# Admin Issue



## KittCreations (Apr 30, 2009)

Issue with administrator Ahkahna:
Claims that you can copyright anatomy of real things in nature such as animals and humans. Furthered it with you can copyright poses of things in nature. First time around up and deleted several submissions of mine, then left me alone for 2-3 months, then came back around to do it again.

I took up the issue with Dragoneer who just tossed it back to her (how responsible!) and said she was OK to do whatever she felt like. That's just exactly what she did.

Complained up a storm, threatened to ban me from EVERY account I own for art posted on ONE account, continued to harass me and threaten to ban. Still continues to threaten to ban. 

Her problem: OH MY GAWD I USED PHOTOS OF ANIMALS FOR A POSE!
Seriously, no copyright law was violated or anywhere near violated.

You cannot copyright a pose or the anatomy of something like a tiger, lion, leopard, fox, wolf, husky, and so on. No one 'owns' these things- they are part of nature and last I checked you cannot copyright nature. 

The photograph itself can be copyrighted, but that only goes as far as to say you cannot repost it without permission, 100% recreate it, and so forth. To RECREATE a photo, you are making everything the same as the photo. You are not just taking the pose and modifying the anatomy or anything like that.

This is a pathetic display by both people. Dragoneer fails to manage his own staff and allows his staff members to get off with ANYTHING they want just because they're staff.

Another problem was she is the only one answering trouble tickets from my JessKitt-08 account and continues to ignore things that require administrator action. The only thing she did do was give someone a slap on the wrist and say "don't do it again" when they were caught being a troll and directly coming to my gallery JUST to harass me. She failed to acknowledge the other names listed or even to investigate them and just decided that what she did was 'justice'. So even though it says right in the terms of service and all over the FA wikki that it is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN FOR ANY USER to go to a person's gallery JUST to harass/flame/troll/or cause damage/attempt to cause damage/ or to be a general "pain in the ass". 

I congratulate staff for not upholding it's rules, threatening a member who's been a member since 2005, and then removing submissions as they see fit. 

You may as well not post ANYTHING to FA because she might remove it 
This is just ridiculous. 

Posted by suggestion of Dragoneer. If this post is suspeneded or anything else by the admins, well I'll know why (I told him that I don't trust his staff to actually do their job correctly because they've shown me they're incapable of such.)


----------



## Stratelier (May 1, 2009)

Is this a rant?  I hope not....

Filing this sort of complaint in a public space is not very conducive to civil and productive discussion either....


----------



## Adrimor (May 1, 2009)

I am not a lawyer (or an admin--surprise!), but this seems like a decent enough case for your side, if you can present it more calmly. Using sarcasm, insults, and such doesn't show you as somebody who deserves an appeal. *BUT*, let me see if I can distill this here--correct me if I'm wrong:

*PROBLEM: *An administrator (Ahkahna) has been removing your images and threatening to ban you based on a flawed argument--namely, that using photographs as references for a drawn picture violates copyright law, and/or that poses and shapes found in nature can be copyrighted.
*ATTEMPTED SOLUTIONS:* Appealing the actions to Dragoneer.
*RESULTS: *None.
*DESIRED OUTCOME:* ?

So, what do you want out of this?

Also, you should probably post this in a more appropriate subforum. Xaerun'll lock this thread faster than you can say "modded",a nd may give you an infraction for calling out other users. (Happened to me for a satirical thread, no lie.)


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

_"Jesskitt, you've been warned and banned in the past about refusing to cite your sources on all images that show any heavy referencing, those are the rules of this site. 

The following require citation. You have 24 hours from the time this note is sent. If the images do not show citations of reference your ban will be extended for a much longer period of time on all of your accounts.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2236587/ = ( http://www.russianclimb.com/makalu_winter_2009/snow-leopard.jpg)
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2236628/ = ( http://www.sfondideldesktop.com/Images-Animals/Fox/Red-Fox-5.Jpg )
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2234440/ = ( http://www.lionking.org/imgarchive/Act_1/Pals.jpg )
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2233928/ = ( http://www.lionking.org/imgarchive/Act_3/ScarsLittleSecret.jpg )

-Ahkahna"
_

http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 2.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 3.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 4.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 5.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 6.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 7.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 8.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskitt-kittcreations/april30/Picture 9.png

///


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

also, she still failed to present any sources on these three:













//////

My reply to Jesskitt:





//////

There's also this image which is definitely traced and has no citation:









/////






/////

I also received another note from Jess:






-------------

Support tickets:

"Ticket Subject: Ripped or Stolen Artwork
Posted By:  On: 01/29/09 09:02 pm

User: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/kittcreations
Tracing/outright theft and a long history of it.
Not linking to references, deleting and re-uploading images when people request about references

Ripped Image: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1940840/
Ripped Image: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/1940833/
Original: http://i43.tinypic.com/2z9mbl0.jpg
Overlay: http://i44.tinypic.com/vwya1k.jpg


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

She has many other images that are suspect, but I have yet to find the originals.

Thank you"

My reply : "I will make note on this that I sent her a warning to cite the sources above since none of them matched up anywhere and they were likely copied or, in the cubs cases, traced but done so with enough changes made that I didn't consider it enough to be removed AT THIS TIME. I warned her she has 24 hours to cite her sources, however."


I removed the following today:
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jess1.png
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jess2.png
What I've removed before:
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jess3.png (no comments needed here)
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jess4.png (direct tracing over the top of the head)

-------------

Replies from Kittcreations:

_"RE: Submission removal: Site Headder
Sent By: KittCreations On: January 30th, 2009 09:59

Since when was photo referencing Illegal? You can now officially copyright poses and anatomy?"_

Site header:
http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jess1.png
http://www.prlog.org/10045205-liger-lion-tiger-mix-as-seen-at-shambala.jpg
When I overlayed these, the only part that didn't match up correctly was the rear leg and tail. The rest was traced over with very minor alterations of hair and fur, but it was obvious.

_"RE: Cite Sources: Kigai and Devi
Sent By: KittCreations On: January 30th, 2009 10:20

Remove what you feel is traced/illegal.
While you're at it, you should just remove the entire gallery. Shit I must have at least stolen everything in it including those photographs eh?"_

I asked her to cite her sources since I didn't believe these (http://www.summerdragoness.com/_images/fa/jesskigai.png) were sufficiently traced to be removed, but still clearly used the photo (http://animals.timduru.org/dirlist/puma cougar/Cougar-cub.jpg). She removed them herself today, when all they needed were citations.


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

(This in particular was capped due to Kitts disbelief in how not a single admin touched her journal. We cannot edit this information and have no access to anything which would allow any form of editing.)






------------------------

I have dealt with KittCreations several times and her attitude is very lacking. Each session involves insults.

The first experience with her was removing a submission involving the sale/adoption out of a pet. I explained the site is not an adoption service, she is more than welcome to post photo's of her pets but not photo's with adoption information all over it. In this instance she threw a fit over it.

Yesterday I moved blurry, grainy photo's to scraps, but I left numerous photo's that would be classified as OK by the rules even though they are still by camera phone in her main gallery. She didn't fly too well with this either.

_"Well I'm sorry that all I have to use is a cell phone camera

While I did read your NEW AND IMPROVED FA upload rules, I must stress to you that any cell phone image will most likely not come out clear at all. You will always see some sort of grainy-ness or blur or even compression.
You see, camera phones aren't exactly very good at taking pictures unless you have an extremely well lit place. Even inside your house with your lights it's not even close enough to 'well lit' for the camera phone.

I'm sorry, but the whole IT'S BLURRY AND OR GRAINY thing makes me laugh because it's something that quite honestly can't be avoided. It's physically impossible."_

_"If I had an actual camera I would use it, don't you think? Grow a brain and use common sense."_

Today, I asked her politely to cite her sources for an image that was heavily referenced. I explained those were the rules. 

_"Unless a photograph has been 100% replicated I don't really see any need to.
I copy a pose- that's now a problem? I'm sorry, but the new rules are just bogus and makes it so you can't post anything more than furry art or furry porn basically.

I feel bad for the SL players that have their avatars posted with just clothing on over the avatar they bought. That's not significantly modifying it, thus it'll be removed.

Give me a few hours to collect my photographs and I'll just remove everything.

Would that make you happy? Or should I give you some sugar coated kissing ass too?"_
---------------------

*My email to her:*

Hello Jess,

Your accounts JessKitt and KittCreations have been temporarily suspended for 24 hours. The ban will be lifted at 1pm, January 24th. 

The following are the reasons you have had a suspension placed against you:
TOS: *FA will take action against users found to be crude and vulgar. Crude and vulgar is defined as, but not limited to, in this case: derogatory remarks, disruptive behavior.

Submission Policy: "In addition, submissions uploaded must be of your own creation or must have been created expressly for you (and then, only posted with permission from the original artist(s)). All sources (inspirations, sampling, references, copyright) must be cited, credited and documented within the submission's description. Failure to do so may result in removal of the submission without notice. By finalizing the submission, you agree that any and all information contained within the description of said submission is truthful and accurate."

Harassment or retaliation against staff for enforcement of the site rules will not be tolerated.

TOS:-A user must obey the requests and guidelines given to them by the Administration, except where such orders would conflict with the first law.

--Enforcement Policy--
FA staff will uphold the policies set forth by the TOS, SA and AUP and will protect the general interests of the Service. This includes, but is not limited to: art theft, identity theft, harassment, defacement, piracy or other illegal activity.

A is committed to fair and equal treatment of all members. Suspected violations will be fully investigated before action is taken. Members of FA are expected to follow any reasonable requests and/or instructions given to them from staff within the boundaries of the site's domain. Users found in violation of site policies will have action taken against their account which may involve removal of submissions, temporary suspension from the Service and/or outright termination of their FA membership.
Repeated violations of the TOS rules will result in permanent suspension of your account. 

Fur Affinity Administration,
-Ahkahna
-----------------------------------

*Email reply from KittCreations:*
"JessKitt <jesskitt_08@yahoo.com> to ahkahna@gmail.com
1:27pm

See  it does take sugar coated kissing up to the admins to stay on the website! 

~Jess aka Kitt"


-----------------


----------



## Adrimor (May 1, 2009)

Hmm. Now it's getting interesting.

Advantage: Ahkahna.


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

I will make this statement that I have been given full permission to post this information.

-edit: and just in case, I've also screencapped the original post to this thread.


And:

I removed a pair of "repeats" from last year.


----------



## Stratelier (May 1, 2009)

AdriNoMa said:


> *PROBLEM: *An administrator (Ahkahna) has been removing your images and threatening to ban you based on a flawed argument--namely, that using photographs as references for a drawn picture violates copyright law, and/or that poses and shapes found in nature can be copyrighted.
> *ATTEMPTED SOLUTIONS:* Appealing the actions to Dragoneer.
> *RESULTS: *None.
> *DESIRED OUTCOME:* ?


Yeah, I like that version better.

*EDIT*  Administrative response, eh?  And with screenshots for the record, I see.

.
.
.

And after evaluating the screenshots, I have to side with Ahkahna.  KittiCreations, your arguments about what copyright is and isn't are valid of their own accord, but *irrelevant to this discussion*.

Copyright isn't the problem.  Your submissions were not removed because of 'copyright', they were removed because you failed to *provide citation* of what source materials you referenced.

Regardless of whether the reference images are protected by copyright, copyleft, copyup or or copy-whatever, if you used a particular image as specific reference material for your work then you have an obligation to say so.  Failure to give due credit is popularly called "plaigarism" and while that's not the same kind of violation as general copyright-violations or "art theft", it's still a violation of FA policy.


----------



## ArielMT (May 1, 2009)

What I see are reasonable requests and opportunities for reasonable rebuttals.

However, I see those opportunities for reasonable rebuttals missed because of a juvenile understanding of copyright law, misunderstanding of how far fair use can go before a work becomes genuinely infringing, confusion of copyright and trade mark and the differences between the extent of protection offered, and a poor attitude and blatant disrespect for the property of others that can be best summarized as "stuff the admins and their acceptable use policy."

This is based as much on the opening post as it is on Ahkahna's replies.


----------



## Rafeal (May 1, 2009)

KittCreations said:


> Another problem was she is the only one answering trouble tickets from my JessKitt-08 account and continues to ignore things that require administrator action. The only thing she did do was give someone a slap on the wrist and say "don't do it again" when they were caught being a troll and directly coming to my gallery JUST to harass me. She failed to acknowledge the other names listed or even to investigate them and just decided that what she did was 'justice'. So even though it says right in the terms of service and all over the FA wikki that it is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN FOR ANY USER to go to a person's gallery JUST to harass/flame/troll/or cause damage/attempt to cause damage/ or to be a general "pain in the ass".





Wow, somehow I remember being the target of such behavior...

And I do see the simple requests for citation and the simple refusal to do so... 

The problem is now that someone is 'butt hurt' and doesn't know what to do but lash out at someone???


----------



## Stratelier (May 1, 2009)

Rafeal said:


> The problem is now that someone is 'butt hurt' and doesn't know what to do but lash out at someone???


It sounds like that weak old defense argument, where if they don't agree with the reason a piece was removed, they completely write it off as "for no reason at all".

At the risk of repeating myself....  KittCreations, it's not a violation to use specific images as reference materials to draw from, but you've got to come clean and _own up to it_.  Failing to cite a reference material used (or, worse, claiming to have not used any references when you in fact did) is a violation too.

It's like that question you find on employment applications asking if you've been convicted of a crime within the past seven years:  Answering "yes" won't necessarily cost you the job, but lying about it most certainly will.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 1, 2009)

Yeah, basically we do get an admin history and Ahkahna has been good about following up on why she does removals of this nature. She's generally the one I see do it the most. She had posted what was removed and as you can see she's duplicated what is reported to the admins.

As most have probably surmised by now it wasn't a matter of an admin removing what he/she felt like, but rather someone not citing material he/she heavily referenced from.

Interesting that Jesskit's rebuttal was about someone's "husband and life" to attend to. That's harassment.


----------



## Eevee (May 1, 2009)

Dear OP:

Get over yourself!  You traced someone else's photo.  Cite it or learn to draw without tracing.


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

Just out of curiosity, where in FA's ToS, AUP, or Submission Agreement is there anything said about citing references? I've never noticed that rule.


----------



## Ahkahna (May 1, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Just out of curiosity, where in FA's ToS, AUP, or Submission Agreement is there anything said about citing references? I've never noticed that rule.



Submission Policy:
"Upon submitting to FA you grant the website non-exclusive rights to transmit, resize, store, display, publish or alter any submission media within the boundaries of the site's domains. Submissions may not be uploaded with intent to maliciously target, harass or cause harm to another individual. In addition, submissions uploaded must be of your own creation or must have been created expressly for you (and then, only posted with permission from the original artist(s)). *All sources (inspirations, sampling, references, copyright) must be cited, credited and documented within the submission's description.* _Failure to do so may result in removal of the submission without notice._ By finalizing the submission, you agree that any and all information contained within the description of said submission is truthful and accurate."


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

I have more overlays of her traced art if you'd like them.

Here are the links.

Husky: http://i44.tinypic.com/m9vm1z.png
Malamute: http://i40.tinypic.com/207vyjb.png
Lion King: http://i39.tinypic.com/33f7udz.png


----------



## LizardKing (May 1, 2009)

It says in your profile you're a member of the "anti-drama-llama movement" or some such.

That is all.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 1, 2009)

KittCreations said:


> Posted by suggestion of Dragoneer. If this post is suspeneded or anything else by the admins, well I'll know why (I told him that I don't trust his staff to actually do their job correctly because they've shown me they're incapable of such.)



Just noticed this little tidbit.

Either Neer just pulled one of the dirtiest admin tricks in the book of exposing you for your failure to read and abide by rules or he had no clue what was going on since Ahkahna posted why you got the boot.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> I have more overlays of her traced art if you'd like them.
> 
> Here are the links.
> 
> ...



More.

I don't believe this is a proper use of "using a pose"...
More like direct trace. :\

http://i43.tinypic.com/6t1hs5.png

Also, at the right side, very bottom picture, I believe was ganked from this image.
Jess's picture: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2241765

A quick Googly Moogly: http://lh5.ggpht.com/_ekaLo1OCw8w/RwjX_BjQwII/AAAAAAAABnY/RD64wAK2O8Q/IMG_1844.JPG

I did an overlay and certain parts matched up, other parts such as the right foreleg were moved.


----------



## ArielMT (May 1, 2009)

LizardKing said:


> It says in your profile you're a member of the "anti-drama-llama movement" or some such.
> 
> That is all.



It's good stuff that's aimed to help out FA users in genuine need of help, the ADLM.

I didn't notice that before.  Rather ironic that it should be promoted by one who saw fit to generate needless drama.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

KittCreations said:


> Her problem: OH MY GAWD I USED PHOTOS OF ANIMALS FOR A POSE!
> Seriously, no copyright law was violated or anywhere near violated.
> 
> You cannot copyright a pose or the anatomy of something like a tiger, lion, leopard, fox, wolf, husky, and so on. No one 'owns' these things- they are part of nature and last I checked you cannot copyright nature.
> ...



Teal Deer much

But, you mentioned before that if you took a picture of Roxie, yes that would be YOUR PICTURE.
YOUR PROPERTY, right?
You can cut it up, post it all over the neighbourhood, call it yours, trace it, etc.
It's your picture.

It still applies to other's pictures.
If a person goes to the zoo and photographs the animals, those pictures are theirs, you did not ask to trace their pictures and call it your art. :S
You're tracing their art.

Also, why are you being mouthy with the admins when they're just doing their jobs.

SORRY FOR THE MULTI-POSTS. ]:


----------



## Jayness (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> More.
> 
> I don't believe this is a proper use of "using a pose"...
> More like direct trace. :\
> ...



And considering this was one of those traces that were removed last time she was caught.
She even got temporarily banned back then. I wonder how many times we'll witness this same circus.
Jess, when will you learn?


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

Jayness said:


> And considering this was one of those traces that were removed last time she was caught.
> She even got temporarily banned back then. I wonder how many times we'll witness this same circus.
> Jess, when will you learn?



Oh ikr.
Back when Dchan busted her for tracing and that was one of the pictures included in the overlays, she had a huge fit about how they're trolls and she's done nothing wrong and she doesn't trace.

...So she puts up one of the traced pictures.
Uggh, she'll never learn.
"Style no longer used".... as in "traced a while ago"
Like this picture.
I'm looking on Le GooglÃ© for a real photograph.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2237923/


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

Ahkahna said:


> *All sources (inspirations, sampling, references, copyright) must be cited, credited and documented within the submission's description.*



Ahh. Okay. The submission agreement is much denser and less structured than the ToS and AUP, that's probably why I never noticed that.

Regardless, there are definitely problems with that rule. In cases of sampling and copyright (which are, quite often, the same issue), why is it being enforced without the request or knowledge of the affected copyright holder? Unless it's a blatant duplicate of something under copyright, there are too many issues around whether it's actually an infringement of copyright (it could be a fair use, or not even a use at all) for a disinterested third party to be making those decisions. It inevitably allows drama and personal vendettas to get injected into the discussion.

And do I really need to go into how futile the policing of "references" and "inspirations" is? All an accused person has to do is say "no, I didn't reference that" and there's no way to disprove them, however implausible their argument may be. Besides, what is there to gain from forcing people to say what inspired them, or what they borrowed elements from? If someone is a hack with no creativity, they'll be ignored or called upon it. If any harassment results, deal with that. Having artistic integrity in the site's rules just complicates these matters, and, as is evident from this ordeal, escalates harassment.

I know that the rule is on the books right now, and that it won't change the issue with the OP, but I think it's time we review that policy.


----------



## Taasla (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Oh ikr.
> Back when Dchan busted her for tracing and that was one of the pictures included in the overlays, she had a huge fit about how they're trolls and she's done nothing wrong and she doesn't trace.
> 
> ...So she puts up one of the traced pictures.
> ...



I'm willing to bet that the front most paw in the original is cut off, and she attempted to draw it in herself.  That might explain why that front paw is so terrible.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

Taasla said:


> I'm willing to bet that the front most paw in the original is cut off, and she attempted to draw it in herself.  That might explain why that front paw is so terrible.



Yep, that's exactly what I thought.

Here's another.

Jess's art: http://www.furaffinity.net/full/2236609/
Original: http://fineartamerica.com/images-medium/cougars-mother-and-cub-stan-hamilton.jpg

Overlay: http://i41.tinypic.com/w81bo0.png

She also did not cite her reference for this picture: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2234348/
Original: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/051205/051205_aslan_hmed_1p.hmedium.jpg

EDIT: Another overlay: http://i43.tinypic.com/2vry7gg.png

& I do believe the below one is traced, but I cannot find a picture. The anatomy in this [older] picture is better than the ones in her recent pictures, and she says this is because she decided to use more "paw-like" hands. The bodies and clothes are still better in this potentially traced picture than in her most recent one. The heads also do not match with the bodies.

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2241415


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 1, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Ahh. Okay. The submission agreement is much denser and less structured than the ToS and AUP, that's probably why I never noticed that.
> 
> Regardless, there are definitely problems with that rule. In cases of sampling and copyright (which are, quite often, the same issue), why is it being enforced without the request or knowledge of the affected copyright holder?



Asking someone to cite a reference is totally different than copyright infringement in the regards that the copyright holder would be claiming suit that it is infringement. 

This is a middle ground for asking for a cited reference so that you don't have to also deal with the drama of people noticing referenced pieces and throwing massive comment fits, because it's not like the general public wouldn't notice and then throw comments down that could qualify as harassment too.

In addition of the copyright holder requests the reference to be taken down, case by case basis (because some people get too uptight and get things wrong as to what is copyright) we look and then abide by the request.

Many of these issues are often reported by other members via the TT system.


----------



## Winail (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> I have more overlays of her traced art if you'd like them.
> 
> Here are the links.
> 
> ...




Oh clayton, I love you.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

Winail said:


> Oh clayton, I love you.



ily 2 hottie bo bottie


----------



## whoadamn (May 1, 2009)

lol.
well, this post backfired...
not to mention this whole "you can't copyright nature" argument loses validity when you're "referencing" (see tracing) cartoons and paintings.

owned.

ahkahna definitely gets credit for remaining civil when presented with so much sheer ignorance


----------



## ArielMT (May 1, 2009)

whoadamn said:


> ... not to mention this whole "you can't copyright nature" argument loses validity when ...



She is right.  Nature and natural things such as basic anatomy indeed can't be copyrighted.

However, what _is_ copyrighted are _expressions_ of nature and natural things.  Expressions of nature are afforded just as much legal protection via copyright as expressions of fiction and other ideas.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> She is right.  Nature and natural things such as basic anatomy indeed can't be copyrighted.
> 
> However, what _is_ copyrighted are _expressions_ of nature and natural things.  Expressions of nature are afforded just as much legal protection via copyright as expressions of fiction and other ideas.



However, you can't go tracing art and photographs that aren't yours, not citing your reference and calling the art yours, when it isn't.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 1, 2009)

Jess is clearly getting a swift, unrelenting ass kicking that she deserves.  We've see lots of her crazyness, her, flat out being told in no uncertian terms that all she had to do was cite the sources of the stuff she blatently ripped off and she'd be okay, she instead goes on a crazy rampage.

Glorious.

Considdering she charges for artwork, her own customers definately deserve to know how much originality they're paying for.


----------



## princessbunny99 (May 1, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Considdering she charges for artwork, her own customers definately deserve to know how much originality they're paying for.



That's the bit that's bugged me about her the most. I don't know how many people she's ripped off with lion king and balto traces, but it's too many :/


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Jess is clearly getting a swift, unrelenting ass kicking that she deserves.  We've see lots of her crazyness, her, flat out being told in no uncertian terms that all she had to do was cite the sources of the stuff she blatently ripped off and she'd be okay, she instead goes on a crazy rampage.
> 
> Glorious.
> 
> Considdering she charges for artwork, her own customers definately deserve to know how much originality they're paying for.




Oh I think she's only just recently opening commissions.
I don't know other than that though. She doesn't have the money or time to train her dog, but she has all the time and money in the world to write annoying, TL;DR posts, trace art and buy tons of fur for fursuit building.
Oh but nvm, she doesn't have any money. She has to pay rent.
Meanwhile she's building fursuits.


----------



## Sheridan (May 1, 2009)

Jess, from my experience.. you're the one who should be spoken to about abuse and harassment, you never seem to have a nice word to say to anybody who graciously offers you good advice.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 1, 2009)

Someone should find a way to lock Jess's first post but not the thread before she deletes it like she does everything else that turns agianst her.  Maybe just remove her ability to edit posts all togther?


----------



## Xaerun (May 1, 2009)

Ashley: Uh... no.


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Someone should find a way to lock Jess's first post but not the thread before she deletes it like she does everything else that turns agianst her.  Maybe just remove her ability to edit posts all togther?



Why lock her post when Ahkahna has a screenshot of her whole post?
:]
It'll just show how childish Jess really is about this whole ordeal if she deletes her post.

Also:
I believe this picture was traced off a screencap of this GIF image [the link in the picture leads to the GIF].
I couldn't get it to match up exactly because it's a GIF of a lion running but..you can see how it matches up in places.

http://i41.tinypic.com/2wf5tv6.png


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 1, 2009)

That's one constepated looking lion. o___o;;;


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> That's one constepated looking lion. o___o;;;



I srs lmfao'd


----------



## Nightingalle (May 1, 2009)

She's been doing this shit for years >>;  It used to be on fanart.lionking.org before she was banned from there.  People kept calling her out on tracing.  No surprise.


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

Arshes Nei said:


> Asking someone to cite a reference is totally different than copyright infringement in the regards that the copyright holder would be claiming suit that it is infringement.
> 
> This is a middle ground for asking for a cited reference so that you don't have to also deal with the drama of people noticing referenced pieces and throwing massive comment fits, because it's not like the general public wouldn't notice and then throw comments down that could qualify as harassment too.



So instead of discouraging drama fits, you change the rules to make them okay? Again, as I stated before, I fail to see how the rule about citing references does anything besides encourage massive ordeals like this. Regardless of how much of a bitch the original poster is being about it, it's not a very constructive rule; it has too many potential gray areas in terms of enforcement, and I really don't see why it exists.


----------



## princessbunny99 (May 1, 2009)

Just cause you don't see why it exists doesn't mean it shouldn't. Sorryeee


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

princessbunny99 said:


> Just cause you don't see why it exists doesn't mean it shouldn't. Sorryeee



Okay? Care to explain why it should then?


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Okay? Care to explain why it should then?




Would you want someone tracing over your art and calling it theirs then not crediting you? :S


----------



## princessbunny99 (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Would you want someone tracing over your art and calling it theirs then not crediting you? :S



This. Heavily using a reference is FINE. No one is arguing that. The point here is that heavily using a reference (tracing/copying/ overlaying what have you) and not crediting the original source isn't allowed on FA.

Why? Because Dragoneer and other admins and artists want it that way. Because it's a good idea. Because artists, photographers and animators deserve credit for their time and talent, even if its just with a traced pose.

Is that enough for you?


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Would you want someone tracing over your art and calling it theirs then not crediting you? :S



I'd probably be offended, but without a confession by the "artist" or concrete evidence about how they arrived at their final product, there's not a lot I can do about it. People imitate stuff all the time, and if they do it well and thus get any respect for it, they're just better at marketing than the original artist. That's life. FurAffinity seems to want to fight against that uncorrectable fact of life, and by attempting that, we've ended up with this fiasco. And there are many more complicated ways a similar issue could arise.

Would the original poster even get so angry if people had just not given attention to derivative, crappy artwork?


----------



## Volkodav (May 1, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> I'd probably be offended, but without a confession by the "artist" or concrete evidence about how they arrived at their final product, there's not a lot I can do about it. People imitate stuff all the time, and if they do it well and thus get any respect for it, they're just better at marketing than the original artist. That's life. FurAffinity seems to want to fight against that uncorrectable fact of life, and by attempting that, we've ended up with this fiasco. And there are many more complicated ways a similar issue could arise.
> 
> Would the original poster even get so angry if people had just not given attention to derivative, crappy artwork?



Yes, but if you see an image that you KNOW is directly traced off of yours and maybe altered a bit, I'm sure it would bother you.
You're not allowed to claim others' art as your own, whether it be a photograph, painting, drawn art, sculpture, etc.

What Jess is doing is claiming others' art as her own, expecting people to not notice and take action against it.
It's plain rude.


----------



## XerxesQados (May 1, 2009)

Clayton said:


> What Jess is doing is claiming others' art as her own, expecting people to not notice and take action against it.
> It's plain rude.



Some people are rude. Move on with your life.


----------



## princessbunny99 (May 1, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Some people are rude. Move on with your life.



Oh ok. I guess you win.


----------



## Volkodav (May 2, 2009)

XerxesQados said:


> Some people are rude. Move on with your life.



..It's still against the law. :S
H.O while I trace a picture of Scooby Doo and call him Clayton.


----------



## Dragoneer (May 2, 2009)

Arshes Nei said:


> Just noticed this little tidbit.
> 
> Either Neer just pulled one of the dirtiest admin tricks in the book of exposing you for your failure to read and abide by rules or he had no clue what was going on since Ahkahna posted why you got the boot.


I always suggest that if people disagree with admin actions and feel that they were mis-judged or treated unfairly that they can voice their opinions on the forum. It wasn't a setup for failure, but a setup to voice her opinions freely.

After my conversation with Jesskitt in AIM and her threatening to sue to the site, I felt that if she believed she had a valid case she should bring it. And since she stated all admins were untrustworthy I felt doing it in open forum and transparent was a viable option for her.


----------



## whoadamn (May 2, 2009)

ArielMT said:


> She is right.  Nature and natural things such as basic anatomy indeed can't be copyrighted.
> 
> However, what _is_ copyrighted are _expressions_ of nature and natural things.  Expressions of nature are afforded just as much legal protection via copyright as expressions of fiction and other ideas.


there is, in fact, more to that sentence than you apparently interpreted...

also
echo -e '#include <stdio.h>\nint main(){printf("Mew!\\n");}'>scriptkitty.c&&gcc -o scriptkitty scriptkitty.c&&./scriptkitty
...why


----------



## Volkodav (May 2, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> I always suggest that if people disagree with admin actions and feel that they were mis-judged or treated unfairly that they can voice their opinions on the forum. It wasn't a setup for failure, but a setup to voice her opinions freely.
> 
> After my conversation with Jesskitt in AIM and her threatening to sue to the site, I felt that if she believed she had a valid case she should bring it. And since she stated all admins were untrustworthy I felt doing it in open forum and transparent was a viable option for her.


Why in god's name does she think she can sue the site, and what for??
:S
"THEY WON'T LET ME POST TRACED ART"


----------



## ArielMT (May 2, 2009)

whoadamn said:


> there is, in fact, more to that sentence than you apparently interpreted...



I simply wanted to highlight the part I was replying to.  The rest of the post had me essentially nodding my head in agreement.



whoadamn said:


> also
> echo -e '#include <stdio.h>\nint main(){printf("Mew!\\n");}'>scriptkitty.c&&gcc -o scriptkitty scriptkitty.c&&./scriptkitty
> ...why



Simply because.  :3


----------



## Dragoneer (May 2, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Why in god's name does she think she can sue the site, and what for??
> :S
> "THEY WON'T LET ME POST TRACED ART"


Essentially, yes. Jesskitt claimed we were suppressing her copyright.


----------



## Kesteh (May 2, 2009)

Tl;dr, it's jesskit. 
Calls theft on authentic and original pieces, yet doesn't check herself to shut her own damn mouth.


----------



## Volkodav (May 2, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> Essentially, yes. Jesskitt claimed we were suppressing her copyright.



My god. For someone who knows so much about copyrights and the law, she doesn't know anything.


----------



## Altera (May 2, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Why in god's name does she think she can sue the site, and what for??
> :S
> "THEY WON'T LET ME POST TRACED ART"



she's a law school drop-out who lives in a camper van. She's sue-happy.


----------



## Volkodav (May 2, 2009)

Altera said:


> she's a law school drop-out who lives in a camper van. She's sue-happy.



Ohmygodlmfao


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 2, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> Essentially, yes. Jesskitt claimed we were suppressing her *violation of* copyright.


 
Fixed.


----------



## Jayness (May 2, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> After my conversation with Jesskitt in AIM and her threatening to sue to the site, I felt that if she believed she had a valid case she should bring it. And since she stated all admins were untrustworthy I felt doing it in open forum and transparent was a viable option for her.



Haha, wow! I believe she threatened to do the same thing for Brian Tiemann on lionking.org.
Talking about dÃ©jÃ  vu.


----------



## Dragoneer (May 2, 2009)

Jayness said:


> Haha, wow! I believe she threatened to do the same thing for Brian Tiemann on lionking.org.
> Talking about dÃ©jÃ  vu.


My exact words to Jesskitt when she threatened to sue was "Bring it". And I stand by that.


----------



## Jealousy (May 2, 2009)

Good for you Dragoneer. There is no way anything like this can stand in court.


----------



## Makyui (May 2, 2009)

Yeah, I have to wonder why she thinks she can sue FA for banning her, and get anywhere with it. FA is pretty much legally allowed to ban anyone for any reason that they see fit, including for _no_ reason, if my understanding is correct.

It's like trying to sue to get into a private club. Membership is not exactly a right.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 2, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> My exact words to Jesskitt when she threatened to sue was "Bring it". And I stand by that.


 
Don't forget, after you win the suit, you can counter sue for the payment of your legal fees. ^_^



Makyui said:


> Yeah, I have to wonder why she thinks she can sue FA for banning her, and get anywhere with it. FA is pretty much legally allowed to ban anyone for any reason that they see fit, including for _no_ reason, if my understanding is correct.
> 
> It's like trying to sue to get into a private club. Membership is not exactly a right.


I've actually alwanted to see a furry try to take some insane copyright to court, just so the court records could be published for laughs.

Furry Lawyer: "Your honor, my client insists that she owns the copyright of the term 'Wox', a combination of the words 'Wolf' and 'Fox' and wishes to sue the defendent for copyright damages."
Judge: "Don't you mean 'Trademark' instead of 'Copyright'?"
Furry Laywer: "I tried to explain that to her your honor but she refused to listen."
Judge: "Did you also explain to her that nothing so generic could be reasonably trademarked?"
Furry: "COPYRIGHT!  NOT TRADEMARK!  I READ IT ONLINE!!!"
Judge: "You get paid even if you lose, don't you?"
Furry Lawyer:  "Oh yes sir."
Judge: "Defense?"
Defense Lawyer: "With our opening statements, we'd like to rest our case."


----------



## Xaerun (May 2, 2009)

Is this gonna go anywhere further, or are we done here?


----------



## Ahkahna (May 2, 2009)

Xaerun said:


> Is this gonna go anywhere further, or are we done here?



Knowing Jess, I doubt she has access to internet for the weekend, so I suggest this thread be open up until Monday afternoon unless the thread completely spirals out of control. However, if you (and Neer agrees) feel it's necessary to close it down, by all means.

Edit: Clay, I removed several images you noted, however a few I left up due to the fact that she already cited her references or, in the case of the husky head, was original enough to be considered ok.


----------



## Jayness (May 2, 2009)

Btw, dunno if this has been posted yet - or maybe I missed it.
But this image:

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2238144/

I knew it was too familiar:
http://i44.tinypic.com/34qk6rr.jpg

The female wolf looks also like something I've seen in the Balto movie, but haven't had luck to recognize where.


----------



## Sheridan (May 2, 2009)

Jayness said:


> Btw, dunno if this has been posted yet - or maybe I missed it.
> But this image:
> 
> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2238144/
> ...





			
				JessKitt said:
			
		

> It is actually possible to draw in a style w/o tracing
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Haha.. hahaha.. HAHAHA!

Jess, honey, give it up! You're so busted, learn this lesson and move on, stop repeating the same mistakes!


----------



## Rafeal (May 2, 2009)

Actually, I...

...kinda feel sorry for her.

Call it sympathy for the devil, but I honestly hope she learns something from all of this.

*shrugs*
Raf


----------



## Jayness (May 2, 2009)

Rafeal said:


> Actually, I...
> 
> ...kinda feel sorry for her.
> 
> ...



Well... considering this isn't first or even second time she's busted for doing this by total count, I wouldn't put too high hopes here.
But it really is rather sad.


----------



## Nightingalle (May 2, 2009)

Jayness said:


> Haha, wow! I believe she threatened to do the same thing for Brian Tiemann on lionking.org.
> Talking about dÃ©jÃ  vu.



Yup.  And then she was banned.  Finally came back under another name and tried to act like she wasn't Jess (even though I had overlayed her drawings and sent them to Brian directly). Then a year later or so she was like ' lol ok this was just an experiment c: I'm gone now!' and left again >>  Wtf.


----------



## Jayness (May 2, 2009)

KoiFishSushi said:


> Yup.  And then she was banned.  Finally came back under another name and tried to act like she wasn't Jess (even though I had overlayed her drawings and sent them to Brian directly). Then a year later or so she was like ' lol ok this was just an experiment c: I'm gone now!' and left again >>  Wtf.



Wait what? Honestly?
I never saw the whole issue 'cause I left the fandom about a year or two earlier.
But this is just... wack.


----------



## Dragoneer (May 2, 2009)

KoiFishSushi said:


> Yup.  And then she was banned.  Finally came back under another name and tried to act like she wasn't Jess (even though I had overlayed her drawings and sent them to Brian directly). Then a year later or so she was like ' lol ok this was just an experiment c: I'm gone now!' and left again >>  Wtf.


That's generally the attitude of most copy artists, unfortunately.


----------



## Armaetus (May 2, 2009)

Jess knew what she was doing, even with my own wordings prior to this thread. I posted several reference photos of what she allegedly traced in her submissions and simply ignored it, claiming I was harassing or something (do my shouts on her page even count as harrassment?). I stopped communication to her when I was asked to stop by an admin.

Jesskit, if you knew your pictures were heavily referenced, you should have stated them in the submission information instead of putting "ORIGINAL ARTWORK" in it like they all say. Everyone on the site has to follow the rules, including you..and you would not be in this situation if you just cited references in them.


----------



## Kesteh (May 2, 2009)

You know...in high school I'm pretty sure they get you to write research essays. You HAVE to cite on those.
I'm guessing she either cheated or failed the class.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 2, 2009)

http://forum.freeadvice.com/copyrights-trademarks-39/anatomy-poses-466392.html#post2249684

Jess isn't getting the free legal advice she wanted to hear.



> Because JessKitt ignored the initial attempts by the website to regulate her drawings, she could be found guilty of willful infringement. Actual damages, profits, and statutory damages could be awarded, should the photographer decide to sue. An intentional infringer may have to pay as much as $150,000 per work infringed.


 


> The administrator can require whatever he or she wants as a condition of your participation on the site. If you are required to cite sources for your "artwork" or risk being banned from the site, they can do that. If you are required to pat your head and rub your tummy while singing Monty Python's "Lumberjack Song" or risk being banned, they can do that, too. Their site, their rules. Play by their rules, or get booted.


 
Probably the only way JessKitt could even sue FA would be in FA took something that she created as an ACTUAL original work, and then used it in advertising material as FA gains income from advertisements published on it.  There really should be some sorta 'Furry Primer On Copyright And Trademark'.  Cause, god damn, the majority of the fandom is GROSSLY misinformed.  Hell there's someone on FA who claims copyright over the term 'Zeolf', a portmanteau of 'Zebra' and 'Wolf'.  Not only would that be a trademark not a copyright, it'd be indefensable due to genericism.


----------



## Volkodav (May 2, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> http://forum.freeadvice.com/copyrights-trademarks-39/anatomy-poses-466392.html#post2249684
> 
> Jess isn't getting the free legal advice she wanted to hear.
> 
> ...



LMAO
If you can't afford your life now Jess, wait until you get sued.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 3, 2009)

Clayton said:


> LMAO
> If you can't afford your life now Jess, wait until you get sued.


 
Good thing she's keeping it on the down-low by creating as many internet logs about it as she possibly can, right?


----------



## Volkodav (May 3, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Good thing she's keeping it on the down-low by creating as many internet logs about it as she possibly can, right?


Oh for sure.
It'll make her situation better if she mouths off as much as she can and posts more traced art.


----------



## Dragoneer (May 3, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> http://forum.freeadvice.com/copyrights-trademarks-39/anatomy-poses-466392.html#post2249684
> 
> Jess isn't getting the free legal advice she wanted to hear.


So, Jess decided to research to try to build action against us so she could take legal against her her "copyright violation". Interesting. And some of the responses from the legal gurus there are quite hilarious.

WELL! This certainly changes things.

<farnsworth>Oh my, yes. </farnsworth>


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 3, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> So, Jess decided to research to try to build action against us so she could take legal against her her "copyright violation". Interesting. And some of the responses from the legal gurus there are quite hilarious.
> 
> WELL! This certainly changes things.
> 
> <farnsworth>Oh my, yes. </farnsworth>


 
I actually wish that she'd look at those responses, shit bricks and begin to back peddle.  With her history however, even when 'SLAMMED with the fact that she's wrong she'd just start telling those people how they're wrong.  Assuming she does respond, she'd probably begin lecturing those she sought advice from about how they are cleary wrong and do know anything.


----------



## Kesteh (May 3, 2009)

JessKit -4, World 10.


_Flawless Victory!_


----------



## Dragoneer (May 3, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Assuming she does respond, she'd probably begin lecturing those she sought advice from about how they are cleary wrong and do know anything.


She won't have to worry about backpeddling on FA. =)

I'm all for hearing people out, even when they disagree with me, but when you go to an advice/legal group to try and get evidence to support your case _*AFTER* threatening the site owner with legal action,_ well, uh... let me just put it this way: I agree with members of freeadvice.com's legal section. She's got far more to worry about than just a banhammer. But she's going to have to worry about that, too.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 3, 2009)

Dragoneer said:


> I agree with members of freeadvice.com's legal section. She's got far more to worry about than just a banhammer. But she's going to have to worry about that, too.


 
In general, copyright law is pretty straight forward, what would be infringement and would not be infringement is pretty clear.  I've seen umpteen misassumptions about copyright law in the furry fandom that honestly I think there needs to be a point form brief that furries could be linked to that clears it up.

You don't need to go 'OMG COPYRIGHT ME!' for something to be copyrighted, if you made it, it's copyrighted to you reguardless of how you mark it.  If you publish it for free online (Say on FA), if others copy it down and post it elsewhere online it's not copyright infringement.  The exception to this being if you take someone elses freely distributed work and use it some sort of for-profit operation like a print magazine or a pay-access website.  But legally, you could post anything on FA to fchan and no one could sue fchan.  (Fchan just bends over and takes it from crazy bitchy artists ANYWAY.)

You can't copyright a 'character idea'.  I could write a story about a cocky captian who speaks in half sentances on an earth star ship, does it with green alien chicks and argues with an illogical first officer, despite being a BLATENT rip of Stat Trek, the characterization of Kirk is almost IMPOSSIBLE to copyright or trademark.  VISUAL images are a lot easier, how Wolverine looks in Marvel Comics, that's an easy to defend trademark.  If he only existed in text however without graphical representation, most ripoffs would be near impossible to protect.  I've seen furries claim copyright and ownership of the location of the STRIPES on their characters and think that it'd be enforcable.

Not only that, most of copyright and trademark law applies to buisness.  Materials in commercial operations and where other commercial operations are infringing your copyright and earning money off of your work.  If you do buisness under the name of your fursona, say 'FoxPaw Productions' and sell stuff, that could be trademarked.  If you're just 'Some guy' with the frusona character 'FoxPaw' you have no trademark rights over the character and I could make a complete clone of your character and roleplay it online, on the same sites you do, you could never sue for trademark infringement.

It's amazing, the rights that many in the fandom think they have when they do not have them.


----------



## Jealousy (May 3, 2009)

Very much so. I'm surprised no one has decided to try to find the original artists themselves and convinced them to sue her. The internet can be a very dangerous place.


----------



## Volkodav (May 3, 2009)

Oh the hilarity.

I really wanna' see what Jess has to say about this.
I bet she'll start backpedaling and denying everything like Ashley said.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 3, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Oh the hilarity.
> 
> I really wanna' see what Jess has to say about this.
> I bet she'll start backpedaling and denying everything like Ashley said.


It's sad really, cause you want to see someone smarten the hell up but she has a long, long, long history of never learning or changing as a result of her mistakes.  She doesn't even learn to mask her irrational behavour.

She even distracted herself with 'Copyright bullshit' when all she was asked was to cite the references for the stuff she blatently ripped off.  They didn't even threaten to ban her for basicly just tracing stuff, hell, that's what I woulda done.  However I suppose that requiring her to basicly openly admit and post evidence herself that her work is largely just traced off of other work would be a far worse fate than banishment.  Imagine the comments when she had to link in every description the source of what she had traced?


----------



## Jayness (May 3, 2009)

Clayton said:


> Oh the hilarity.
> 
> I really wanna' see what Jess has to say about this.
> I bet she'll start backpedaling and denying everything like Ashley said.



Either that or she does what she did last time she left FA 4ever: blame everyone for causing drama on her. It was everyone else's fault and she was just the victim.
When the sad truth is, all this drama about copyrights (and even critique) is downright her own fault.


----------



## Volkodav (May 3, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> It's sad really, cause you want to see someone smarten the hell up but she has a long, long, long history of never learning or changing as a result of her mistakes.  She doesn't even learn to mask her irrational behavour.
> 
> She even distracted herself with 'Copyright bullshit' when all she was asked was to cite the references for the stuff she blatently ripped off.  They didn't even threaten to ban her for basicly just tracing stuff, hell, that's what I woulda done.  However I suppose that requiring her to basicly openly admit and post evidence herself that her work is largely just traced off of other work would be a far worse fate than banishment.  Imagine the comments when she had to link in every description the source of what she had traced?



Oh I know. She acts a bit like my brother, in a way.
He's got serious issues, and in order to get attention he'll try to piss people off or he'll break something as a way of getting that attention.
Jess here is tracing art and mouthing off [like my brother does], probably to get attention, if she didn't like drama she simply wouldn't be making all of these threads.
She wants attention, and is just setting herself up for trouble in the long run.

You have a very good point though.


----------



## Jayness (May 3, 2009)

I see that all five of her accounts are currently banned.
Hope you don't mind my curiosity for asking, is it temporary or permanent?


----------



## Ahkahna (May 3, 2009)

It is a *permanent ban*. We will not tolerate any further actions from her as she has shown no interest in complying with FA's TOS, AUP, and Submission policy, nor being remotely civil.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 3, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> In general, copyright law is pretty straight forward, what would be infringement and would not be infringement is pretty clear.  I've seen umpteen misassumptions about copyright law in the furry fandom that honestly I think there needs to be a point form brief that furries could be linked to that clears it up.
> 
> You don't need to go 'OMG COPYRIGHT ME!' for something to be copyrighted, if you made it, it's copyrighted to you reguardless of how you mark it.  If you publish it for free online (Say on FA), if others copy it down and post it elsewhere online it's not copyright infringement.  The exception to this being if you take someone elses freely distributed work and use it some sort of for-profit operation like a print magazine or a pay-access website.  But legally, you could post anything on FA to fchan and no one could sue fchan.  (Fchan just bends over and takes it from crazy bitchy artists ANYWAY.)
> 
> ...



Wow Ashley, umm you are very wrong. I mean your paragraph that if someone can repost what you did online for free and that's why "Fchan" and them can get away with it is just....no sorry wrong. 

I provide Neer with actual cases where infringement can happen and what is your rights between a registered copyright and unregistered one. 

Copyright is exactly that. It's how and where you can copy someone else's creation and the rights involved in doing so. It has nothing to do with reposting for "free" or not. If a user with an unregistered copyright wants an image down they can request for take down because it's actually within copyright. They cannot however sue for damages if their copyright is unregistered within a certain time frame of that incident. The problem is if siteA doesn't want to abide you'd have to sue for damages and if your copyright isn't registered it's harder.

Jesskit was never a threat -  could go to all the lawyers she wants. The thing about copyright cases is that lawyers do not like taking cases like this without money up front, and certainly not without a case. In general it can costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to get the filing for these kind of lawsuits done. That's why unless there's a real winning cut and dry case, a lawyer will not take her kind of case. 

Jesskit was in violation of copyright if anything...which members have correctly surmised. Now you know why it's asked you cite a reference. If that infringed copyright owner wants FA to take it down we do. It's their right. FA wouldn't necessarily be liable for her infringing works if we didn't know and act upon it. Only if we ignore take-down orders and the person follows suit would we possibly be in trouble with the original copyright owners. I believe this was due to one of the Digital Acts.


----------



## Armaetus (May 3, 2009)

I am surprised she has not bothered to respond more than once on this thread of hers, despite the overwhelming evidence against her. How are you staff going to make sure she does stay banned and not make new accounts, watching the IP address that she uses now that might open new accounts?


----------



## Ahkahna (May 3, 2009)

We will be keeping an eye on her accounts, yes. If she makes anything new she has been warned through my email to her that there will be a permanent IP ban placed against her.

I'm not surprised at all that she hasn't responded, in fact it was expected.


----------



## jayhusky (May 3, 2009)

Ahkahna said:


> We will be keeping an eye on her accounts, yes. If she makes anything new she has been warned through my email to her that there will be a permanent IP ban placed against her.
> 
> I'm not surprised at all that she hasn't responded, in fact it was expected.



Umm If the IP address is a Dynamic IP then wouldn't that affect a wide variety of people, whereas if Static it would only affect her.


----------



## Stratelier (May 3, 2009)

Ahkahna said:


> I'm not surprised at all that she hasn't responded, in fact it was expected.


Case closed then.  Lock plz?


----------



## Ahkahna (May 3, 2009)

furcity said:


> Umm If the IP address is a Dynamic IP then wouldn't that affect a wide variety of people, whereas if Static it would only affect her.



Then it will need to be discussed with Neer on what to do.


----------



## Ahkahna (May 4, 2009)

Just a few more things, and the thread will remain permanently locked.

My email to her for reasoning of her permanent ban status:

_"Hello Jesskitt,

As per the rules of this site your account has been permanently banned for the following multiple infractions against you:

TOS: *FA will take action against users found to be crude and vulgar. Crude and vulgar is defined as, but not limited to, in this case: derogatory remarks, disruptive behavior.

Submission Policy: "In addition, submissions uploaded must be of your own creation or must have been created expressly for you (and then, only posted with permission from the original artist(s)). All sources (inspirations, sampling, references, copyright) must be cited, credited and documented within the submission's description. Failure to do so may result in removal of the submission without notice. By finalizing the submission, you agree that any and all information contained within the description of said submission is truthful and accurate."

Harassment or retaliation against staff for enforcement of the site rules will not be tolerated.

TOS:-
Code of Conduct - The Three Laws of Courtesy

* A user may not intentionally harass, slander or disrupt another User of the site, or, through inaction, intentionally allow another User to come to be harassed.
* A user must obey the requests and guidelines given to them by the Administration, except where such orders would conflict with the first law.
* A user may protect their interests, as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second Law.

You also accept that any submission uploaded to the FA domains is done of your own volition, and you accept full responsibility for any consequences which may arise. You agree that FA is in no way responsible for monetary damages or losses incurred as a result of any submission or information uploaded.

--Enforcement Policy--
FA staff will uphold the policies set forth by the TOS, SA and AUP and will protect the general interests of the Service. This includes, but is not limited to: art theft, identity theft, harassment, defacement, piracy or other illegal activity.

A is committed to fair and equal treatment of all members. Suspected violations will be fully investigated before action is taken. Members of FA are expected to follow any reasonable requests and/or instructions given to them from staff within the boundaries of the site's domain. Users found in violation of site policies will have action taken against their account which may involve removal of submissions, temporary suspension from the Service and/or outright termination of their FA membership.

>>>>Repeated violations of the TOS rules will result in permanent suspension of your account.
Suspension and Termination of Membership
FA may, at any time and without notice, suspend or terminate a user's membership with the Service and/or remove content without notice. You agree that we are not liable for the loss of data, information or financial loss resulting from termination or suspension.

Copyrights
All international copyright laws and intellectual property laws apply. Artwork found on FA is copyright the original artist unless otherwise stated. Submissions and content may only be transmit to FA so long as they are in full compliance with the terms outlined in the SA and AUP.

Aditionally, you were given multiple chances to correct the mistakes. Rather than act reasonably you reacted aggressively, acted against the rules of Fur Affinity and against Staff members. As per your post here, you are clearly told what you had done was not appropriate: http://forum.freeadvice.com/copyrigh...ml#post2249684

As of today, you are Permanently banned from returning to Fur Affinity, all of your accounts have been locked. Any attempts to make more accounts will result in an IP ban and further action by the site owner, Dragoneer, may be taken.

Fur Affinity Administration,
-Ahkahna" _

Email from Jess, today:

_"JessKitt
to Ahkahna

show details 5:31 PM (3 hours ago)


Reply


Legal action will be taken later on. You have no right to do this and legally there was no copyright infringement. *If you could just give me your personal contact information*, I will be more than happy to consult a lawyer and file a lawsuit.

You don't uphold your policy. You allow people to harass me, you do it yourself, and then you kick me because I called out your corruption.

Dragoneer is week and will not do anything about this situation, thus I will need his information as well.

IP banning me isn't going to help your cause.

~Jess aka Kitt

" _

(I edited in my name and outlined the section in bold)

Also:


----------

