Should the prohibited content rules for Scribblehub be ammended to include Illegal Monetization?

[DireBadger]

Copyright law has been warped out of logic and common sense into an edifice that only serves to protect corporate interests. Expect it to change soon. As a content creator, I find the current form of copyright to be an offensive mess that harms writers of all kinds and leads to nothing but trash like Amazon rings of power and the new James Bond monstrosities.

Seriously, it needs to be restructured like patent law. If you can't make money off of something in twenty years, you have no call to punish creative writers who can put your ideas to better use. Your brain ain't that special.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Copyright law has been warped out of logic and common sense into an edifice that only serves to protect corporate interests. Expect it to change soon. As a content creator, I find the current form of copyright to be an offensive mess that harms writers of all kinds and leads to nothing but trash like Amazon rings of power and the new James Bond monstrosities.

Seriously, it needs to be restructured like patent law. If you can't make money off of something in twenty years, you have no call to punish creative writers who can put your ideas to better use. Your brain ain't that special.

 

[DireBadger]

11 days ain't a necrothread.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

11 days ain't a necrothread.

You are right, but you have to understand, the desire to shitpost is stronger than logical reasoning.

 

[DireBadger]

Heh, well, this subject is something I have had to wrestle with for decades as an artist, writer, and game developer after I left the service.

I came to a conclusion a LONG time ago that it took studios almost twenty years to realize. Piracy doesn't cost sales. People who 'steal' copies of your 'ideas', would not have paid for it if they didn't have the chance to obtain it for free, it's entertainment, and they would have simply done without it.

It's a hard lesson to learn, and pride prevents a lot of people from ever considering it. Intellectual theft is not the same as actual theft, because you don't lose anything... any more than someone quoting a joke you invented costs you anything. You aren't even losing out on potential profits, because they would never have paid you for it.

If anything, it actually drives your sales a lot higher, because the exposure and advertising drive your product towards a LOT more consumers. Quake, the most pirated game on the planet, earned its creator John Romero insane amounts of money for an otherwise fairly niche and mediocre product and nearly kick-started the entire 'full 3d FPS' genre.
In the end, most copyright enforcement, once it exceeds the boundaries of punishing literal plagiarism, has become nothing more than a way for powerful companies with unethical legal teams to drub independent creators. 99% of most DMCA takedown notices are actually illegal, but the threat of someone like Disney or Sony suing you, even if you win, would destroy your life.

Patreon sponsorship for fair use products such as fanfiction is neither illegal nor immoral, and if there were any karma in this world, the people trying to pretend that it is would be exposed as the greedy, grasping ghouls that they are.

You are right, but you have to understand, the desire to shitpost is stronger than logical reasoning.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Heh, well, this subject is something I have had to wrestle with for decades as an artist, writer, and game developer after I left the service.

I came to a conclusion a LONG time ago that it took studios almost twenty years to realize. Piracy doesn't cost sales. People who 'steal' copies of your work, would not have paid for it if they didn't have the chance to obtain it for free, it's entertainment, and they would have simply done without it.

It's a hard lesson to learn, and pride prevents a lot of people from ever considering it. Intellectual theft is not the same as actual theft, because you don't lose anything... any more than someone quoting a joke you invented costs you anything. You aren't even losing out on potential profits, because they would never have paid you for it.

If anything, it actually drives your sales a lot higher, because the exposure and advertising drive your product towards a LOT more consumers. Quake, the most pirated game on the planet, earned its creator John Romero insane amounts of money for an otherwise fairly niche and mediocre product and nearly kick-started the entire 'full 3d FPS' genre.
In the end, most copyright enforcement, once it exceeds the boundaries of punishing literal plagiarism, has become nothing more than a way for powerful companies with unethical legal teams to drub independent creators. 99% of most DMCA takedown notices are actually illegal, but the threat of someone like Disney or Sony suing you, even if you win, would destroy your life.

Patreon sponsorship for fair use products such as fanfiction is neither illegal nor immoral, and if there were any karma in this world, the people trying to pretend that it is would be exposed as the greedy, grasping ghouls that they are.

Whoops. Thought it was directed to me. Nevermind.

 

[DireBadger]

My guy, I don't care that they steal from corpos. I care that they steal from new authors of original works. There is a guy writing an original work, and a guy writing a Naruto fanfic. They are not on the same terms. A person who writes a fanfic has a headstart. I am even ok with people stealing views. Fine, steal views from me, author of original work that tries to make a name for myself and make it a job. I'm OK. But they also steal money.

And there is simply nothing you can say or show that is going to prove they aren't stealing money from authors of original works. No way. It doesn't matter how much they steal either. I don't care if it's one dollar or it is one billion dollars. They steal from me, they steal from my author friends, they steal from authors I like, they steal from any author who writes and monetizes an original work.

Yeah, except it ain't stealing. Loaded language doesn't change the reality that they are not depriving you of any actual property. Accusing someone of a crime in print is libel.

You are not 'entitled' to the income that fanfic writers draw. And claiming that they are 'stealing' is nothing more than attempting to build a moral high ground to justify greed. That money is not YOURS, it is not MINE, it belongs to the customer or the patron, and they get to decide where they spend it... it doesn't matter how hard you worked if they enjoy that fanfic more, they have every right to spend their money on what YOU consider a 'lesser product'.

I don't have to prove it. It's absolutely obvious. And the idea of 'stealing views' is a total wash. If I spend two years building a solid gold chair, and the guy next door just strips the plastic off a folding chair and replaces it with a badly sewn cloth cover, and his chair sells while mine doesn't, that doesn't mean he's stolen my customer, it means I need to do something different.

Fair Use laws are defined for a good reason, and restricting them even more just has a chilling effect on creativity. That's why they exist. And Patreon doesn't sell ANY products, it simply gives you a way to support a writer. It doesn't violate any laws, or any ethics.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Yeah, except it ain't stealing. Loaded language doesn't change the reality that they are not depriving you of any actual property. Accusing someone of a crime in print is libel.

You are not 'entitled' to the income that fanfic writers draw. And claiming that they are 'stealing' is nothing more than attempting to build a moral high ground to justify greed. That money is not YOURS, it is not MINE, it belongs to the customer or the patron, and they get to decide where they spend it... it doesn't matter how hard you worked if they enjoy that fanfic more, they have every right to spend their money on what YOU consider a 'lesser product'.

I don't have to prove it. It's absolutely obvious. And the idea of 'stealing views' is a total wash. If I spend two years building a solid gold chair, and the guy next door just strips the plastic off a folding chair and replaces it with a badly sewn cloth cover, and his chair sells while mine doesn't, that doesn't mean he's stolen my customer, it means I need to do something different.

I thought you wrote it to me, turns out I jumped the gun. I withdraw from this conversation, sorry, and let's shitpost together next time.

 

[DireBadger]

I thought you wrote it to me, turns out I jumped the gun. I withdraw from this conversation, sorry, and let's shitpost together next time.

Ahh, I guess I poorly chose my return shitpost. I still love The Princess Bride, though.


And mostly I was just irritated at the utter ignorance of the moral, ethical, and legal underpinnings of fair use laws displayed by a couple of prior posters in this thread.

If I see someone cutting their lawn to look like Mickey Mouse's head, and I decide to leave a fifty in their mailbox to pay for more gas, I am not breaking any laws, and neither are they. Patreon is supporting an AUTHOR, not their work, and there is nothing illegal about giving people money.

Even if the reasons are because you like their fair-use materials. They don't have the right to sell prints of that work, but they have EVERY right to charge people to go in their backyard to look at more of their work, as long as they don't sell the actual work or claim that they own the trademarks.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Ahh, I guess I poorly chose my return shitpost. I still love the princess bride, though.

 

[RepresentingDesire]

I came to a conclusion a LONG time ago that it took studios almost twenty years to realize. Piracy doesn't cost sales. People who 'steal' copies of your 'ideas', would not have paid for it if they didn't have the chance to obtain it for free, it's entertainment, and they would have simply done without it.

As a game pirate I can only agree with the said, I would have bought the things I pirated if I could like mh4u that I had to pirate because capcom doesn't sell it in playable form, mh as whole is a good example of piracy out of inaccessibility.

 

[DireBadger]

As a game pirate I can only agree with the said, I would have bought the things I pirated if I could like mh4u that I had to pirate because capcom doesn't sell it in playable form, mh as whole is a good example of piracy out of inaccessibility.

True dat, I used to be a big part of pirate sites when I was young and broke. You know what? I found out that my friends and I would almost universally buy the real thing when we had enough money.

IF IT DIDN'T SUCK!

The problem with books is, you buy something, and find out it absolutely sucks. That's what happened with GRRM and MK Jemisin's books for me... I mean, they won awards, they should be good, right?
Nope. giant waste of money. The writing, the story, it was all a total wash. That's when I stopped trusting TOR books entirely. I haven't read or paid for anything that wasn't an Indy pub, small release, Kindle Unlimited, or Steam returnable if it sucked.

I'd rather support a guy who is pounding out Naruto fanfic than some New York Times bestselling writer whose only claim to fame is exploiting whatever people have screamed about on two minutes of hate this week.

You know writers suck if you would rather read Dante King and just skip the sex scenes.

 

[Empress_Omnii]

If I spend two years building a solid gold chair, and the guy next door just strips the plastic off a folding chair and replaces it with a badly sewn cloth cover, and his chair sells while mine doesn't, that doesn't mean he's stolen my customer, it means I need to do something different.

I don't want to get into an argument. But I am going to disagree with this comparison.
Making a fanfic isn't creating a chair, but to stay in line with your analogy.

It is more like... creating a custom designed, patented chair. Then having someone else make additions and other parts for specifically for the chair. But then these parts get really popular because people can use them to make something reminiscent of the original chair, then use this fact to profit.

Neither analogy fits well... but I think you ignore the fact that it isn't about 'this is a lesser product', instead it's about using the original work as a basis for your own benefit. You didn't create the original work, therefore you aren't allowed to use its popularity for money. Not I made this cool thing, therefore I won't let you make something like it.
Just because a fanfic is better written than the original, doesn't mean they should be allowed to make money from it. Again, the fanfic didn't create the basis for their work, and in most relevant cases, they also didn't make the original popular. So, therefore, the original writer stops them from profiting off of their own creation. (Regardless of how this power is often abused or the ethics behind how much effort is actually put into the original creator vs the fanfic.)

 

[RepresentingDesire]

I don't have to prove it. It's absolutely obvious. And the idea of 'stealing views' is a total wash. If I spend two years building a solid gold chair, and the guy next door just strips the plastic off a folding chair and replaces it with a badly sewn cloth cover, and his chair sells while mine doesn't, that doesn't mean he's stolen my customer, it means I need to do something different.

When it comes to that copyright can be complicated because if a product is transformative enough copyright law doesn't apply, how transformative something has to be is probably defined by laws and precedents of a given region.

Just because a fanfic is better written than the original, doesn't mean they should be allowed to make money from it.

That's against the capatalistic spirit, a more refined version wins always over the original.

 

[owotrucked]

guys just post that and don't elaborate:

 

[beast_regards]

Seriously, it needs to be restructured like patent law.

Patent law is not a good example either.

You could see its use in practice in the Nintendo vs. Pocketpair lawsuit, which not only relies on the filling done after the products in question has been released, it abuses the ridiculously vague wording as "aim object at character at the field" as an unique Nintendo's patent.

Outside the entertainment industry, it probably blocked many research directions out of fear that it might hit some equally vague wording in some very vague technical document.

 

[DireBadger]

Patent law is not a good example either.

You could see its use in practice in the Nintendo vs. Pocketpair lawsuit, which not only relies on the filling done after the products in question has been released, it abuses the ridiculously vague wording as "aim object at character at the field" as an unique Nintendo's patent.

Outside the entertainment industry, it probably blocked many research directions out of fear that it might hit some equally vague wording in some very vague technical document.

Oh, no kidding, but patent law's problems are mostly in it's vague wording and enforcement.

I mean, come on, some dipshit patented 'quantum entanglement communication'. No method, no examples, no production methodology, no prototype, and yet the patent application was APPROVED. Just like the mouse patent was 'approved' way back when it was just 'using a wire guided object on a desk to move a pointer on a screen'.

Yeah, Patent law is retarded without mandatory prototyping. But outside of that ridiculousness, the concept isn't too bad.
Too bad it's based on 1600's guild industrial protections.


Do you want to protect copyrights, trademarks, and patents? re-institute legal dueling laws.

 

[beast_regards]

Oh, no kidding, but patent law's problems are mostly in it's vague wording and enforcement.

I mean, come on, some dipshit patented 'quantum entanglement communication'. No method, no examples, no production methodology, no prototype, and yet the patent application was APPROVED. Just like the mouse patent was 'approved' way back when it was just 'using a wire guided object on a desk to move a pointer on a screen'.

Yeah, Patent law is retarded without mandatory prototyping. But outside of that ridiculousness, the concept isn't too bad.
Too bad it's based on 1600's guild industrial protections.

The idea behind this thread is equally ridiculous, though, motivated by the same principle as patenting quantum entanglement communications without proving it is even technically possible.

 

[Tyranomaster]

I'm all for putting a lower limit on copyright, such that it expires regardless of upkeep. I'm a big fan of video game mods. Some companies encourage it, others send cease and desist letters. We can talk hypotheticals, and we can talk how we wish it worked, but we don't live in the hypothetical world, we live in a world where there are legal ramifications that already exist, even if we find them to be unjust. There are many countries with varying degrees of more or less control on intellectual property than the US. We've mentioned Japan multiple times. Somalia (with almost no functional government) doesn't even recognize property rights really (because they are only enforced at gunpoint by yourself or your community).

We can argue endlessly about whether intellectual property can even be a thing. Is all work derivative? Before countries and complicated laws, you and your buddies would just go and beat, possibly murder, the person who's encroaching on your territory, as happens in lawless areas of the world today. Most laws merely exist to prevent violent outcomes of disputes. Back in the good old days, companies had private spies and espionage/counterespionage programs to keep their trade secrets. My actual main concern is that we have laws currently, and people are taken to court for it. Not whether those are good or bad. Just that it is the case.

All the advocation I've seen here has ammounted to "Well, I don't think the laws should be that way, so everyone should break them." Go advocate. If you're in the US, go to your local political office for your party of preference, and start trying to make this a thing. Bring it to the public forefront. People got an amendment added to the constitution to ban alcohol in one of the most alcoholic nations in the world at the time. Lets not pretend that the change would somehow be insurmountable or impossible. If you aren't in the US and your country doesn't care about copyright, host a website. Do the thing.

Until that time, however, I advocate for not puting the entire community at risk because we choose to do one of the few things that even websites like webnovel, AO3, and Fanfic.com don't allow, which is the explicit linking to funding locations on fanfiction pages themselves, which pretty much everyone everywhere else except exactly on this forum agree is where the line is crossed. Right or wrong, the law exists as it exists currently, and people can be 'unjustly' punished under it. Creators with zero revenue coming from content have still had entire websites taken down thanks to Nintendo litigation. We can hem and haw about how unfair it is. Or how 'um actually' the creators should have just stood up because it was an unfair dmca. The reality of the situation doesn't change because anyone believes it should be different.

 

[DireBadger]

Nope, the advocation is "The laws are NOT that way". But nice job trying to restate the disagreement.

You are claiming that Patreon allows illegal copyright violations. I am not going to call you a flat-out liar, but this data is false.
Because it does not. It is not illegal to support someone on Patreon for any reason you want. If you like the way they have videos of their worm farm and kids wearing daffy duck costumes you can pay them a million a month.
Fair use laws support unmarketed fanfiction. As long as they are not marketing fanfiction, they can request any donations they like. Patreon even explicitly points out that their new vending model does NOT support fair use, and is not permitted for use to market fanfiction or other fair use media. If someone violates that, Patreon can and will close their site (and has)
No law has been broken, and your entire argument revolves around stating that what they are doing is 'illegal'. So far that has not been proved in court. In fact, Patreon's content moderation violating the First Amendment HAS been taken to court repeatedly, as has their use of VTMA to divert private information. NO ONE has even attempted to sue them for content violation outside of age laws.

In short, you are trying to push an agenda based on falsified and cherry-picked data. Scribblehub is at NO risk whatsoever of being threatened, and claiming that this is 'putting the entire community at risk' and running around screaming and shaking your hands with absolutely no evidence that the sky is falling is not doing anyone a favor. Several OTHER writing websites, including Royal Road, do so and have never been remotely threatened.

There are already DMCA notices in existence. I cannot help but wonder why you feel the need to attempt to 'punish' fanfiction writers. Does it have anything to do with the fact that Adamo pulls over 1200 dollars a month from his patrons?

To be honest, the entire vote and thread is based upon the same unverified premise, that supporting fanfiction authors who do NOT sell their copyrighted artwork is illegal. I recommend the thread be closed.