Crush...Yiff...Destroy! Crush...Yiff...Destroy!
The CYD Forum Archive
 

Fursuit Furore, or LAWSUITE
   Crush...Yiff...Destroy! Forum Archive Index -> News
Author Message
Mitch
Vociferator
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 658

Posted: 1/9/2005 12:02:53 PM     Post subject: Fursuit Furore, or LAWSUITE  

So, you'll have seen Subversive's two-page piece, "The Bitter Ex-furry's Guide to Fursuiting". Well, the images on the 2nd page have caused something of a ruckus. Here's some emails Subversive and I have received.

First up is a communication introducing Lieutenant Blackberry of the INTARNET P.D. hot on the trail of a moving copyright violation:


Read the Berne Convention a little more closely. I will wager that you reside in one of the nations that signed onto the treaty. Posting those copyrighted photographs is a clear violation of international copyright law.

It's true that you may have gotten them via Sibe's illegal file sharing service, and not stolen them yourself, but it's your responsibility to remove them.

To the administrators: This article contains photographs copyrighted to the photographers and the likenesses of characters copyrighted to their creators. Please remove them.


And then we hear from the owner of this suit:


Subject: copyright


Hello there

You have used a picture with copyright on your page. I don't have give the permission to use my picture. Please delete it from your page.
Its the 12th picture from above on this page: http://www.crushyiffdestroy.com/show-article.php?file=fs2 (The black bat with the white eyes)


Next up, photographer Mark Chester, who took this happy pic


Subject: copyrighted infringement


My name is Mark I. Chester. I am a photographer in San Francisco, CA and I find that you are using a copyrighted image of mine on your website. You do not have permission to use the image. Please remove it immediately.

http://www.crushyiffdestroy.com/show-article.php?file=fs2

I've also included a screen capture with my photo and your comment.

I look forward to your email telling me that the image has been removed and an appropriate apology for appropriating material that you no not have permission to use.

Mark I. Chester


I am at a dead loss as to what might be "an appropriate apology", or what penalties I'll face if my apology is deemed inappropriate.

Naturally I ask Blackberry what business this is of his:

> Blackberry,
>
> Who died and made you Guardian of International Copyright? Seriously, it
> looks a little odd to be coming on like the Internet Police. Also, thanks
> for emailing all those people, you busybody stickybeak! Remember - no
> publicity is bad publicity!
>
> And FYI, at least two of the images are perfectly OK with the persons
> depicted; I'll leave you to discover which.
>
> In the meantime, exactly what action do you propose to take over this
> moving copyright violation? I am all agog and quivering with anticipation!
> Gimme your best shot, big boy!

I just want to make this clear so I can inform your upstream
connection providers: you support any and all illegal activities
carried out by your members, or just selected crimes?

I am merely a concerned party. Too many people have been hurt by this nonsense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kadius
Needs to get out more
Joined: 10 Feb 2004
Posts: 911

Posted: 1/9/2005 12:17:39 PM     Post subject:  

Oh noes, CYD is gonna get lawsuited.

Seriously, I doubt anyone would convict you if you beat them half to death. I mean, really. They have a picture taken of themselves and then they post it on the internet for the whole world to see. It gets on a site like this and suddenly they're ashamed of it and want it gone?

I am at a dead loss as to what might be "an appropriate apology", or what penalties I'll face if my apology is deemed inappropriate.
Something around the lines of:
Dear Mr. Chester, I am sorry you put on a fursuit and made an ass of yourself. Would probably be appropriate. Atleast good for a laugh.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SquareMoogle
Vociferator
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Posts: 357

Posted: 1/9/2005 12:24:55 PM     Post subject:  

Shit, they're onto you. Better take those images down before the internet-police take you to internet-jail. Keep the emails a'comin'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Donotsue
Needs to get out more
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 884

Posted: 1/9/2005 12:27:33 PM     Post subject:  

Aren't the pics used for fair review purposes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DA
Vociferator
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 595

Posted: 1/9/2005 1:42:22 PM     Post subject:  

What a bunch of stupidity, I think it's totally legal under fair use policys since they're being used to educate. I don't think they'd have the guts to take you to a judge anyway, can you imagine that?

Judge: what's the problem?

Furry: He posted pictures of me...

Judge: What pictures? *is shown and bursts out laughing* How did he get them?

Furry: I posted them on a newsgroup...

Judge: Dismissed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SLaitila
Vociferator
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 490

Posted: 1/9/2005 4:14:31 PM     Post subject:  

I recall Shawn Keller did an animation of Blackberry once. It was with his internet-policing and the fursuit he claims to be safe for children.

What a fat retard. BLACKBERRY IS A FAT RETARD, NOT KELLER
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Baird
Prattler
Joined: 04 Aug 2003
Posts: 140

Posted: 1/9/2005 4:26:14 PM     Post subject:  

'Real' legal advice would probably take the Defamation angle... However, defamation court cases are amoung the most expensive there are, in practically having the plaintiffs pay for absolutely everything in the court (except the defence)... an easy US$40,000. I don't think from seeing the quality of the fursuits that anyone has anything to worry about...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
m_estrugo
Vociferator
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 534

Posted: 1/9/2005 4:56:14 PM     Post subject:  

I recall Shawn Keller did an animation of Blackberry once. It was with his internet-policing and the fursuit he claims to be safe for children.

What a fat retard.


TH' CHILDRENNNNNNNN!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skunkfuckers Inc.
Needs to get out more
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 1006

Posted: 1/9/2005 6:19:30 PM     Post subject:  

I recall Shawn Keller did an animation of Blackberry once. It was with his internet-policing and the fursuit he claims to be safe for children.

What a fat retard.


That little gem is included along with other Keller animations I've made available for download here :D

Notice it would seem I'm not only sharing an artists works without their express written permission, but am breaking a written rule of this very board. In actuality it's not a problem because 1) those animations were already posted on the internet and meant for public consumption, and 2) Shawn Keller isn't an asshat.

The problem with furries is they always want it their way all the time, with no room for criticism, fair use, reason or common sense. It's their way or the highway, and since no one's going to back them up and they're too weak to mount any sort of effective case against anyone, it's invariably the highway - for them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The New Meat
Needs to get out more
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 933

Posted: 1/9/2005 6:48:45 PM     Post subject:  

Not to toot my own horn, but may I direct your attention to http://www.crushyiffdestroy.com/show-article.php?file=desist


Copyright schmopyright, they got nothing. And even if they had something, what are they gonna do about it? No jury would have the slightest sympathy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Hirtes
Needs to get out more
Joined: 04 Aug 2003
Posts: 820

Posted: 1/9/2005 8:59:07 PM     Post subject: Re: Fursuit Furore, or LAWSUITE  

I am merely a concerned party. Too many people have been hurt by this nonsense.


But, how much harm has come to the CHILLLLLLLLDRENNNNNNNNNNN?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Hirtes
Needs to get out more
Joined: 04 Aug 2003
Posts: 820

Posted: 1/9/2005 9:02:13 PM     Post subject:  

That little gem is included along with other Keller animations I've made available for download here :D



I appreciate the effort you made to make these avaialble, but the link you directed us to requires registration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Hirtes
Needs to get out more
Joined: 04 Aug 2003
Posts: 820

Posted: 1/9/2005 9:04:39 PM     Post subject:  

That little gem is included along with other Keller animations I've made available for download here :D



I appreciate the effort you made to make these downloadable, but the link you directed us to requires registration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Computolio
Needs to get out more
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 865

Posted: 1/9/2005 10:03:11 PM     Post subject: Re: Fursuit Furore, or LAWSUITE  


I am merely a concerned party. Too many people have been hurt by this nonsense.


Hurt? Hurt? You poor fucking baby. By "hurt", I take it you/the involved parties aren't proud of what they did? Because they all posted it in a public place (PROTIP: The internet is a public place), and once something's public, it usually stays public. Forever.

Tell "the people who have been hurt by this nonsense" that the grown-up thing to do would be to own up to this stuff (because it's really not all that awful in the scheme of things), or at least they can ask to have it taken down themselves and do it nicely and in a mature manner. We actually might do it - or at least feel somewhat bad about not doing it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SquareMoogle
Vociferator
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Posts: 357

Posted: 1/10/2005 12:32:30 AM     Post subject: Re: Fursuit Furore, or LAWSUITE  

(because it's really not all that awful in the scheme of things)

(Except Pisspig.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skunkfuckers Inc.
Needs to get out more
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 1006

Posted: 1/10/2005 12:43:20 AM     Post subject:  

That little gem is included along with other Keller animations I've made available for download here :D



I appreciate the effort you made to make these downloadable, but the link you directed us to requires registration.

You know, I honestly didn't even think of that :oops:

That might explain why I've had all of ten people download it so far. I've just put it up on TorrentReactor.net, which requires no signup/login, so bring on the leechers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rankin
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 03 Jan 2004
Posts: 1659

Posted: 1/10/2005 3:17:28 AM     Post subject:  



Much love and contempt for Ghastly at the same time; the latter, seeing some of his perverted creations.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/10/2005 5:43:00 AM     Post subject:  

Shit, they're onto you. Better take those images down before the internet-police take you to internet-jail. Keep the emails a'comin'


I've gotten a couple as well.. I got a few "LOL" type emails, one explaining (why I don't know) the precise location that one of the photos were taken, and the ones from Blackberry and the photographer. I made fun of them both until they went away: (Note: Yes I know I am an asshole.)

From Blackberry:
You have posted several pictures which are protected under
international copyright according to the Berne Convention. I don't
believe you were given (or asked for) permission to redistribute these
works. Please remove the pictures from your article.


Dear Sir,
No.
Thank you,
(me)


To which he replied some words about copyrights, so here is his reply to my reply (which is quoted) He also didn't pick up on my use of the word "violated".

> > Actually, yes. Read the Berne Convention a little more closely. I
>
> Please send me a complete copy of the Berne convention, in triplicate.
> I need one seperate copy for each person here.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html

Article 2 details the works that are covered.
It has been ruled that posting on a web site is a form of Reproduction
(Article 9) and Broadcast (Article 11bis).

> Also, each original "copyright holder" will need to send me proof that
> their works are the ones being violated.

Photographs are automatically copyrighted unless the copyright is
released to you. Do you have documentation that you have permission
to redistribute these copyrighted works?


I was feeling Snarky, so I responded thusly:

Hello again!

Thank you for sending me the copies of the Berne Convention. However,
I am currently at a computer without an internet connection. Please
send me the text which is relevant to the discussion at hand,
hilighting the important parts. That's what I meant, I didn't mean the
hotlinks themselves, but I do appreciate you sending them to me.

> Photographs are automatically copyrighted unless the copyright is
> released to you. Do you have documentation that you have permission
> to redistribute these copyrighted works?

I have permission to sing and dance as gaily as I want to, thank you
for asking! Would you like a photo of me standing in front of
anything? It would of course be copyrighted, so you can't share it
with anyone or put it up on any websites. I hate people who do that.

(Me)


Unfortunatly he figured out my ruse, so all I got was a petulent "You're just someone who likes to make fun of people" email back.

However, that photographer is a whole different ball of wax. I honestly felt bad, since I realized he's just some random Joe caught up in the crossfire. So, I actually started out nice to him. I explained that I wasn't making fun of him, only what he photographed, and no profit was being made here. He responded with this:

(....)
Like many, you believe that because you live in England that you are immune
to copyright laws from artists who live in America. You have to be the
scum of the earth to steal from a low income underground artist and see it
as an act of appreciation. Like most cretins who steal someone else's
work, you hide behind the anonymity of your email address, sticking your
tongue out like a child who is misbehaving. There is no honor in your theft.
(....)


I replied back to him as calmly as I had in the first email, also informing him that I was an American (I have no idea why he thought I was from England. Would you like a spot of tea?). I continued to repeat that its all just for humor, nobody's making any money off it, lighten up, etc. He replied to this, and I replied to that, and this was the result:

> I asked you to remove the material and you made it clear in your response
> that you were not going to do it. You're the kind of person who steals
> from others, uses their work without their consent and tells anyone who
> might be offended that they should appreciate the free advertising

Yes I am "that" kind of person. I repost gay bondage fursuit photos!
Surely a just and noble society would slay me in a blinding flash of
retribution, for I am an evil, soulless individual who probably
urinates on puppies while making obscene collect calls to the lonely
elderly.. I will cry myself to sleep tonight, knowing that a bald man
in California is angry that I made fun of something he photographed.

> Since you're an American (with a capital *A*), and since you don't take any
> of this seriously, it should be no problem for you to forward me your full

Sorry, I mistyped, I said I'm not taking YOU seriously. I'll send you
my address if you promise to only use it for your christmas card list.
I *am* afraid you are going to sue me in an attempt to get your
dignity back, but since I can barely afford to pay rent, I can't
really help much even if I were legally required to.

> But I know your kind. You won't give me that information because you're a
> coward, the kind of coward who hides behind fake names and free email
> systems and yaps loudly and long, as long as you don't have to take any
> personal responsibility for your actions.

I tweak the brittle from a distance. It's a recent hobby, and one that
I will tire of rather quickly, but hey, it beats sitting here waiting
for the weather to turn nice.

> This is my last warning to remove my work from your article on the web.

OR WHAT, YOU WILL INFECT ME WITH BALD?

I say to you sir, "Hello!"


I think he got the point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
M0us3_Zero
Vociferator
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 437

Posted: 1/10/2005 6:53:09 AM     Post subject:  

Here's the kicker...

Didn't these people post these pictures in the open domain publicly without a copyright watermark? On public sites for everyone to google and surf to their merryment?

The knowledge of the items in question being copyrighted material must be made through a notice of some sort, that someone must view. Otherwise... Their "Lawsuite" holds no water.

Winner: CYD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/10/2005 7:17:43 AM     Post subject:  


Didn't these people post these pictures in the open domain publicly without a copyright watermark? On public sites for everyone to google and surf to their merryment?


Unfortunatly I'm not 100% sure how open domain it was. It most likely had a password (I HOPE). The archive has all of the Apache-generated file directory index pages for a site called fyl.timduru.org, which is now gone. fursuit.timduru.org seems to have another archive on it, but they all seem clean.

However, everyone sent those pictures out into what they know is the internet, that has no real controls on anything, into a mailing list with who knows how many people on it..

Can anyone who was actually on this list (Vitae?) provide any further clues?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The New Meat
Needs to get out more
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 933

Posted: 1/10/2005 10:19:30 AM     Post subject:  

Here's the kicker...

Didn't these people post these pictures in the open domain publicly without a copyright watermark? On public sites for everyone to google and surf to their merryment?

The knowledge of the items in question being copyrighted material must be made through a notice of some sort, that someone must view. Otherwise... Their "Lawsuite" holds no water.

Winner: CYD.


Technically, copyright still exists even without a watermark, but, yeah, it'll make it a lot harder for them to prove anything.

Once again, though, what are they gonna do? Legally, CYD's pretty much in the clear, but what if these guy's whine to the server? A lot of srevers get freaked out by this sort of thing and fold like a card table even when they don't have to. How cool is our server?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Donotsue
Needs to get out more
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 884

Posted: 1/10/2005 12:45:01 PM     Post subject:  

All the more important for someone now to go to the con and take pictures to replace Teh Copyrited ones. =)
Hm.. I too have pictures... but they are not very horrible...

No bondage foxes.. or pigs gettin piss poured over them! =/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/10/2005 3:46:35 PM     Post subject:  

Once again, though, what are they gonna do? Legally, CYD's pretty much in the clear, but what if these guy's whine to the server? A lot of srevers get freaked out by this sort of thing and fold like a card table even when they don't have to. How cool is our server?

What about moving the images to a free hosting service like TechStar and linking to those? I would think if they wanted to go after that stuff, then, the worst is that TechStar would remove the images, rather than some kinda thing where CYD would get kicked by nervous server admins.

You know what's really funnier than all of the cries of "LAWSUITE" is the fact that this is proof that furries monitor CYD in wait for the chance to descend upon the site for any perceived transgression against their ranks. It's funny how quickly one can mention someone here, and news reaches them through the grapevine.

As for the age-old copyright gripe, what's really funny is if Subversive's review had been positive, talking about how sexy the suits were and all... there wouldn't be a peep from these guys. They're trying to argue copyright, when really their complaint is embarassment. Regarding the whole deal, one site has this to say:

The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works -- only the ability to express other people's. Intent, and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.

Fair use is usually a short excerpt and almost always attributed. (One should not use more of the work than is necessary to make the commentary.) It should not harm the commercial value of the work -- in the sense of people no longer needing to buy it (which is another reason why reproduction of the entire work is a problem.)

Note that most inclusion of text in Usenet followups is for commentary and reply, and it doesn't damage the commercial value of the original posting (if it has any) and as such it is fair use. Fair use isn't an exact doctrine, either. The court decides if the right to comment overrides the copyright on an individual basis in each case. There have been cases that go beyond the bounds of what I say above, but in general they don't apply to the typical net misclaim of fair use.

Another tidbit from this site pertains to the frequent furry claim that a picture of Sonic/Knuckles/Tails mansex is copyrighted to them:

U.S. Copyright law is quite explicit that the making of what are called "derivative works" -- works based or derived from another copyrighted work -- is the exclusive province of the owner of the original work. This is true even though the making of these new works is a highly creative process. If you write a story using settings or characters from somebody else's work, you need that author's permission.
Yes, that means almost all "fan fiction" is arguably a copyright violation. If you want to write a story about Jim Kirk and Mr. Spock, you need Paramount's permission, plain and simple. Now, as it turns out, many, but not all holders of popular copyrights turn a blind eye to "fan fiction" or even subtly encourage it because it helps them. Make no mistake, however, that it is entirely up to them whether to do that.

There is a major exception -- criticism and parody. The fair use provision says that if you want to make fun of something like Star Trek, you don't need their permission to include Mr. Spock. This is not a loophole; you can't just take a non-parody and claim it is one on a technicality. The way "fair use" works is you get sued for copyright infringement, and you admit you did copy, but that your copying was a fair use. A subjective judgment on, among other things, your goals, is then made.

However, it's also worth noting that a court has never ruled on this issue, because fan fiction cases always get settled quickly when the defendant is a fan of limited means sued by a powerful publishing company. Some argue that completely non-commercial fan fiction might be declared a fair use if courts get to decide. You can read more

Furries make note.... Rogue the Bat pr0n is not parody if you're doing a spreadshot of her for fapping purposes. Dr. Comet's pin-ups of Krystal from Starfox isn't parody. If Sega or Konami (they do Starfox, right?) wanted to nail yer ass, they could.

Copyright law and fair use aren't as black and white as furries would like to think. The whole thing is a gray area.. moreso when the Internet is involved. In this case, the reposting of images isn't hurting the commercial value of the originals, as we're not talking about stuff from a pay site or photo album. In addition, the photos aren't registered with the copyright office. That doesn't mean they don't hold some copyright protection... just that the burden of proof of infringement would be a lot harder in a court case. In the case of unregistered photos, most sites I read through indicate the courts usually go in favor of whoever has the most convincing evidence.. be it the holder of the original image providing solid proof of damages or the person in question showing convincing evidence that this particular instance falls under "fair use."

In this case, the worst offense here really isn't violation of copyrights in that there is monetary damage or something. The only real issue here that might be considered in any kind of legal battle would be the use of a photo without a "model release," i.e. - consent of the person featured in the image. In these cases, however, it's even harder to prove damages because most people do not know who the person behind the mask is.

I think in this case, however, the use falls under fair use in that the images are used for commentary and parody. That doesn't mean nervous sysadmins might not yank them or something... but... you can't say the furries have no legal leg to stand on... but no more than CYD itself, and copyright law is so gray that any legal battles over such a thing would be a fruitless waste of time and money on their part..... money they could be using for Chester Ringtail auto-fellatio pictures.

Not to mention that if the furries don't think this sort of thing fall under parody, then they need to seriously rethink their notion that all of the Minerva Mink spooge and Sonic/Tails sodomy stories is protected as "parody."

Just because you're embarrased by the fact that people are laughing at you because you like dressing up as a pig and taking a pee bath doesn't mean you have a legal case, sport.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/10/2005 4:06:44 PM     Post subject:  


You know what's really funnier than all of the cries of "LAWSUITE" is the fact that this is proof that furries monitor CYD in wait for the chance to descend upon the site for any perceived transgression against their ranks.

As for the age-old copyright gripe, what's really funny is if Subversive's review had been positive, talking about how sexy the suits were and all...


You know what has surprised me? The one thing I was kind of dreading was email from fursuiters who are angry because I dragged the "scene" through the mud, or how its not about sex, or basically accusing me of not knowing what I was talking about or slandering the hobby.

I have gotten exactly zero emails with this argument. I am guessing the grapevine already has the article's address on it, so the silence from the fursuiting community is kind of odd.

While I was afraid I used too much sarcasm and too little objectivity, maybe I hit the nail on the head. Or, maybe they just havent noticed yet. :)

Either way, I'll keep everyone informed of new developments! :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anonymous
Vociferator
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 766

Posted: 1/10/2005 5:22:58 PM     Post subject:  

The details about the pictures or list?
I can't talk about it.
It's like fight club..
Rules:
1) never talk about fight club
2) never talk about fight club.

Let's just say I personaly don't care that the picture is here, the way it was presented made me laugh. I'm not as uber-serious about these things as my, uh, listmates are.
I will say this though, the pictures were definatly never placed in an open area (IE: newsgroup, personal webspace), they were behind a passworded site. They got leaked.. which sucks.. but I'm not whining. I understand, unlike most others, that no matter how much security you place on something on the internet, that doesn't mean it won't get found or used against someone.

Thats about all I can say..
For now though, keep up the lol's.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/10/2005 6:46:49 PM     Post subject:  

Regarding the angst of those featured in the pics with needed edits... on one hand, it's unfortunate that the Web has made it easy for personal things like this to leak out. On the other hand, if you're uploading pictures of stuff about yourself that you feel you have to hide behind a password... you really need to step back and decide if it's worth doing.... because you KNOW it will leak out. It may not come back to haunt you directly, but you know your ass cheeks could very well find their way on to the next SomethingAwful "Save the Whales" image on Photoshop Phriday.

A lot of folks recognize that the Web provides opportunities for not only voyeurism, but exhibitionism, too. They upload pictures pretty well knowing there's a chance someone will fap to it, and that gets them off. Not bad as far as sexual liberation goes. But, there's an equal chance someone will find that pic and make fun of it. Those are the risks.

The moral of the story is, if you are taking pictures of stuff you don't want other people to find out about (besides those you intend to share it with), don't post it on the Internet, because - sure as shit - it will find its way to an unintended audience. If you REALLLY have to share pictures of yourself taking a pee bath in a pig suit, do it in email. At least then if you see yourself on SomethingAwful.com, you've already narrowed down the list of culprits who leaked the image.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skunkfuckers Inc.
Needs to get out more
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 1006

Posted: 1/10/2005 6:47:51 PM     Post subject:  

Furries make note.... Rogue the Bat pr0n is not parody if you're doing a spreadshot of her for fapping purposes. Dr. Comet's pin-ups of Krystal from Starfox isn't parody. If Sega or Konami (they do Starfox, right?) wanted to nail yer ass, they could.


You know, I'd read somewhere that Bandai of Japan used one of Karabiner's pieces of Renamon fanart in Digimon promotional materials without him knowing about it. From what I understand, when he found out not only was he not upset, but was actually flattered.

I think that has to do with the artist being Japanese. They seem to have really open ideas about copyright; I read a really good article (I wish I could find it now) about how the Lupin III anime is technically infringing on a series of classic French novels, with the character of Lupin being presented as the grandson of a character from the books. That's like an anime being created called Harry Potter the 3rd featuring the decendant of the boy wizard. And, of course, the Lupin III anime has heavily inspired other anime like Cowboy Bebop, etc.

I'd think most Western furries would've shit a brick in that same position, which would have been funny because.. well, what are they going to say? Legally they would've gotten those bricks shoved back up their asses by REAL lawyers getting paid way more than any of us are to do one thing and one thing only: fuck people in the ass with really-real, real-life fucking lawsuits.

That's right, piss off the people who own the characters and could eat your ass alive in a court of law. Because that'd be smart :twisted:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse
Needs to get out more
Joined: 13 Jul 2003
Posts: 1192

Posted: 1/10/2005 7:07:30 PM     Post subject:  

A lot of folks recognize that the Web provides opportunities for not only voyeurism, but exhibitionism, too. They upload pictures pretty well knowing there's a chance someone will fap to it, and that gets them off. Not bad as far as sexual liberation goes. But, there's an equal chance someone will find that pic and make fun of it. Those are the risks.


But is someone finding it, or it winding up on the front page of somethingawful that big of "risk"? If thats the worst thing that ever happens to some of these people, I get the feeling they are gonna be just fine.

Besides, I know quite a few 'normal' people that have skeletons in thier closets. Its more just that furries tend to be so dysfunctional in all the other ways you wouldn't want to really hang out with them. If the guy in the pig costume was pretty normal, cool guy to hang out with, who would care. I mean I'd never want to see or be reminded of that incident.. but its not like I'd totally shun the person necessarily :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/10/2005 9:34:04 PM     Post subject:  


The moral of the story is, if you are taking pictures of stuff you don't want other people to find out about (besides those you intend to share it with), don't post it on the Internet, because - sure as shit - it will find its way to an unintended audience.



Also, everyone that is listed there is just in a costume. There is no way for the real world to know who they really are unless they've been foolish and wore their sex suit to work. Sure furries may figure out who you are, but honestly you'll probably just wind up with a whole lot more 'new friends.'
There were a lot of dumbasses who have their face up for everyone to view in a lot of those pictures, I made sure not to use those.

I remember stumbling upon some babyfur website where the front page was nothing but pictures of people in diapers looking straight at the camera. Some people just have no sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/10/2005 10:21:22 PM     Post subject:  

But is someone finding it, or it winding up on the front page of somethingawful that big of "risk"? If thats the worst thing that ever happens to some of these people, I get the feeling they are gonna be just fine.

Indeed. Risk in the sense I was using it is subjective. If you're in a fursuit that completely masks your identity and you never reveal that it's you in the fursuit to anyone except those engaging in the behaviors in question with you, then your risk is minimal. If other furries know it's you, your risk is also negligible. Likewise, if you really don't care about the reprocussions of someone finding out... like maybe you work in a porn video store and there's little chance a coworkier finding out you're Pisspig will threaten your job, income, lifestyle, whatever... then there's really not much to worry about.

If, on the other hand you're maybe a Baptist minister and such information could damage you...... the simplest way to keep it to yourself is to don't freakin' post the pictures on the Internet.

Besides, I know quite a few 'normal' people that have skeletons in thier closets. Its more just that furries tend to be so dysfunctional in all the other ways you wouldn't want to really hang out with them. If the guy in the pig costume was pretty normal, cool guy to hang out with, who would care. I mean I'd never want to see or be reminded of that incident.. but its not like I'd totally shun the person necessarily :)

Almost everyone has stuff they're into they may not share with other people. That's just human nature. No startling revelations there. If they guy in the pig costume was normal otherwise... huzzah.. so long as he doesn't feel compelled to share his experiences as many furries do.

I think people tend to have the same mistaken notion about online activities as they do about cell phones. Many people seem to have this notion that if they're on the cell phone, they're in just as private a setting as talking in their own home. Hence why you get to hear about someone's latest herpes outbreak while standing in line at the movie theater. Likewise, people have the mistaken idea that if they do something, photograph it, and post it on the web that they'll have the same anonymity as if they hadn't posted it at all. If you post under an assumed name and don't name your images something stupid like "davidheptstedindiapers.jpg" and keep your identity withheld in other ways like blurring your faces on the image, then you stand a good chance of never having your little secrets bite you in the ass.

And, like you said, the risk is often minimal. But, if that minimal risk is too great for someone... it's best they just assume the worst WILL happen and not tempt fate in the first place.

What's really funny about skeletons in the virtual closet is there used to be a time where you could find someone's skeletons really easily by going to their website and just typing "/private" in after everything. That would open the gateway to all kinds of sordid little secrets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
M0us3_Zero
Vociferator
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 437

Posted: 1/11/2005 3:56:48 AM     Post subject:  

Well, all in all, these morons get a big Meh from me anyways.

They seem to do the same old tired routine over and over and over when the heat gets turned up on them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anonymous
Vociferator
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 766

Posted: 1/11/2005 10:13:41 PM     Post subject:  

Oh blah... you guys took the pictures down.
Guess you had to, no? :/
Ahh well.
It was funny while it lasted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mitch
Vociferator
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 658

Posted: 1/11/2005 10:34:12 PM     Post subject:  

Oh blah... you guys took the pictures down.
Guess you had to, no? :/
Ahh well.
It was funny while it lasted.

Yep, some genius finally realized they'd get farther faster by emailing my host instead of besieging me with emails and IMs and the host drew my attention to their Terms and Conditions and said I had a choice of taking the pix down or they could take the entire site down while they scratched their backsides and figured out what was what.

So... meh. I will say that I never expected this level of furore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
m_estrugo
Vociferator
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 534

Posted: 1/11/2005 10:36:37 PM     Post subject:  

Oh blah... you guys took the pictures down.
Guess you had to, no? :/
Ahh well.
It was funny while it lasted.

Yep, some genius finally realized they'd get farther faster by emailing my host instead of besieging me with emails and IMs and the host drew my attention to their Terms and Conditions and said I had a choice of taking the pix down or they could take the entire site down while they scratched their backsides and figured out what was what.

So... meh. I will say that I never expected this level of furore.


All of them, or only those the demandant asked?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SquareMoogle
Vociferator
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Posts: 357

Posted: 1/11/2005 10:45:58 PM     Post subject:  

*Willing to provide 3rd party hosting* :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/11/2005 11:03:59 PM     Post subject:  

Can't the images simply be changed to links to direct the reader to the picture in question? Alternately, maybe Subversive can track down alternate images he can link to if the ones in question are actually behind some protection like registered user passwords or something. Alternately, the removed images could be replaced with a description of the image.

Ah well.. just another furry exercise in what's good for the goose isn't tolerated by the gander. They'll buttfuck Warner Brothers' and Disney's copyrights, and then throw a temper tantrum when anything of theirs is even looked at cross-eyed.... like kids throwing snow at people walking by that run home to mommy the second they get pasted upside the head with a snowball (preferably with a rock in it).

The more I watch 'em scribble around in their ant farm, the less inclined I am to be understanding of all of the minutae of furrydom and just lump it all into the "suck" category.

Still, it is fun knowing this site can be such a fly in their ointment.

On a semi-related note, click here for an amusing article about geekdom, including furries.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/12/2005 2:18:51 AM     Post subject:  

Can't the images simply be changed to links to direct the reader to the picture in question? Alternately, maybe Subversive can track down alternate images he can link to if the ones in question are actually behind some protection like registered user passwords or something. Alternately, the removed images could be replaced with a description of the image.


I'd say keep the pages here, but the images themselves would be on a third party server. I can provide the hosting for the images, no problem. It would be on a server in Chechoslovakia though :)

I'll do whatever Mitch decides. I can't check my email or deal with my webspace until I get home, so anything I do will have to wait until then.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse
Needs to get out more
Joined: 13 Jul 2003
Posts: 1192

Posted: 1/12/2005 6:11:40 AM     Post subject:  

uh oh..

Furries 1 - CYD 0 :(

Time to put on our game faces
haha

Still, it is fun knowing this site can be such a fly in their ointment.


Thats basically what I said. The fact that those pictures had to be taken down is funnier than the article ever was (no offence subversive :) ) for displaying in full living color the levels of hypocrisy you mention.

I'd say keep the pages here, but the images themselves would be on a third party server. I can provide the hosting for the images, no problem. It would be on a server in Chechoslovakia though


You'd have to check with Mitch, but I think the host doesnt want the images even linked or anything.

Now, maybe someone could draw all-original police sketch style renditions of the 'suits in question... :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rankin
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 03 Jan 2004
Posts: 1659

Posted: 1/12/2005 7:40:57 AM     Post subject:  

Yep, some genius finally realized they'd get farther faster by emailing my host instead of besieging me with emails and IMs and the host drew my attention to their Terms and Conditions and said I had a choice of taking the pix down or they could take the entire site down while they scratched their backsides and figured out what was what.



..this from the same fucking host that thinks that restarting Apache every hour is perfectly acceptable because they don't know how to keep it from dying?

Mitch, get me some metrics, I'm sure that my existing services host could manage CYD at no more than $10USD/mo... and that's with a gig of space.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Donotsue
Needs to get out more
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 884

Posted: 1/12/2005 8:15:44 AM     Post subject:  

This is turning out quite a battle? =)

http://www.macksites.com/sounds/colonel.mid

Chester
Has only got one ball,
Ch'marr
Has two, but very small
kaffe
Has something similar,
But poor old Kimmugh
Has no balls
At all
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
M0us3_Zero
Vociferator
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 437

Posted: 1/12/2005 8:16:54 AM     Post subject:  

Ugh.

Now I hate these smegheads.

If only I really had a legion of sailor-suit clad ninjas... and a list of IPs...

Remember that scene in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back? Where they go door to door and beat the living snot out of 12-year-old fat kids for talking smack and trolling movie review sites?

Yeah... That's revenge baby.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anencephalic Baby Jesus
Rasophore
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 69

Posted: 1/12/2005 9:27:43 AM     Post subject:  

I've crossed over the hate threshold.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gargoyle
Vociferator
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 455

Posted: 1/12/2005 10:18:28 AM     Post subject:  

I'd say keep the pages here, but the images themselves would be on a third party server. I can provide the hosting for the images, no problem. It would be on a server in Chechoslovakia though :)


The country of Czechoslovakia caused to exist about a decade ago, Mister... along with Yugoslavia, Soviet Union, or East Germany.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
subversive
Prattler
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 183

Posted: 1/12/2005 10:33:52 AM     Post subject:  


The country of Czechoslovakia caused to exist about a decade ago.


"Czech Republic" sorry.

And I do think you mean "ceased to exist"

I WINNAR :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/12/2005 3:03:56 PM     Post subject:  

Of course, you realize all of our angsting over falling victim to the one real-world skill furries excel at... putting pressure on site hosts... is making them happy. It's probably best to just move on, though I like the idea of courtroom sketch-like depictions of the images in question. If I had the time or a scanner, I'd be so there. Hmmm... actually, wouldn't even need a scanner... just past the images through a few filters, get the outlines, put in some colors to make stuff off-model enough that they're not full-on copies, and just draw over the images to produce them.

Then if they bitch, we just tell 'em it's parody in the same sense that Minerva Mink tentacle rape is protected in their furry little alternate reality.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skunkfuckers Inc.
Needs to get out more
Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 1006

Posted: 1/12/2005 7:34:32 PM     Post subject:  

I'd say keep the pages here, but the images themselves would be on a third party server. I can provide the hosting for the images, no problem. It would be on a server in Chechoslovakia though


You'd have to check with Mitch, but I think the host doesnt want the images even linked or anything.

I'd press the point and see what they do about it, or at least get a good idea of where you stand with them. But I'm with Rankin on this, the problem is with the webhost. I'm not sure how much cost Mitch is incuring every month for what they're providing, but you could probably do better.


Of course, you realize all of our angsting over falling victim to the one real-world skill furries excel at... putting pressure on site hosts... is making them happy.

You mean "internet skill", don't you? There aren't many people a furry is going to have much dominance or persuasion over in real life, beside other weak-ass furries.

And I don't think any of us is seriously fretting over anything here, not like they are. Not even close. They're the ones losing it (in both senses of the term); we're here for the entertainment, they're here to monitor everything we do because they're scared to death of what we can bring to bear against them: truth.

Their natural element is deceit in it's many forms. Histrionics, deleberate omission of facts, obfuscation (due to personal delusions or just outright maliciousness or fear) and maintaining ignorance about themselves and in their image to the world at large. From the well meaning person who lets a furry crash at their place for a few days - and weeks later has to throw them out and clean up the mess left behind, to the unsuspecting artist who gets cozied up to and primed for the eventual hard sell into doing smut and/or type-fucking with them, it's all about lies being layed down like a slime.

It's what they subsist on, it's how they get by.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
m_estrugo
Vociferator
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 534

Posted: 1/12/2005 7:39:14 PM     Post subject:  

Dunno. I'd vote for moving along. If they want to call this a win against the evil minions inhabiting CYD, let them. If the pics appear once more and become public and there's nothing else they can do, well, yay.
Myself, I don't care.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mitch
Vociferator
Joined: 01 Jun 2003
Posts: 658

Posted: 1/12/2005 7:47:40 PM     Post subject:  

I'm not sure how much cost Mitch is incuring every month for what they're providing, but you could probably do better.

$2.50 per month. No, really.

They're the ones losing it (in both senses of the term); we're here for the entertainment, they're here to monitor everything we do because they're scared to death of what we can bring to bear against them: truth.

Like I say, I've never seen such grotesque overreaction, and I haven't even posted the best example because I am going to find out if it is actionable - on my part.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZenZhu
TOP POSTER!
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 1510

Posted: 1/12/2005 8:57:01 PM     Post subject:  

You mean "internet skill", don't you? There aren't many people a furry is going to have much dominance or persuasion over in real life, beside other weak-ass furries.

I stand corrected, good sir.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
M0us3_Zero
Vociferator
Joined: 22 Mar 2004
Posts: 437

Posted: 1/15/2005 3:23:37 AM     Post subject:  

Perfect solution....

Link to THEIR crap.

In other words, you're pointing us to the motherlode of comedy gold. Not the other way around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message