sjrathbun812 Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I have a question. technically, I have copyrighted Nintendo and Sega by drawing pictures of their characters. (Like Fox and Sonic.) And I could get in trouble for that, but I can see that Nintendo has made no effort whatsoever about things like SF TAS or R3DFiVe's SF movie. So do you think Nintendo or Sega would care if some kid drew a random picture of Fox or Sonic or something? Because I certainly don't want to get in trouble and have to pay 1500 dollars just because I drew a pic of a character that I don't own. Now that I think about it, this site is copyright of Nintendo. So.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZM Anonymous Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Read This and You'll Have Your Answer Fred's and R3D's fanfilms are protected under the Parody Clause in the Fair Use Doctrine. Just as long as they don't make a profit by marketing, they should be in the clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjrathbun812 Posted May 16, 2011 Author Share Posted May 16, 2011 .....So does that mean my stuff should be considered Fair Use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzz Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 my...my movie is not a parody :< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZM Anonymous Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 .....So does that mean my stuff should be considered Fair Use? It should! just don't claim the characters to be your own. Companies can't stop people from using a character's likeness in any form. Scratch what I said. It may be the opposite for red. Darn you Germany. Y U SO STRICT my...my movie is not a parody :< I don't mean it like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 Technically, fanart is copyright infringement. If they so choose, they can go after you for it. But they won't. I can't speak for Sega, but Nintendo loves fanart. They've even held fanart contests in the past. Hmm... Nintendo's site is down. But the legal section of their site describes what they send their lawyers after. They're more worried about people trying to make money off of their IPs and pirating games than they are harassing fans. Harassing fans over fanart is killing a form of word-of-mouth advertising. It doesn't even make good business sense to sue over that, and Nintendo appears to recognize that. The amount of sonic fanart out there leads me to believe Sega feels the same way. .....So does that mean my stuff should be considered Fair Use? NO. Fair use doesn't mean non-commercial use. It means using it for academic study, research, news reporting, or parody. "I drew this because I like Sonic" does not qualify as fair use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deploy Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 They rarely care if you aren't making a profit. Nintendo's not gonna go on your DA account, see a drawing of Fox, and sue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 You're fine, man. There is no issue here, as far as I can tell. Nintendo has no reason to sue you, otherwise all the good fanarts would be off the internet already. There would be no SFO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I remember 10+ years ago when Warner Bros was going after anyone and everyone who was posting up Minerva Mink fan art or running fan sites dedicated to her...um...furriness. In retrospect it was a pretty stupid thing for them to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deploy Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I remember 10+ years ago when Warner Bros was going after anyone and everyone who was posting up Minerva Mink fan art or running fan sites dedicated to her...um...furriness. In retrospect it was a pretty stupid thing for them to do. LOL Minerva Mink and her... 2-3 episodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 LOL Minerva Mink and her... 2-3 episodes. Hahah yeah, Warners would have a field day if (10+ years ago) they saw some of the montages and "tributes" to her on Youtube. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 LOL Minerva Mink and her... 2-3 episodes. LOL Rule 34... <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjrathbun812 Posted May 17, 2011 Author Share Posted May 17, 2011 Oh ok. Thank you guys, for clarifying for me. I honestly don't know a whole lot about all this. I didn't expect Nintendo to get after me, but I knew they could if they wanted to. So just to make sure that I know what I'm talking about....As long as I 1. don't say that any of the listed characters are mine, 2. I don't gain any profit off of them, and 3. I should probably get information to see if certain companys would care if I did or not. Because there are some who don't care what your doing, and they want it down anyway. Which I know they have every right to. I just don't want to end up having to pay a 10000 dollar bill or something like that just because I didn't "ask" to use there stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deploy Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 It should all be good, Wolf Fang :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 I remember 10+ years ago when Warner Bros was going after anyone and everyone who was posting up Minerva Mink fan art or running fan sites dedicated to her...um...furriness. In retrospect it was a pretty stupid thing for them to do. The justification for this is that they probably saw the copious porn as defamatory, and I can't blame them. Regular fanart is fine because as DZ has said, it's a form of advertisement, but there's nothing unjustified about a company going after sites they think are detrimental to the images of them and their characters. It's also worth it to keep in mind that copyright laws vary by country, which is interestingly enough why Pandora is no longer available in Canada and how us Canadians see very little in the form of home-grown parody of copyrighted material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"User" Posted May 17, 2011 Share Posted May 17, 2011 The justification for this is that they probably saw the copious porn as defamatory, and I can't blame them. Regular fanart is fine because as DZ has said, it's a form of advertisement, but there's nothing unjustified about a company going after sites they think are detrimental to the images of them and their characters. It's also worth it to keep in mind that copyright laws vary by country, which is interestingly enough why Pandora is no longer available in Canada and how us Canadians see very little in the form of home-grown parody of copyrighted material. First off it's good to see another fellow Canadian on SF-O. With this particular case though no, it wasn't really vast amounts of porn it was just...pictures, music, etc. In my late high school and college days (1999-2004) I saw about half a dozen sites shut down JUST for trademark infringement - something that in today's world would be unfathomable. Interestingly enough Canadian copyright laws are more lax than their European or American counterparts. Other countries have been pushing us to try and adopt a tougher stance on this stuff for years now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now