in effect, the pictures would get spread even more than they are being spread now.

35Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 20:19

>>34
You cannot really blame onechan though, it's pretty obvious to me at least the furry board posters rarely use other parts of the website. In fact it was slower than /suc/ until about a year ago. It's more intended to be "german 4chan" but with the stuff that's banned from the original.

36Report
at 27 Mar 2006: 22:29

>>23
They *do not have* a DNP list. The only thing going on in that thread is people linking to various images elsewhere online. None of those images are on FAP's servers.

If they don't know about this place and suddenly find it with half their life's work on it, guess what?  They can talk to Nadia, get added to the DNP list.  BOOM all posts with their art gone.

If they don't know about this place, then they're not able to ask to have it removed, are they? And even if they find the place and add themselves to the DNP list, then you'll get a bunch of posts whining about the artist being a dick about their work *when it shouldn't have been posted in the first place*.

Also, have you seen the DNP list here compared to another chan board's? Since when is it the artist's responsibility to keep track of every single chan board that could possibly pop up to ask for something that they've already asked for and shouldn't have happened in the first place?

Just in case you don't quite see what i mean:
1. get server in some place where copyrights aren't worth anything
2. host bernal's life work
3. link on image board
4. ???
5. Profit!

4. PM an admin informing them of the illegal redistibution, and they'll remove the link.

Basically, once the art is online, the artist has pretty much lost control of where their art is being posted.

Which of course says *nothing* about personal responsibility. Just because some *may* go around redistributing it without caring about the artist's wishes, doesn't mean people shouldn't take the responsibility to curb the behavior as much as possible. Every time someone posts work that they've been told not to redistribute, every time the mods don't do anything about work they know the artist doesn't want distributed, despite not being on the DNP list, you're just giving the middle finger to that artist.

Those people don't care about the artists. They don't respect the artists. They just try to claim "Well, this place has a DNP list, so we respect the artists!", but it's not respect when you post/allow something you know they don't want posted, regardless of whether they're on the DNP list or not.

Why isn't anyone asking why the people -posting- aren't checking on whether the stuff is redistributable or not? Why are they holding the mods strictly responsible?

Oh, believe me, I don't think very highly of people that ignore "Do Not Redistribute" messages. But of course, since this is all pretty much anonymous to other users, we have no idea who's actually doing it. Only the mods have a clue, and they don't seem to care about anyone that doesn't personally email them.

37Report
at 28 Mar 2006: 02:26

They *do not have* a DNP list. The only thing going on in that thread is people linking to various images elsewhere online. None of those images are on FAP's servers.
You realize that you are using the same excuse used by emule and bittorrent users? It doesn't matter where it is, fact is that they are using the website to spread material that the artist does not wish to have spread around.

4. PM an admin informing them of the illegal redistibution, and they'll remove the link.
Didn't you say above that the admins don't need to care about that due to it not being hosted on their servers? :>

then you'll get a bunch of posts whining about the artist being a dick about their work
when was the last time you saw such a thread?

Only the mods have a clue, and they don't seem to care about anyone that doesn't personally email them.
Doing so would put them in a spot where they would have to check EVERY SINGLE IMAGE being posted here wether the artist wants his works to be distributed or not. I'm not sure they're willing to commit their time to this kind of burden, but perhaps you would like to do so? Try emailing them, perhaps you can open a "DND-Squad" or soemthing ...

38Report
at 28 Mar 2006: 03:10

Didn't you say above that the admins don't need to care about that due to it not being hosted on their servers? :>

That's right. But luckilly, in the case of FAP, the people running it seem to be intelligent people, and if you can show the content being linked to is illegally redistributed, they'll remove the link (though they prefer you go after the place hosting it; get it at the source, where possible). Though they don't have to, they know it'll just do more harm than good to leave the link alone.

when was the last time you saw such a thread?

Oh, what's her name... SpazzyKoneko. StrayDog didn't get a kind reception with all that hubbub over that non-cub pic of his that was posted in a cub thread in /ah/. People still like to bitch about Dr. Comet..

Doing so would put them in a spot where they would have to check EVERY SINGLE IMAGE being posted here wether the artist wants his works to be distributed or not.

As someone mentioned before, FChan is a user-driven board. What's so wrong about putting pics marked with a DND statement, as well as pics from sites that clearly have such a message, under the DNP rules so users themselves can simply click the bell and hit 4? I'd have no problem at all with that.

39Report
at 28 Mar 2006: 03:48

You're contradicting yourself, lobbying for more restrictions so artists don't have to worry about their stuff being spread nilly-willy, while at the same time excusing a system that makes it possible for people to spread stuff without any repercussions at all and without anyone actually policing it.

Koneko did not as far as i can remember get any whiny posts here about her going dnp. Straydog got into troubles because he thought he could tell the mods how to run fchan. Bitching about Comet on fchan? err, no.

Also: quite some artists have said their DND only applies to use in commercial ventures. This would make the admins have to check with each and any artist, unless they come to bitch at them. (And yes, there have been cases.)

40Report
at 28 Mar 2006: 06:27

You're contradicting yourself, lobbying for more restrictions so artists don't have to worry about their stuff being spread nilly-willy, while at the same time excusing a system that makes it possible for people to spread stuff without any repercussions at all and without anyone actually policing it.

It isn't being spread willy-nilly with a system like FAP's. All you're doing is pointing to where it is. The image itself is still on the original server, and you just follow a hyperlink to that image. That isn't being spread around, because it's never put onto another server without their permission.

And even still, webmasters can put into place methods to prevent hotlinking, so you can't directly link to the images from anywhere.

As for policing it.. well, that's up to the admins. Whether it's a system like FAP, or a chan board, or whatever. Chan boards can be just as disregarding of redistribution as a FAP-like system, or they can both be as restrictive as the most anal-retentative admin in existance can make it.

Also: quite some artists have said their DND only applies to use in commercial ventures.

So, you take the lowest-common-denominator? Because some artists may mean distribution as in commercial distribution (for which a less ambiguous phrase could be made), it's best to assume all artists that say a general "Do Not Distribute" mean specificly commercial, unless otherwise stated? Then I suppose it's okay to alter artists' work too, because "Do Not Alter" may mean only altering the color brown to green of a small part of the image.

Why not the reverse? Why not assume No Distribution means any distribution methods, commercial or not, and make a list for artists that email Nadia and say FChan is allowed to distribute their DND-labeled work?

49Add 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