Plagiarism?

[Spqrblues]

(I've got you beat. I'm not wearing any underwear.)

Okay, joke seen. Will you play nice and be friends and take the images down?

[McDuffies]

If it were someone doing this with my art, if they used the entirety of my art just with different words (as it's been described here), I'd sue their heart-patterned underdrawers off for going beyond the legal limits of fair use and parody.

I fully support you, man!

(I've got you beat. I'm not wearing any underwear.)

edit by GD Mod (pierce_studios): It was requested of me that the link be removed, all other parts of the post are intact.

You'd more likely try to hire a lawyer, then realise that they're too expensive and not worth what you might even hope to get from sueing, and then you'd retreat to sending that person C&D letters which he'd ignore because by now everyone knows that C&D's are just empty talk with no actual weight.
Noone in webcomic world is strong enough to actually put such threats to reality. Well, perhaps one person... and then perhaps not even him.

[Spqrblues]

You'd more likely try to hire a lawyer, then realise that they're too expensive [...] Noone in webcomic world is strong enough [...] Well, perhaps one person... and then perhaps not even him.

We play around and have fun, and joke with each other. But what happens the time when we come up against someone who actually is a lawyer, and humourless, and not interested in the getting-money part so much as the "I'd as soon you don't do this" part; or maybe has bigger guns behind him than we realised through some other professional connection (oh, I dunno, is in publishing or journalism or politics or whoknowswhat)? What does the little webcomicker who thought he was just being ha-ha-funny do in that case? Or do we think of it as a matter of being sure to pick small targets who won't have the means (as far as we can tell) to complicate your life, and stay away from big guys (Marvel, DC, whoever) who might be armed?

[Dracomax]

well, if it has a case for parody, and if you own the site, you can try to fight it out--but that gets expensive. Penny arcade found that out the hard way.

best answer is usually to just take it down if they send you a letter or communication asking you to do so.

although, copyright is hazy because they are not required to defend their copyright in order to keep it, unlike a trademark. so, you could make a parody for years, and be required to take it down because the copyright holder decides 10 years down the road they don't like it.

honestly, it's just easier to be original.

[Dominic Durgan]

If Mookie actually gets serious about legal shenanigans (which is unlikely, as that involves effort) then I'll just replace it with something even more insulting.

That's the way the cookie crumbles, really.

[Dave Against The Machine]

Point me to the section that says bad writeing means I need to deface someone's comic.

Paragraph 19, Section 2, Clause ii:
Bad art may be used as legitimate grounds for the act of visual mocking (ie, photoshop/paint). Sufficiently clichéd bad art requires mocking.
Paragraph 19, Section 2, Clause iii:
In addition, bad writing is also legitimate grounds for visual mocking. Sufficiently clichéd bad writing similarly requires mocking.

Ah, learn something new everyday.

[McDuffies]

You'd more likely try to hire a lawyer, then realise that they're too expensive [...] Noone in webcomic world is strong enough [...] Well, perhaps one person... and then perhaps not even him.

We play around and have fun, and joke with each other. But what happens the time when we come up against someone who actually is a lawyer, and humourless, and not interested in the getting-money part so much as the "I'd as soon you don't do this" part; or maybe has bigger guns behind him than we realised through some other professional connection (oh, I dunno, is in publishing or journalism or politics or whoknowswhat)? What does the little webcomicker who thought he was just being ha-ha-funny do in that case? Or do we think of it as a matter of being sure to pick small targets who won't have the means (as far as we can tell) to complicate your life, and stay away from big guys (Marvel, DC, whoever) who might be armed?

In 90% of cases you simply go under the radar. Why would Disney bother about me defacing their characters? Or should Nintendo bother to sue every single sprite comic holder out there. Or manga publishers all bloggers who have fun translating or re-capping their comics... General wisdom says that in majority of cases, your C&D letter was sent by some clerk whose job is to browse around and send C&D letters without real weight, general idea is to scare owners of objectionable sites into taking them down.
I'm not sure about PA vs. Hello Kitty case, though. I dunno if any actual legal action was taken by Hello Kitty side, of PA just preemptively took the comic down to avoid the risk. But it's a bit specific situation, being that PA is so popular that it can't go under the radar and being that Hallo Kitty is more an icon - meaning, there isn't any character behind the image, so they have more reasons to protect the image than comic owners.
Should you be so unlucky to run into (and ignore) one of a few persons out there who are ready to sue you and spend money just for the heck of bringing things to justice, well, I can only say that you're one extremely unlucky guy.
I wouldn't compare that with outright piracy, but in a way, the principle is similar: internet is open ground for such things, impossible to stop, and all respective owners can hope to do is pick up a few of offenders in hope of scaring away a few more. Good or bad, that's all.

[Kisai]

Or should Nintendo bother to sue every single sprite comic holder out there.

Actually Penny Arcade has had at least two comics pulled. One for Strawberry shortcake IIRC.

Nintendo is very militant about their IP. Try eBaying any pokemon material and watch how quickly your account gets suspended.

The Dominic Deegan vs Dominic Durgan issue, is really no issue. Both started on Comicgenesis (then keenspace), and from a legal standpoint mookie would have to remove his own comic http://dominicdeegan.comicgenesis.com/d/20020521.html start
http://dominicdeegan.comicgenesis.com/d/20031011.html end
first before any action could be taken on comicgenesis. But since he's on keenspot, that wouldn't go over well. The worst thing that can happen is he can complain to me, kelly, gav, teri or chris and I'll take durgan down, but that has not happened.

And the statement made earlier that 'the owner has to make the C&D order' isn't quite true, anyone who has the legal power to make decisions on the behalf of the IP holder can.

I'm actually quite amazed that 8bit theatre still exists.

[Spqrblues]

In 90% of cases you simply go under the radar. Why would Disney bother about me defacing their characters?

Now, Disney is the definition of humourless. It's all hugs and gold-plated toilet seats at the Disney corporate offices until someone touches a property, then the air itself burns.

Also... I'd think you wouldn't want your webcomic under the radar where readers can't, you know, find you. I kinda like getting new readers.

But it's a bit specific situation, being that PA is so popular that it can't go under the radar and being that Hallo Kitty is more an icon - meaning, there isn't any character behind the image, so they have more reasons to protect the image than comic owners.
Should you be so unlucky to run into (and ignore) one of a few persons out there who are ready to sue you and spend money just for the heck of bringing things to justice, well, I can only say that you're one extremely unlucky guy.

When it's one ordinary Joe going after another ordinary Joe's stuff, "you can't catch me" comes across as the argument of a cad (yes, by gum, I said cad, sir). I'm all for it when the poachers have made a creative work/commentary, as opposed to, say, someone taking all the pages from Tales of Pylea and having the characters shout "death to f**king queers" in every panel. But if they redrew Tales of Pylea as a Tijuana Bible, I'd very likely be supportive of it. Interpret that as you will.

I've never understood the "people won't do anything to you, it'll cost them money" argument--we don't know one another, and we don't know who's standing behind 90% of the webcomics out there. I guess we could just be sure to stick to messing with stuff where the artists say things like "I'm still in school" or "I had nothing to eat today but stale bread and water," but what if they have a big angry daddy? We. Just. Don't. Know. And having no money yourself doesn't necessarily save you, if you ever intend to get a job.

Why isn't it comparable to outright piracy, again? And why don't you want, someday, for your work to become iconic? Just asking, exploring this topic, which apparently I find fascinating....

Both started on Comicgenesis (then keenspace), and from a legal standpoint mookie would have to remove his own [...] first before any action could be taken on comicgenesis.

Okay, I clearly didn't get enough sleep--why would this Mookie guy have to remove his own comic? Is it derivative too?

I'd bring up a discussion of what parameters of "respect" webcomickers ought to give each other's stuff because of the lowly level we all operate at, but I suspect that'd get me laughed at. I have a sensitive butterfly of a soul.

[Glarryg]

I'm actually quite amazed that 8bit theatre still exists.

I'm also amazed about that, because the guy ran out of material five years ago.

Glarryg

[Mercury Hat]

But since he's on keenspot,

He left Keenspot sometime last year, actually. He still had his forum there, but his actual comic's on a different server now.

[McDuffies]

Now, Disney is the definition of humourless. It's all hugs and gold-plated toilet seats at the Disney corporate offices until someone touches a property, then the air itself burns.

Also... I'd think you wouldn't want your webcomic under the radar where readers can't, you know, find you. I kinda like getting new readers.

Well, I didn't want, but then I'm a special case... It'd not a good example, we're talking about copyright, and my case was a mere trademark use. I took the "nice" route, I'd have it taken down if there were any complaints, but not so much because of me as it's because I wouldn't want ComicGenesis to have any problems.

But then again, from what I've seen, most of cases of reusing other people's artwork, recapping, etc... were done very unambiciously. I mean, it's us who draw original stuff that are ambitious about it, those who just recap other's stuff usually do it just for a laugh. Like when you're writing a fake subtitles file for a foreign film.
Well there are exceptions for sure, like comic ripers, sites and programs that take large quantities of webcomics and stack them in one place uncredited... But that's more a case of piracy, and that's where the difference between the two is, I guess.

When it's one ordinary Joe going after another ordinary Joe's stuff, "you can't catch me" comes across as the argument of a cad (yes, by gum, I said cad, sir). I'm all for it when the poachers have made a creative work/commentary, as opposed to, say, someone taking all the pages from Tales of Pylea and having the characters shout "death to f**king queers" in every panel. But if they redrew Tales of Pylea as a Tijuana Bible, I'd very likely be supportive of it. Interpret that as you will.

Well, you might as well interpret it as it's ok if it improves the original work... which is, I think, the case with Dominic.

I've never understood the "people won't do anything to you, it'll cost them money" argument--we don't know one another, and we don't know who's standing behind 90% of the webcomics out there. I guess we could just be sure to stick to messing with stuff where the artists say things like "I'm still in school" or "I had nothing to eat today but stale bread and water," but what if they have a big angry daddy? We. Just. Don't. Know. And having no money yourself doesn't necessarily save you, if you ever intend to get a job.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that I advocate defacing of other people's comics, I'm just replying to the comment that they'd sue their asses off if someone tried that with their comic - with a few facts of life, which are that in most of cases they'd have to let it go for simple practical reasons.

Maybe when I put it like that it sounds like I'm incouraging people to do such stuff, but average webcomicker shouldn't flinch and hurriedly remove his comics when he gets a C&D letter. IvStudios once infamously got a letter from a person who supposedly had a fanzine with the same name as his comic. This person falsely represented himself as a lawyer which we found out after checking the registry. Many other artists regularly get C&D letters for what can by all rights be considered a parody. I'm simply incouraging people not to get easily intimidated, that's all.

There's the other side, when you're a celebrity, you became a target of sorts. I guess it's something that goes with a gig. DD has this celebrity status within webcomics, which is, I assume, why Durgan works - because those images are reckognizable to many people who've encountered DD before. There's much less drive for doing the same with my comic, which noone's heard about. Simply, though I'd think that it'd de rotten to take, for instance, Breakdown and re-title it, with comic such as DD it's different. I don't see DD's author as fellow webcomicker, really, we're not in the same boat. I mean, taking on it in such way isn't very nice, but I think that sometimes, given enough charm to pull it off, it's perfectly fine to be mean.

Why isn't it comparable to outright piracy, again?

I'm guessing intention. If you exclude cases when someone takes entire comic of yours and presents it as his (which is comparable to piracy, I guess) the person who's defacing your comic usually puts emphasis on his addition, not your part. Center of attention is on their changed writing, photoshoping or whatever they do, and material they took from you is usually either to make up for what they lack (in drawing skills for instance), or is used for reckognizability factor (in parodies), In any case, taken element is more a support to their addition which is central.
Usually, if someone rips on your art to presents himself falsely as a good artist, they take the comic in it's entirety.
(Not trying to justify it, I just think that there is a difference. Whether it makes it more right or not, you decide).

And why don't you want, someday, for your work to become iconic? Just asking, exploring this topic, which apparently I find fascinating....

Well, when I said iconic, I did mean as in all imagery, lacking content. I wouldn't mind if my characters were selling t-shirts and all, but there'd be the content of my comic that actually attracts people to those characters. On the other hand, if I was to think of a cool character design just for the sake of printing him on t-shirts... well, let's say that that's not what I want to do with my creativity.

[Dominic Durgan]

But since he's on keenspot,

He left Keenspot sometime last year, actually. He still had his forum there, but his actual comic's on a different server now.

Not exactly.

Mookie's fairly lazy when it comes to cleaning up his own messes.

[LibertyCabbage]

It should just be that whichever is funnier is the original.

[Col]

It should just be that whichever is funnier is the original.

In that case, I find Dominic Deegan offensive to Dominic Durgan!

[LibertyCabbage]

Deegan should publicly apologize to Durgan for stealing his work, and, as a punishment, be forced to engage in grotesque sexual activities with overweight sea mammals.

[Komiyan]

Deegan should publicly apologize to Durgan for stealing his work, and, as a punishment, be forced to engage in grotesque sexual activities with overweight sea mammals.

"Forced"?

[Dominic Durgan]

Deegan should publicly apologize to Durgan for stealing his work, and, as a punishment, be forced to engage in grotesque sexual activities with overweight sea mammals.

"Forced"?

You're just jealous he gets more bishie glomps than you

[LibertyCabbage]

Deegan should publicly apologize to Durgan for stealing his work, and, as a punishment, be forced to engage in grotesque sexual activities with overweight sea mammals.

"Forced"?

You're right. For his case, I think we'd need a harsher punishment. Hmm...

Well, for starters, we could make him read his own comic

[Sortelli]

Deegan should publicly apologize to Durgan for stealing his work, and, as a punishment, be forced to engage in grotesque sexual activities with overweight sea mammals.

"Forced"?

Only if it's to save his life, of course.