Gamerenders = Gamerippers?

Warning from BFTP: - repping anyone who posts in this topic will earn you a warning, suspension, or possible ban. It is a open discussion that deserves to be allowed without fear.



Full Length Article

What are your thoughts on this?

Basically, they're saying that cutting out images from existing images IS ripping. It's manipulating peoples works without their permission.

 

http://www.gamerenders.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=215702

We don't render from dA.

 

Assuming, based on GameRender statistics, GAMING images are the most rendered...answer the following questions:

1. Do you think that game companies would really be that interested in chasing down every website on the internet that includes gaming images without their permission?

2. Do you think that they have the money and the time to set up hundreds of thousands of lawsuits aimed at the internet gaming community?

3. What would they stand to get out of doing so, e.g what competitive gains would they receive from taking legal action?

4. Would they really consider risking their reputation by taking legal action against thousands of gamers, who won't exactly have much money in the first place?

5. Why would they mind increasing the amount of exposure their games are getting by characters and imagery from their games being distributed?

6. Even if a game company decided to require permission to be given before gaming images are used, do you think it would be profitable to hire hundreds of extra staff to handle the 1000's of requests that this would produce? Of course, you'd also need hundreds of extra staff in addition to sort out people that do not get permission before they decide to display the game company's images.

P.S. I've cleaned the thread up to show the two most important replies - because of the nature of such disputes, AND the name of the thread.

 

^lol

 

BFTP owned you lol
you cant answer those questions :lol: now can you lolz

 

[/quote]

Wow! Some way to defend us renderers/gamers. Wow that sounded sarcastic, im not being sarcastic btw.

 

This can be argued either way. For example
what BFTP said on number 1

You can pirate windows all day, does that mean Microsoft will hunt down everybody who has an illegal copy of Windows and sue them? No, but its still illegal to do.

Same thing with images, IF the image has copywrite info on it, its not supposed to be messed with. But on the other side of things you are posting a link to the original so you are giving credit to the original creator. Its not technically illegal action since you are not saying its your image (yes you rendered it and the render is your image but not the orignal). Game remixes for example, they are a free, user made fan music from games. Is it illegal? Some would say it is, and some would say it isnt. Most game music developers actually like the idea because it will give credit to the original composers. Therefore, its a win-win situation. Devs get acknowledgment and users get to show their creativity.

I personally think its iffy. When you link back to the original image (like what GR requires) its not illegal because you are giving credit to the original image. But if you dont it can be seen as illegal.

 

You seem to be forgetting something regarding copyrights, Whiplash1024.

EVERYTHING is copyrighted, regardless if it appears to be or not. Even if you link back to the website or give credit to the author, it's still considered a copyright violation unless the author specifically said that's all you need to do. It would be impossible to remove all copyright material, so GameRenders Staff does it the best way possible:

We apologize to the author when they contact us and remove the material in question. This is better then most sites, and we try to be fair. In the matter of CGTalk, deviantArt, etc...we do not allow any images that appear on those websites, unless the author gives permission. In some cases, sites will pay for work to be created - GameWallPapers.com is a good example of this. You can find some wallpapers on their site that can also be found at deviantArt, which we make exceptions for.

Andrew

 

I've pinned this thread, and renamed it back to what it was. I think it's a discussion that should be noted for future months, years to come - and i've added a warning that no -reps should be given because of this thread.

Thanks,
Andrew

 

I actually agree that if it's "wrong" to render things from DeviantArt then it's wrong to render full stop. Because quite simply every image people use belongs to someone else, legally you should only be able to make sigs / walls based on photo's you personally take then cut up or on vector images you create/drawings/art you personally do.

However, this is all on the assumption that deviantART are correct in there policy. I however believe everyone should have the right to do what they want with things that are in the public domain, once you publish something on the internet and allow people access to it, it is "public domain" therefore FREE for all

 

Long story short:

If they aren't asking profit for said images, such as is usually the case when said images are on the internet, able to be downloaded to one's PC for free, they have no case. Noone here is using said 'rips' to gain any form of cash payment, so it's perfectly legal. The most the creators of these images can do legally is ask for all copies to be removed.

 

Yes but it can be considered that if you sell a tut or sig or render pack on this site containing renders you took, then you are indeed making a profit from other peoples work, regardless of how you theorize it... trading things for virtual money that helps you gain an advantage on this site...

 

If this 'virtual money' can be used to purchase something that has actual substance, they may have a case.

 

And how would the person have enough time to view all the sites that is asking premission to use the image. It would be much easier just to say NO.

The more rendered images the more of a change their going to start putting a copyrighted tag up.

 

[/quote]

1 yes if they get something out of it
2 no but if they sue one at a time and get a profit from it they possible could
3 have people not rip from them
4 probaly not
5 they probaly dont its like free advertising
6 it would probaly cut down on the people asking
but they probaly wouldnt

So in the end it you are right
they get:
free advertising
and it ruins their reputation

this out weighs
them getting extra money in the short run