Thread:Brandon Rhea/@comment-34999980-20180415222956/@comment-25217833-20180416012711

"Deal" with art thieves? How quaint. Well, allow me to inroduce myself. I am "The Accused" and creator of Hinagiku. I am also the editor of the images posted to the biography in question. With pleasantries out of the way, let's have a long chat.

Let's define the term "thief" before we begin:

Thief

noun

noun: thief; plural noun: thieves Now that we have defined the term, we can approach this intelligently. "Stealing" would imply that, as per the definition, I took another person's property. Now, let's define "property":
 * 1) a person who steals another person's property, especially by stealth and without using force or violence.

Property

noun

noun: property Property, in terms of Copyright, becomes an issue of legality. Fanart, of which all images I have used are, falls under a gray area in Copyright. Kishimoto, Ryohgo Narita, Nagomu Torii, and Tomoyo Kamoi could, at any point, legally sue each and every fanart creator that has ever posted the likeness of any characters whom they have created. Out of the kindness of their hearts, or either pure indifference, they allow people to spread the love of their work through these works you call "art," and I call "imitations." I have not stolen anything based solely off the fact that the fanarts I copied, from Google might I add, do not belong to them; they cannot posses what was not their's to begin with, and I cannot steal what hasn't been possessed. If the people you so nobly try to defend have legal documentation of their imitations of original works being protected by Copyright, then you have every right to reasonably request that I take down the art without immediately escalating it to this. Did you ask Tappei Nagatsuki if you could use fanart of her characters for your profile picture? I highly doubt this. Fortunately for you and I, fanart falls under "Fair Use."
 * 1) a thing or things belonging to someone; possessions collectively.

Fanart is a copy of an original work, regardless of how it intends to differentiate itself from the original creator's work. Simply posting these works to DeviantArt, or wherever they originate from other than Google, does not automatically grant them Copyright, because they are still an imitation. Fair Use is defined as follows:

"Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory framework for determining whether something is a fair use and identifies certain types of uses—such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of activities that may qualify as fair use.  Section 107 calls for consideration of the following four factors in evaluating a question of fair use: Due to my editing of most of the images on my biography, they still fall under fair use, and deviate from the original purpose in which they would be used, which is on top of the fact that I gain no payment for these images. My biography is clearly very different from any of the "characters" protrayed in the images used.
 * Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes:  Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair.  This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below.  Additionally, “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair.  Transformative uses are those that add something new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work.
 * Nature of the copyrighted work:  This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished work is less likely to be considered fair.
 * Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole:  Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work.
 * Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work:  Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread."

Since I have covered Copyright, Fair Use, and what is defined as a possession and theft, I will move on to the Naruto Profile Wikia "disclaimer."

"The images used here are credited to their respective artists. Shinobi Legends and this wiki does not gain profit in using their artwork and they are merely used as representations of the players' fictional characters that exist in SL."

It's even recently become Naruto Profile Wiki policy around here to credit the artists, or websites, from which our images originated. Believe it or not, I had every intention of crediting them upon finding their origin points. Instead, now I have to dispute your claims after you so rudely threatened me. Looks like you have violated FANDOM policy:

"You agree that you will not use the Service in any manner that is contrary to the FANDOM Community Guidelines, which may be updated from time to time. Without limiting the foregoing, you also agree not to use the Service to:
 * Abuse, harass, threaten or intimidate other FANDOM users . . . "

Definition of "threat":

Threat

noun

noun: threat; plural noun: threats Definition of "intimidate":
 * 1) a statement of an intention to inflict pain, injury, damage, or other hostile action on someone in retribution for something done or not done.

Intimidate

verb
 * 1) frighten or overawe (someone), especially in order to make them do what one wants.

You posted the following on my character's biography:

"I don't want to hustle and bustle with you, so I suggest you remove the art you stole ASAP. Or else I'll have to do it for you."

"Or else" sounds quite threatening, especially in the context you used. This was also an attempt to intimidate me into doing what you wanted. I will not be threatened nor intimidated, madam.