![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
davemerrillI neglected my AN staff duties yesterday and we went to the comic book show downtown. Didn't really pick up a lot of comics. The pickin's were a little slimmer than last time in terms of the weirdo stuff. Prices were all over the map. It pays to shop around. Canada scored their first goal while we were there and the entire room erupted with cheers, and one guy asked "Who scored?" with a response of WHADYA MEAN, "WHO SCORED?" But he meant the player, not the team.
Canada played the game they should have played earlier, tight and tough. Good thing too, because it was 'with your shield or on it' time for those guys.
I believe it was Deb Aoki who made the first comparison of the whole Nick Simmons "Incarnate" plagarizing "Bleach" thing with anime fans who distribute scanlations and fansubs online, or who sell licenced-character fanart in artist alleys at anime cons. Chris Butcher agrees, while Simon Jones - link may be NSFW does not.
I tend to agree with Simon Jones, who has an interesting take on the doujinshi side of things. I don't think professional American comic artist plagiarism and fans selling fan art or fans distributing scanlations or fansubs is anywhere close to being the same thing, and it's kind of disingenuous to equate the two, or to claim that anime fans shouldn't complain about this because they spend all their time ripping off copyrights. It's apples and oranges. What Nick Simmons did was plagiarism - passing off somebody else's artwork as his own work - something every professional artist is aware of and should be on guard against.
Using the Nick Simmons Experience to condemn fan artists for creating derivative works... well, the "fans creating derivative works based on their favorite characters" horse has been out of that barn for decades and decades now. Nobody seems to have a problem with it, even when Kirk and Spock were inventing the term "slash".
What people DO have a problem with is profit, and that's what makes Nick Simmons stand out - he's doing his ripping off in a professional comic book that he gets paid for, that is sold as a professional magazine in the marketplace of professional magazines. Which understandably is held to a higher standard than the artists alley at Doofuscon '09 or Fantastic Trekiverse Vol 6 #3, circulation 50.
The Artist Alleys of anime conventions are all different and they all have their own set of rules, but they all address the issues of IP theft and fair use, the issues of plagiarism and of swiping and of selling your own work. It's not a wild west free for all. The video rooms at anime cons get clearance for the titles they show. The dealers room contracts are very clear about what dealers are allowed to sell, and bootlegs are not allowed. So, to characterize all anime fans as being ignorant or uncaring about IP is false.
Do some anime fans download illegal fansubs or scanlations? Sure. All the time. Do some Marvel/DC fans download scans of their favorite comics? Sure. All the time. Do professional American comic artists sit behind their tables and sell sketches of Wonder Woman or Spiderman or Spawn or Donald Duck? Sure, all the time. Do fans of American movies download illegal copies of their favorite movies? Sure, all the time. Does this have anything to do with Nick Simmons swiping Bleach? Not a bit.
Personally I think selling 25 or 50 or 500 prints of your fanart is crossing the line into sketchy ethical territory. Of course back in the 1980s I thought charging to copy tapes was ethically sketchy too. And the guys that filled tables at every comic book show selling VHS copies of laserdiscs they taped themselves, those are guys that anime fandom campaigned against at every opportunity, and when we started our own shows those people were not allowed to sell bootlegs. (not that they didn't try). Considering at the start anime fandom wouldn't exist without home taping, without tape trading, without the same kind of copyright infringement we now look down on, it's ironic. But what separates the fans from the pros, or the fans from the criminals, in the final analysis, it's all money. Nobody ever got rich selling fanzines of fan art or fan fiction, and while they may be on ethically shaky ground, at least they aren't swiping like a goddamn 12-year old and trying to pass it off as their own work in a professionally printed and distributed comic book.
Canada played the game they should have played earlier, tight and tough. Good thing too, because it was 'with your shield or on it' time for those guys.
I believe it was Deb Aoki who made the first comparison of the whole Nick Simmons "Incarnate" plagarizing "Bleach" thing with anime fans who distribute scanlations and fansubs online, or who sell licenced-character fanart in artist alleys at anime cons. Chris Butcher agrees, while Simon Jones - link may be NSFW does not.
I tend to agree with Simon Jones, who has an interesting take on the doujinshi side of things. I don't think professional American comic artist plagiarism and fans selling fan art or fans distributing scanlations or fansubs is anywhere close to being the same thing, and it's kind of disingenuous to equate the two, or to claim that anime fans shouldn't complain about this because they spend all their time ripping off copyrights. It's apples and oranges. What Nick Simmons did was plagiarism - passing off somebody else's artwork as his own work - something every professional artist is aware of and should be on guard against.
Using the Nick Simmons Experience to condemn fan artists for creating derivative works... well, the "fans creating derivative works based on their favorite characters" horse has been out of that barn for decades and decades now. Nobody seems to have a problem with it, even when Kirk and Spock were inventing the term "slash".
What people DO have a problem with is profit, and that's what makes Nick Simmons stand out - he's doing his ripping off in a professional comic book that he gets paid for, that is sold as a professional magazine in the marketplace of professional magazines. Which understandably is held to a higher standard than the artists alley at Doofuscon '09 or Fantastic Trekiverse Vol 6 #3, circulation 50.
The Artist Alleys of anime conventions are all different and they all have their own set of rules, but they all address the issues of IP theft and fair use, the issues of plagiarism and of swiping and of selling your own work. It's not a wild west free for all. The video rooms at anime cons get clearance for the titles they show. The dealers room contracts are very clear about what dealers are allowed to sell, and bootlegs are not allowed. So, to characterize all anime fans as being ignorant or uncaring about IP is false.
Do some anime fans download illegal fansubs or scanlations? Sure. All the time. Do some Marvel/DC fans download scans of their favorite comics? Sure. All the time. Do professional American comic artists sit behind their tables and sell sketches of Wonder Woman or Spiderman or Spawn or Donald Duck? Sure, all the time. Do fans of American movies download illegal copies of their favorite movies? Sure, all the time. Does this have anything to do with Nick Simmons swiping Bleach? Not a bit.
Personally I think selling 25 or 50 or 500 prints of your fanart is crossing the line into sketchy ethical territory. Of course back in the 1980s I thought charging to copy tapes was ethically sketchy too. And the guys that filled tables at every comic book show selling VHS copies of laserdiscs they taped themselves, those are guys that anime fandom campaigned against at every opportunity, and when we started our own shows those people were not allowed to sell bootlegs. (not that they didn't try). Considering at the start anime fandom wouldn't exist without home taping, without tape trading, without the same kind of copyright infringement we now look down on, it's ironic. But what separates the fans from the pros, or the fans from the criminals, in the final analysis, it's all money. Nobody ever got rich selling fanzines of fan art or fan fiction, and while they may be on ethically shaky ground, at least they aren't swiping like a goddamn 12-year old and trying to pass it off as their own work in a professionally printed and distributed comic book.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 06:25 pm (UTC)I've seen people do this too, and to a man they are all complete losers. I mean livin' out of their car, bathing-optional losers. It makes me wonder exactly why they got into the whole "ripping people off" thing, if the payoff is less than minimum wage at McDonalds.
You used to see the same thing with the video bootleggers at conventions, they'd have tables and tables of copies for sale, I mean a lot of capital and labor went into their video bootlegging operation, and if you find out anything about them, you find out they live in a leaky trailer somewhere and can barely pay the rent or gas up their old pickup truck or keep their five dogs fed. Guys, if you're going to steal, at least steal something that will IMPROVE YOUR LIFE.
Part of the mindset is, and this is a real vague theory of mine, but you go to the flea markets in the sticks, and you see a lot of people from agricultural families, who have traditions of picking berries or apples and selling them by the roadside or at the market - the stuff is lying around and you pick it up and sell it. You have chickens, they lay eggs, you sell the eggs. You have dogs, they have puppies, you sell the puppies. You find junk at the dump somebody wants, haul it home and sell it. (You have a lot of corn, people want liquor, why not set up a still?) You find stripped paperbacks at the distributor, you sell 'em at the flea market. If there's income to be generated from something, then do it. If you have some crazy Japanese cartoon or Godzilla movie somebody wants, why not run off a few VHS tapes? What's the harm? Who says I shouldn't? Those fat cats in Washington? That's the mindset. That's my theory anyway. Not that it has anything to do with this discussion, but there ya go.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 06:26 pm (UTC)And people doing fanart aren't claiming the original characters/works as their own.
Big difference.
I am not violating copyright with my mad-Asto icon. I don't claim I created and own Astro. To do that would be absurd. It's a derivative work. A parody, because Astro wouldn't do what I'm depicting.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 06:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 06:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 07:07 pm (UTC)Just presented as is.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 07:19 pm (UTC)And Dave and Shain's Stupid Comics is Dave and Shain's thing. Not mine. I'd rather let the comics speak for themselves.
no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 10:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-01 11:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-02 12:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-02 12:53 am (UTC)I mean, what's the point? You have a comic (or ganked something off the net) and boom there it is, so, why? Did you find it funny? Were you outraged by poor anatomy or horrible framing or bad grammar or what?
I'm not saying you need to deconstruct it like Seanbaby does over at Cracked.com (and his stuff makes me pee it's so funny sometimes), nor copy Stupid Comics, just...talk about it. right? Because otherwise it's like that most annoying thing in the universe, linkbombing.
God, I hate that. People spending all day digging thru YouTube, sending link after link with no warning that it's a video, no commentary about what's interesting or fun or horrible about it, man, that's just lazy ass ADD kinda stuff. People gotta TALK or we all just sit in our chairs like Bevis and Butthead "Hu huhuhu huh that was cool...huh uhuhuh"
I fight against that! I fight with love!