Let's enjoy the final days! Check out what changes and events started this March here: http://maplestory2.nexon.net/en/news/article/56485/sunset-in-maple-world
MapleStory 2's servers will be officially closing on May 27th: http://maplestory2.nexon.net/en/news/article/56486/service-discontinuation

Someone made over 200k merits ripping off my work

Comments

  • DochiDochi
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,795
    Posts: 61
    Member
    Kats wrote: »
    Ardawn wrote: »
    Don't expect this to be taken well on the forums from mods. Name dropping is heavily frowned upon. I sympathize with you, but there's a better way to bring this to the mods attention.

    I personally find this stupid. When it comes to someone stealing their work, names should, in my honest opinion, be made public, it should be known, it shouldn't be silenced.
    Besides, the person in question, like I stated above, most likely made a thread themselves.
    I'm not 100% sure its the person in question but, a bit too much of a coincidence as I do not think all that many people have got over 200k from sales. :p

    http://forums.maplestory2.nexon.net/discussion/40795/i-cant-find-the-top-designer-trophy/p1
    The thread I'm referring to.

    This, While I understand why they do it I don't agree with name dropping not being okay. Though the best way to get a hold of them is via a support ticket or possibly even messaging Cuddles personally on here or discord.

    support ticket location if needed

    I agree but I am trying those methods as well, but its more bigger problem than me alone. I can assure you, most of top sellers right now are ones who actually ripped off from other servers and funny thing is, I know people who created those arts back in Korean server and they make up more than 30% of the 'top sales' and like 40% that I've definitely seen from somewhere else. When I directly msg the makers they are definitely not ones who made them since I personally know them or at least know them in forums. So yeah, big problem. I think this is an issue that has to do with more than just reports, but cross check across servers at least. I am going to bring this to attention of Korean/Chinese Artists on their forum as well to raise the issue so they do not get their arts stolen. Artists on other servers should not be responsible for protecting their rights in servers abroad, and nexon has to take actions to prevent it. This is at least my stance on the problem.
    p.s. I do value other people's opinion but as people said above I will not take any troll comments anymore and will face any copyright issues not related to this post in game. Feel free to report my work if you deem inappropriate.
  • GinsamaGinsama
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,940
    Posts: 73
    Member
    edited 1:10PM October 22, 2018
    shadowgun wrote: »
    Dochi wrote: »
    shadowgun wrote: »
    63a7068681229029af297101e893cacf.jpg

    Fan Art - by Takumi Oniki used this photo because i cant get an original to work but its the same outfit

    Lol you just proved yourself maybe you should learn how this works better before saying 'you're a thief too'.

    Takumi Oniki is a thief too? You clearly do not understand what it means for content creators on what it means to get your work stolen.

    your joking right its fan art he isnt making anything from it. And i only said his name since i didnt draw it. Your complaining about a design that would be used to make money for nexon which is clearly stolen from another video game. So no what you did is not ok and is against the ToS. What annoys me more is you keep calling it your work. Its not you work its an artists from PlatinumGames work.

    False. MAking 2b's outfit is OK by standards of the UGC policy if you don't strictly name it "2B's dress". You have to be vague . 2b in this case is /invoking the identity of 2b/ (which is why movies and the like use names like Sprunk, Mountain Duel, Mockstar, etc etc. )

    This is because the texture itself is a derivative work /belonging to the uploader in question/ and /the nature of that work is such that even the original copyright holder would not have a case/ .

    Lets make it clear

    Ripping the textures from the game and applying them to a ugc template: No go

    Spending the time to personally paint the outfit onto a template while looking at a reference sheet: Good to go.

    I find it cute you are putting this man on trial with such a blatant misunderstanding of copyright law and the ugc policy itself. Have you seen the Guidelines right here on the forum?

    http://forums.maplestory2.nexon.net/discussion/35084

    Literally a UA uniform passing the grade from an official channel. I'm iffy of the use of the UA letters however.


    Oh, and while I was typing this I had a huge fight with someone else about other , so now I'm all pumped to really rail your understanding of fair use and copyright law especially when I see this little nugget:
    shadowgun wrote: »
    This isnt a gray area this is a game hosted by Nexon who is responsible for all content within the game. Just because a player drew it doesnt make it ok since its still being sold by Nexon. If this wasnt true then why doesnt every game sell a Master Chief outfit or Final Fantasy assets. Because they are not allowed to without permission from the creator. You dont seem to understand this is not like cosplay or fan art because a company is making profit off these designs. And yea it sucks that some are having their designs stolen but you are far from them since you stole your design from Platinum Games.

    "i just gave a direct proof that it is my work. I post up every time i make a new UGC on the blog and you can see i wrote a complaint atricle on it too, are you serious?"

    quote from you this not your work since again you stole the design.

    Ok. Lets say you take a picture of Times Square. Do you have to pay each and every copyright holder in that photo if you decide to put that up on the internet?
    Bear with me sweetheart because this is merely a premise to get into the real point, and if you get hung up on this example, you'll get left behind really quickly.

    The reason you do not have to pay these people is because the intellectual property in the work in question /is/ the photo, taken at that time, at that place, at that angle. The photo itself is the intellectual property of the person who produced it.

    The reason why fan artists don't have to pay copyright holders for their work?

    ON a basic level, most artists take a blank image and create their work from it. Some may trace elements or use the eyedropper tool to properly match colors or structures. Some people may take blatant queues from other artists in their style. / The work involved is the intellectual property/. Ok sure, a tracer might be the scum of the art community, but at the same time, if someone is doing more than just tracing, like say, making a stencil out of a copyrighted image that they then spray on a canvas, that is sufficient removal from the source material to divorce the original copyright.

    THE CAVEAT- AKA. WHY NEXON IS SO SMART(DUMB?)

    Even if you divorce yourself from the original copyright through derivative work, you still can't, say, claim a copyrighted character was your design. The character still exists in your work. It is like how in the Times Square example you don't actually own the logos and advertisements depicted in the photo, you own the photo itself. In most cases, companies are allowed to force you to give attribution to their trademarks and copyright, but not /claim the photo and revenue thereof/. The intellectual property is the un-reproduceable moment in time on the photo

    What nexon does to protect themself is allow you to make derivative works akin to calling a candy bar Kickers or allow you to call your Ugg boots Tugg boots. BY not allowing you to make the solid connection to the inspiring subject, they can in turn protect /you/ from being unfairly attacked or lawsuited from companies wanting to go after you for your intellectual property, which is the texture /you/ created.

    In fact, it had been bugging me that they don't allow free stock photos on the internet to be used in UGC until it hit me just now... By only allowing your own texture work, they protect you(them?) from accidentally tripping on a copyright landmine if owners change hands in the future or demand money like what happened with the Linux Foundation recently with coders threatening to pull code before .

    Sailor moon tiara? She don't own the crescent moon. Just call it the Goddess's Gildpiece and you're fine

    You really want Deku cosplay shoes? Red shoes with white soles aren't owned by anyone. Call em Heroic Red Sneakers

    The douchebag who makes Sora's shoes and calls them Kingdom Hearts Shoes? A lovely person I'm sure, probably spent a lot of time on them, but at the end of the day guilty of a crime of /using a copyrighted name/.

    So why do lawsuits and courts exist then? AKA Examining a real case against Nexon and Ugc

    BEcause it can be argued that any one of the things I have mentioned in this post are actually stealing something from someone else. Yes. That is completely true. That is why a copyright case has 4 factors to consider during the legal process:

    the purpose and character of your use- A case would need to prove sufficient lack of transformative expression
    the nature of the copyrighted work- A Judge would consider the source of the copyright in question in order to determine it's similarities and reasonable expectations toward someone using that work in their own products.
    the amount and substantiality of the portion taken - The judge would consider which portion of the work is original and which part is derivative.(Tracing vs handdrawn, and how much of each applies to the original work.)
    the effect of the use upon the potential market.- THe plaintiff would need to prove they have a market they could have tapped from lost revenue against the amount of transformative expression employed in the copyrighted work.

    So ok. DID IRON KOREAN DOCHI STEAL THE DESIGN OF 2B?
    It is my conclusion that the court would consider this /inspiration/ for the creation of a derivative work as long as it is reasonably proven that the textures in question do not match or correspond with the ones in-game in such a way that it can be assumed that it was the work of human hands.

    Using ripped textures : X
    Using your own hand-drawn textures: O

    So already a point for ARTIST AFFLUENT Dochi.

    The Nature of the work? 2b's clothes are certainly distinct and call forth the image of 2b. But can it be expected that no one can wear her clothes or anything similar in the real world? Do people want these clothes but the business doesn't sell it? What is the "heart" of what the resulting work was trying to derive from and could have/ should have it be expected of the deriver to have changed it sufficiently?

    The setting for the resulting debate; how big a part was 2b's design as part of the custom item? What was the work involved, and how much of it is the individual creators expression? And would this work constitute Lost Revenue because of it?

    All of this in consideration to one big important factor I've yet to bring up: Does a copyright holder want to go after /Nexon America/ for hosting "copyrighted" work? For a "Maybe"? Do they want to invest the time and money into pursuing actions against one of the bigger mmo publishers worldwide? For that Matter, does Nexon America want to avoid that lawsuit or can they bully the other party into submission?

    MY official stance is that Nexon won't take any action on part of a copyright holder unless blatant or acted upon by said party. This is because legal fees are a significant portion of the case. The path of least resistance is to ignore the issue until someone complains and then remove the work as instructed... but that is also why the GM's exist in part , to judge the design shop items and act accordingly to takedown requests.

    I am going to pass out now because that was the worst morning I've had in a while holy crap.
    SyrusMarufujiSecrotsDochiJozarMidnightNyaIritokiShadowsBeneaAieEleryaDragonicWolfand 3 others.
  • shadowgunshadowgun
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,085
    Posts: 36
    Member
    Ginsama wrote: »
    shadowgun wrote: »
    Dochi wrote: »
    shadowgun wrote: »
    63a7068681229029af297101e893cacf.jpg

    Fan Art - by Takumi Oniki used this photo because i cant get an original to work but its the same outfit

    Lol you just proved yourself maybe you should learn how this works better before saying 'you're a thief too'.

    Takumi Oniki is a thief too? You clearly do not understand what it means for content creators on what it means to get your work stolen.

    your joking right its fan art he isnt making anything from it. And i only said his name since i didnt draw it. Your complaining about a design that would be used to make money for nexon which is clearly stolen from another video game. So no what you did is not ok and is against the ToS. What annoys me more is you keep calling it your work. Its not you work its an artists from PlatinumGames work.

    False. MAking 2b's outfit is OK by standards of the UGC policy if you don't strictly name it "2B's dress". You have to be vague . 2b in this case is /invoking the identity of 2b/ (which is why movies and the like use names like Sprunk, Mountain Duel, Mockstar, etc etc. )

    This is because the texture itself is a derivative work /belonging to the uploader in question/ and /the nature of that work is such that even the original copyright holder would not have a case/ .

    Lets make it clear

    Ripping the textures from the game and applying them to a ugc template: No go

    Spending the time to personally paint the outfit onto a template while looking at a reference sheet: Good to go.

    I find it cute you are putting this man on trial with such a blatant misunderstanding of copyright law and the ugc policy itself. Have you seen the Guidelines right here on the forum?

    http://forums.maplestory2.nexon.net/discussion/35084

    Literally a UA uniform passing the grade from an official channel. I'm iffy of the use of the UA letters however.


    Oh, and while I was typing this I had a huge fight with someone else about other , so now I'm all pumped to really rail your understanding of fair use and copyright law especially when I see this little nugget:
    shadowgun wrote: »
    This isnt a gray area this is a game hosted by Nexon who is responsible for all content within the game. Just because a player drew it doesnt make it ok since its still being sold by Nexon. If this wasnt true then why doesnt every game sell a Master Chief outfit or Final Fantasy assets. Because they are not allowed to without permission from the creator. You dont seem to understand this is not like cosplay or fan art because a company is making profit off these designs. And yea it sucks that some are having their designs stolen but you are far from them since you stole your design from Platinum Games.

    "i just gave a direct proof that it is my work. I post up every time i make a new UGC on the blog and you can see i wrote a complaint atricle on it too, are you serious?"

    quote from you this not your work since again you stole the design.

    Ok. Lets say you take a picture of Times Square. Do you have to pay each and every copyright holder in that photo if you decide to put that up on the internet?
    Bear with me sweetheart because this is merely a premise to get into the real point, and if you get hung up on this example, you'll get left behind really quickly.

    The reason you do not have to pay these people is because the intellectual property in the work in question /is/ the photo, taken at that time, at that place, at that angle. The photo itself is the intellectual property of the person who produced it.

    The reason why fan artists don't have to pay copyright holders for their work?

    ON a basic level, most artists take a blank image and create their work from it. Some may trace elements or use the eyedropper tool to properly match colors or structures. Some people may take blatant queues from other artists in their style. / The work involved is the intellectual property/. Ok sure, a tracer might be the scum of the art community, but at the same time, if someone is doing more than just tracing, like say, making a stencil out of a copyrighted image that they then spray on a canvas, that is sufficient removal from the source material to divorce the original copyright.

    THE CAVEAT- AKA. WHY NEXON IS SO SMART(DUMB?)

    Even if you divorce yourself from the original copyright through derivative work, you still can't, say, claim a copyrighted character was your design. The character still exists in your work. It is like how in the Times Square example you don't actually own the logos and advertisements depicted in the photo, you own the photo itself. In most cases, companies are allowed to force you to give attribution to their trademarks and copyright, but not /claim the photo and revenue thereof/. The intellectual property is the un-reproduceable moment in time on the photo

    What nexon does to protect themself is allow you to make derivative works akin to calling a candy bar Kickers or allow you to call your Ugg boots Tugg boots. BY not allowing you to make the solid connection to the inspiring subject, they can in turn protect /you/ from being unfairly attacked or lawsuited from companies wanting to go after you for your intellectual property, which is the texture /you/ created.

    In fact, it had been bugging me that they don't allow free stock photos on the internet to be used in UGC until it hit me just now... By only allowing your own texture work, they protect you(them?) from accidentally tripping on a copyright landmine if owners change hands in the future or demand money like what happened with the Linux Foundation recently with coders threatening to pull code before .

    Sailor moon tiara? She don't own the crescent moon. Just call it the Goddess's Gildpiece and you're fine

    You really want Deku cosplay shoes? Red shoes with white soles aren't owned by anyone. Call em Heroic Red Sneakers

    The douchebag who makes Sora's shoes and calls them Kingdom Hearts Shoes? A lovely person I'm sure, probably spent a lot of time on them, but at the end of the day guilty of a crime of /using a copyrighted name/.

    So why do lawsuits and courts exist then? AKA Examining a real case against Nexon and Ugc

    BEcause it can be argued that any one of the things I have mentioned in this post are actually stealing something from someone else. Yes. That is completely true. That is why a copyright case has 4 factors to consider during the legal process:

    the purpose and character of your use- A case would need to prove sufficient lack of transformative expression
    the nature of the copyrighted work- A Judge would consider the source of the copyright in question in order to determine it's similarities and reasonable expectations toward someone using that work in their own products.
    the amount and substantiality of the portion taken - The judge would consider which portion of the work is original and which part is derivative.(Tracing vs handdrawn, and how much of each applies to the original work.)
    the effect of the use upon the potential market.- THe plaintiff would need to prove they have a market they could have tapped from lost revenue against the amount of transformative expression employed in the copyrighted work.

    So ok. DID IRON KOREAN DOCHI STEAL THE DESIGN OF 2B?
    It is my conclusion that the court would consider this /inspiration/ for the creation of a derivative work as long as it is reasonably proven that the textures in question do not match or correspond with the ones in-game in such a way that it can be assumed that it was the work of human hands.

    Using ripped textures : X
    Using your own hand-drawn textures: O

    So already a point for ARTIST AFFLUENT Dochi.

    The Nature of the work? 2b's clothes are certainly distinct and call forth the image of 2b. But can it be expected that no one can wear her clothes or anything similar in the real world? Do people want these clothes but the business doesn't sell it? What is the "heart" of what the resulting work was trying to derive from and could have/ should have it be expected of the deriver to have changed it sufficiently?

    The setting for the resulting debate; how big a part was 2b's design as part of the custom item? What was the work involved, and how much of it is the individual creators expression? And would this work constitute Lost Revenue because of it?

    All of this in consideration to one big important factor I've yet to bring up: Does a copyright holder want to go after /Nexon America/ for hosting "copyrighted" work? For a "Maybe"? Do they want to invest the time and money into pursuing actions against one of the bigger mmo publishers worldwide? For that Matter, does Nexon America want to avoid that lawsuit or can they bully the other party into submission?

    MY official stance is that Nexon won't take any action on part of a copyright holder unless blatant or acted upon by said party. This is because legal fees are a significant portion of the case. The path of least resistance is to ignore the issue until someone complains and then remove the work as instructed... but that is also why the GM's exist in part , to judge the design shop items and act accordingly to takedown requests.

    I am going to pass out now because that was the worst morning I've had in a while holy crap.

    You make a valid point and when it comes to the odds of other making a claim against Nexon. In reality they probably wont because its not worth it. That doesnt justify it though since the original poster stated he drew if from looking at an image. So in short yes he did copy 2bs outfit. And it brings up my point that you ignored. If games can use other games outfits without repercussions as long as they draw it themselves then why dont you see master chief costumes or pokemon costumes in games? Because they know its wrong and they can face lawsuits for it. The bigger issue is he choose to use 2bs signature outfit. And i can tell you there is not enough variation to justify it as original. But as the moderator said this is off topic so if you would like to discuss this further please PM me.
    PostTseneAnOldGeezer
  • DochiDochi
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,795
    Posts: 61
    Member
    Please do not feed the trolls when discussing. Thanks
    PostUllAieSooSooNunah
  • GinsamaGinsama
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,940
    Posts: 73
    Member
    Dochi wrote: »
    Please do not feed the trolls when discussing. Thanks

    I love you.
    Dochi
  • shadowgunshadowgun
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,085
    Posts: 36
    Member
    Dochi wrote: »
    Please do not feed the trolls when discussing. Thanks

    better a troll than a thief. Sorry unoriginal artist. Just because you dont like what i have to say doesnt make it a troll.
    Techn0mancerTseneZacharieKimGretaIdeghalliaDragonicWolfbwah
  • DochiDochi
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,795
    Posts: 61
    Member
    edited 5:30PM October 22, 2018
    Ginsama wrote: »
    Dochi wrote: »
    Please do not feed the trolls when discussing. Thanks

    I love you.

    love you too. Thank you so much for explaining. Too bad troll skulls are too thick to get anything through
  • MarchinBunnyMarchinBunny
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 8,245
    Posts: 545
    Member
    edited 7:20PM October 22, 2018
    Ginsama wrote: »
    Lets make it clear

    Ripping the textures from the game and applying them to a ugc template: No go

    Spending the time to personally paint the outfit onto a template while looking at a reference sheet: Good to go.

    Copyright laws are a bit more complicated than that. Copying it in any fashion even if by hand is still against copyright. Even if Nexon allows it, that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't against copyright and I think that is a very important distinction to make here. Technically speaking, even fanart is against copyright when looking at it in the most legal sense. The only reason companies don't go after people for drawing fanart is because it would hurt their bottomline. They would only anger their fans for something that isn't really harming them and is even probably benefiting them.

    Cosplay, on the other hand, you can get away with it, because there are laws in place that makes it impossible to copyright clothing designs and such because clothing is considered as an essential item for hoomans. XD This however, doesn't always necessarily hold true when it comes to character designs and creating cosplay. There have been some cases where companies have sued, to name one, Disney.

    Last but not least, this isn't cosplay anyway. It seems like a lot of people are getting confused. The copyright law that protects clothing doesn't work on digital clothing. Meaning UGC in MapleStory 2, is fully under the same laws of copyright as artwork. Meaning if you are selling designs of characters from another company, it is 100% without a doubt against copyright.
    http://forums.maplestory2.nexon.net/discussion/35084

    Literally a UA uniform passing the grade from an official channel. I'm iffy of the use of the UA letters however.
    Yes, the UA uniform, in my opinion, is quite bizarre. I am honestly shocked they are allowing this because it is indeed against copyright. I think it's hilarious how many people bring up how clothing gets away with it, like as if what we are talking about is clothing. No, we are talking about digital in-game items in the shape of clothing. It's not actual clothing.

    But if Nexon says it's ok, it means they will be taking the responsibility. So I guess it doesn't matter.

    ON a basic level, most artists take a blank image and create their work from it. Some may trace elements or use the eyedropper tool to properly match colors or structures. Some people may take blatant queues from other artists in their style. / The work involved is the intellectual property/. Ok sure, a tracer might be the scum of the art community, but at the same time, if someone is doing more than just tracing, like say, making a stencil out of a copyrighted image that they then spray on a canvas, that is sufficient removal from the source material to divorce the original copyright.
    It might interest you to know many fan artists have been sued before for drawing copyrighted characters and selling prints and such. In order to be safe, your art needs to be quite a bit transformative. That usually means like if I was drawing Batman and selling prints, it would need to be drawn in a fairly different style to the point that it's really only referencing the character and isn't actually copying it.
    Sailor moon tiara? She don't own the crescent moon. Just call it the Goddess's Gildpiece and you're fine

    You really want Deku cosplay shoes? Red shoes with white soles aren't owned by anyone. Call em Heroic Red Sneakers
    What makes these things ok, however, is that the designs of the items you are mentioning are so simplistic that without the name, you couldn't necessarily pinpoint it to any series in particular. In other words, these items are too generic for a company to go after a person for copyright infringement. But if someone let's say copied the entire sailor moon outfit and called it something entirely different, that would still be copyright infringement, cause while the tiara alone is something generic, it all together isn't. There would be absolutely no mistake that it's an outfit from sailor moon.
    The douchebag who makes Sora's shoes and calls them Kingdom Hearts Shoes? A lovely person I'm sure, probably spent a lot of time on them, but at the end of the day guilty of a crime of /using a copyrighted name/.
    Names are not copyrighted. Things like names and words are trademarked. I don't mean to be rude, but the fact that you don't even know that tells me you don't know as much as you seem to think about copyright.
    the purpose and character of your use- A case would need to prove sufficient lack of transformative expression
    the nature of the copyrighted work- A Judge would consider the source of the copyright in question in order to determine it's similarities and reasonable expectations toward someone using that work in their own products.
    the amount and substantiality of the portion taken - The judge would consider which portion of the work is original and which part is derivative.(Tracing vs handdrawn, and how much of each applies to the original work.)

    Trust me when I say this, something being hand drawn isn't going to make a case for copyright any better. Because hand drawing something is still in essence copying. If I had hand drawn a Pikachu poster and was selling it, I absolutely could still be sued and Nintendo would almost certainly win because I do not own the rights to redraw Pikachu and sell it as merchandise. That is what it means to have a copyright on something. Only Nintendo has the right to copy and reproduce it. Now, in order for something to fall under transformative, to give an example ... drawing a realistic Pikachu. As if what it would look like if it was a real animal in real life. I know quite a few artists who do this sort of thing. When you look at these drawings, while you can tell it's meant to be a pokemon, it's extremely different and often even terrifying if I am being honest lol. That is why they can get away with it because it's just so different.
    MY official stance is that Nexon won't take any action on part of a copyright holder unless blatant or acted upon by said party. This is because legal fees are a significant portion of the case. The path of least resistance is to ignore the issue until someone complains and then remove the work as instructed... but that is also why the GM's exist in part , to judge the design shop items and act accordingly to takedown requests.

    This is pretty much where I agree with you. Personally, I doubt any company is going to come around here and actually try and sue. It's just not worth it in the end. And if someone did happen to try, that is when Nexon would just remove the UGC in violation and move on.

    But from what I understand of copyright laws, a lot of stuff in the UGC shop is most certainly against copyright, and so is this outfit. But at the end of the day, it doesn't seem to matter. But people will continue to complain as long as things remain the same. And the bigger an issue theft becomes the more these copyright issues will be pointed out as well. They just sort of go hand in hand. In my opinion, neither should be allowed.

    Edit: Also, the whole off topic thing is none sense. It's on topic because it's an important factor in the whole theft and copyright mess that is UGC. And if it was to remain "on topic" then the thread would just die anyway because there is nothing left to discuss and it's not like this thread out of the 100s that probably exist is going to make any sort of difference until they actually do something about it.
    UllJozarRyunaIdeghalliaNunahAnOldGeezer
  • BluclueBluclue
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 5,190
    Posts: 434
    Member
    Whats with the weird ethics over here? Korean UGC creator literally comes here to personally deal with KMS2 Rip and everyone's argueing by themselves. Seriously though, stop feeding the trolls. Im gonna be upright honest with you all. Majority of the people who diverge topics regarding UGC rips or speak up for UGC rippers are Rippers themselves or are related to them. They are mostly trolls. I can guarantee that fact.
    SpecksSooSoo
  • BluclueBluclue
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 5,190
    Posts: 434
    Member
    edited 7:36PM October 22, 2018
    Stop diverging the topic. This is a 200k sales ripper. With outfits from KMS2 besides Dochi's on sale. Instead of shifting your eyes and getting distracted by these trolls. We should focus. The fact that someone made 200k merets off rips without any moderation from nexon is personally, something i have been talking about for a looong time. Seeing it happen for real is just retarded.
    SpecksSooSoo
  • shadowgunshadowgun
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,085
    Posts: 36
    Member
    Heres a great example that proves my point on copyright. Ever hear of the anime No Game No Life? Its currently under fire because the artist was caught tracing. But heres the thing, he used his own characters in the tracing but he used the same stance and setup. This is still copyright and this is further from what your doing which is literally copying the design of 2bs signature outfit. Dont believe me then google it ill even provide a link to an article about it.

    http://www.otakutale.com/2014/no-game-no-life-artist-yuu-kamiya-allegedly-caught-tracing-other-peoples-work/

    If this is copyright infringement then you can bet what you did is as well. But as i said i agree that its unlikely that the source for all these copyrighted materials will actually do anything about it. But that doesnt make it ok because the point of UGC should be to come up with your own ideas. And the real shame is there are plenty of people who have and they have made great outfits that are completely original but they are surrounded by copyrighted, and unoriginal designs.
    Greta
  • BluclueBluclue
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 5,190
    Posts: 434
    Member
    edited 7:39PM October 22, 2018
    shadowgun wrote: »
    Heres a great example that proves my point on copyright. Ever hear of the anime No Game No Life? Its currently under fire because the artist was caught tracing. But heres the thing, he used his own characters in the tracing but he used the same stance and setup. This is still copyright and this is further from what your doing which is literally copying the design of 2bs signature outfit. Dont believe me then google it ill even provide a link to an article about it.

    http://www.otakutale.com/2014/no-game-no-life-artist-yuu-kamiya-allegedly-caught-tracing-other-peoples-work/

    If this is copyright infringement then you can bet what you did is as well. But as i said i agree that its unlikely that the source for all these copyrighted materials will actually do anything about it. But that doesnt make it ok because the point of UGC should be to come up with your own ideas. And the real shame is there are plenty of people who have and they have made great outfits that are completely original but they are surrounded by copyrighted, and unoriginal designs.

    Stop diverging the topic. This topic is about a 200k sales ripper. With outfits from KMS2 besides Dochi's on sale. If you want to complain about copyright issues, instead of Hijacking someone else's thread and diverging the topic, you should be making a new thread to adress the issue of copyrighted outfits.

    P.S FYI, it has been adressed before and you can check Nexon's Rules and Regulations portion of the Forums and maybe go complain there under the UGC rules section.
    SpecksSooSoo
  • MarchinBunnyMarchinBunny
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 8,245
    Posts: 545
    Member
    Bluclue wrote: »
    Majority of the people who diverge topics regarding UGC rips or speak up for UGC rippers are Rippers themselves or are related to them. They are mostly trolls. I can guarantee that fact.

    That is quite a bold claim in and of itself. You are making yourself look like a hypocrite by accusing others of something you don't even know is true, and that is just as off topic as what we are talking about. Also, in case you are wondering, I don't have any UGC up, and I am not speaking up for UGC rippers, nor am I related to anyone who is a UGC ripper, and I am, certainly not a troll. Just a person with an opinion and presenting information.

    Now if you were not talking to me, then fine. But no one else here was sticking up for any rippers, so your comment is just entirely out of bounds, to be frank.
    Ideghallia
  • shadowgunshadowgun
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,085
    Posts: 36
    Member
    Bluclue wrote: »
    shadowgun wrote: »
    Heres a great example that proves my point on copyright. Ever hear of the anime No Game No Life? Its currently under fire because the artist was caught tracing. But heres the thing, he used his own characters in the tracing but he used the same stance and setup. This is still copyright and this is further from what your doing which is literally copying the design of 2bs signature outfit. Dont believe me then google it ill even provide a link to an article about it.

    http://www.otakutale.com/2014/no-game-no-life-artist-yuu-kamiya-allegedly-caught-tracing-other-peoples-work/

    If this is copyright infringement then you can bet what you did is as well. But as i said i agree that its unlikely that the source for all these copyrighted materials will actually do anything about it. But that doesnt make it ok because the point of UGC should be to come up with your own ideas. And the real shame is there are plenty of people who have and they have made great outfits that are completely original but they are surrounded by copyrighted, and unoriginal designs.

    Stop diverging the topic. This topic is about a 200k sales ripper. With outfits from KMS2 besides Dochi's on sale. If you want to complain about copyright issues, instead of Hijacking someone else's thread and diverging the topic, you should be making a new thread to adress the issue of copyrighted outfits.

    P.S FYI, it has been adressed before and you can check Nexon's Rules and Regulations portion of the Forums and maybe go complain there under the UGC rules section.

    But what im saying relates directly to this because stealing ideas and designs is not ok is exactly what your saying. So how do you justify the other side of this which is people stealing copyrighted material. You cant be mad at one but not the other because the other doesnt effect you.
  • BluclueBluclue
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 5,190
    Posts: 434
    Member
    edited 8:17PM October 22, 2018
    I condone both (branding and such in particular) but not cosplay and such since its a touchy issue. However, while copyrighted material has seen regulation with numerous incidents of copyrighted outfits being taken down and has been discussed extensively in the past, the issue of ripped outfits has not. Additionally, i believe the focus of this thread is not about copyright but rather ripped outfits. If you feel so strongly about copyright that you want to bring it up, you should create a separate post.
  • MarchinBunnyMarchinBunny
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 8,245
    Posts: 545
    Member
    Bluclue wrote: »
    I condone both (branding and such in particular) but not cosplay and such since its a touchy issue. However, while copyrighted material has seen regulation with numerous incidents of copyrighted outfits being taken down and has been discussed extensively in the past, the issue of ripped outfits has not. Additionally, i believe the focus of this thread is not about copyright but rather ripped outfits. If you feel so strongly about copyright that you want to bring it up, you should create a separate post.

    I think the problem is ripping is technically a copyright issue. And also the title of the topic is "Someone made over 200k merits ripping off my work" ... which by itself would be a bit controversial if the work isn't even their own, to begin with. So I can understand why it would be brought up.|

    Anyway, that is the last thing I will post on this matter. It is what it is. This issue has been around since the beta essentially and they still really haven't clarified exactly what is and isn't allowed. Plus, with their track record of actually taking things down, it makes it even worse. It's entirely up in the air. It almost seems like copyrighted material is ok to use as long as you don't use the name, which to me is just wrong, but whatever.
  • BluclueBluclue
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 5,190
    Posts: 434
    Member
    Bluclue wrote: »
    Majority of the people who diverge topics regarding UGC rips or speak up for UGC rippers are Rippers themselves or are related to them. They are mostly trolls. I can guarantee that fact.

    That is quite a bold claim in and of itself. You are making yourself look like a hypocrite by accusing others of something you don't even know is true, and that is just as off topic as what we are talking about. Also, in case you are wondering, I don't have any UGC up, and I am not speaking up for UGC rippers, nor am I related to anyone who is a UGC ripper, and I am, certainly not a troll. Just a person with an opinion and presenting information.

    Now if you were not talking to me, then fine. But no one else here was sticking up for any rippers, so your comment is just entirely out of bounds, to be frank.

    I apologize if this has offended you. But this is from personal experience. Its not a fact. Maybe its a myth for you because you have not come across any. I dont just go around saying things unless i believe its true. Like i said, Majority. You can be the exception. However, diversion is a common technique used by trolls. Is it a myth or a fact? Its a fact.
  • MarchinBunnyMarchinBunny
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 8,245
    Posts: 545
    Member
    edited 8:39PM October 22, 2018
    Bluclue wrote: »
    I apologize if this has offended you. But this is from personal experience. Its not a fact. Maybe its a myth for you because you have not come across any. I dont just go around saying things unless i believe its true. Like i said, Majority. You can be the exception. However, diversion is a common technique used by trolls. Is it a myth or a fact? Its a fact.

    I don't know, I am more the type that just doesn't accuse people unless I know for sure. Because doing what you did is, in fact, called an ad hominem. It's trying to delegitimize their arguments based on accusing them of something else, basically attacking their character rather than their arguments. And yes, typically ad hominems have the effect of being offensive.

    Edit: And sorry, this is legit the last thing, but just needed to respond to this.

  • shadowgunshadowgun
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,085
    Posts: 36
    Member
    Bluclue wrote: »
    Bluclue wrote: »
    Majority of the people who diverge topics regarding UGC rips or speak up for UGC rippers are Rippers themselves or are related to them. They are mostly trolls. I can guarantee that fact.

    That is quite a bold claim in and of itself. You are making yourself look like a hypocrite by accusing others of something you don't even know is true, and that is just as off topic as what we are talking about. Also, in case you are wondering, I don't have any UGC up, and I am not speaking up for UGC rippers, nor am I related to anyone who is a UGC ripper, and I am, certainly not a troll. Just a person with an opinion and presenting information.

    Now if you were not talking to me, then fine. But no one else here was sticking up for any rippers, so your comment is just entirely out of bounds, to be frank.

    I apologize if this has offended you. But this is from personal experience. Its not a fact. Maybe its a myth for you because you have not come across any. I dont just go around saying things unless i believe its true. Like i said, Majority. You can be the exception. However, diversion is a common technique used by trolls. Is it a myth or a fact? Its a fact.

    If it was referring to me then i can show you i dont have anything being sold on UGC and never have. Its as MarchinBunny said the OP is complaining somebody ripped off his work when he in turn ripped off his work from Platinum games. This only helps discredit the claims from real artists that make their own original designs on UGC who actually had their original ideas stolen in my opinion.
  • DochiDochi
    MapleStory 2 Rep: 1,795
    Posts: 61
    Member
    please keep the topic on point and stop feeding the trolls, I value feedback on the TOPIC I raised and anything else if you have questions or concerns I will address then personally with you if you need to. Otherwise you are either just blabbering about different thing in a wrong place or intentionally just trying to get my post locked so I cannot raise awareness.
    p.s. I keep asking people, do not feed the troll. Thanks.