Comic Plagarism

[Miluette]

Oh yeah, I definitely would not sell fanart myself. I'd much, much rather sell original work. It'd be more of a personal success to me, whereas selling fanart would be more of a "for cash" thing, admittedly, and I can make cash other ways.

I tell you, that guy didn't deserve well near 200,000 pageviews in the mere matter of a few days. People are still commenting him like it would make any sort of difference in his or their lives. Crazy. Well, it's undoubtedly the kind of unrecoverable "bad publicity" attention. I truly wish anyone guilty of this could be so scrutinized sometimes, but people don't tend to do this unless they think they can get away with it (unless they truly think it's "okay", in which case they have issues).

[TTallan]

I have no issues with fanart-- I'm sure nearly all of us artists started by doing fan art, one way or another (at one point I was obsessed with copying Macross characters, for example). I am delighted when someone creates fan art of my characters and posts it on their DA account or blog or whatever. But if they were to sell prints of that work without asking my permission, I would be mighty annoyed.

Homage sketches and prints are, I suppose, a grey area of comicdom (and I agree that it is morally worse to do what Nick Simmons did). But I have heard stories of Disney taking a very firm line with their copyrighted characters and going as far as to tell a daycare centre (I think it was a daycare centre) to remove a hand-painted mural of Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck from its walls. Now that Disney owns Marvel, I have to wonder how long it'll be before they put a similar foot down on convention sketches...

[TheCow]

Most of the fanart I sell at cons are humorous or parody, while I do have one or two that are straight-up fanarts. I don't feel comfortable making and selling "straight-up" prints of other peoples characters at cons, but I don't mind doing a humorous twist and selling those. It actually involves me being somewhat original in coming up with an idea or joke.

I never trace though. (The only time I've traced for my comic is one time I tried to trace a photo I took of my car, and it looked like crap, so I never tried it again.) I certainly have been influenced by comics and manga, even to the point of looking through various books to see "how ____ did this or that." (For example, I dug through three different tpbs last week to find out how three different artists handled crying for one of my comics last week. I didn't copy any of them, but I just got an idea of how they dealt with drawing it.)

Personally, I'm against tracing photos, even ones you've taken yourself. I'll use photo references (which reminds me, I need to take some shots for an awkward post that's coming up . . . ) but when you trace them, the drawings look static and stiff, instead of fluid and dynamic. I'm also against tracing other peoples art. I know some people say that tracing is a good way to learn how to draw, but I don't believe it is. I think it's fine to copy other peoples art in order to learn how to draw (I have a box full of drawings copied from every X-Men book in the Rochester public library,) but when you trace, you don't learn anything other than how to trace. And even if you do start out copying drawings, you need to learn and understand the fundamental basics of drawing before you can grow as an artist. Copying only gets you so far. Doing a webcomic for the last seven years has really helped me. When I started, I tended to copy other peoples work. When I started my first webcomic, I found that my "original" stuff didn't look nearly as good as my "copied" stuff, so I had to almost completely re-teach myself concepts like proportion and perspective. I couldn't just gank the pose from page "A" and the background from page "B" anymore.

This Simmons kid is an idiot, and I hope he gets the crap sued out of him.

[Knara]

I took a look at this just yesterday for the first time.  It's really obvious that he used Bleach as a reference for some of the stuff, but I can't call the examples "tracing" unless he's a really bad tracer.  I, myself, am a pretty good mimic and when I copy something freehand I get much closer than those examples.  I think the most he can be accused of is being a bit too blatant in utilizing references from a very popular series.

I've heard that it's accepted for artists to draw Superman (DC characters), Spider-man (Marvel characters), and Invincible (Image characters) because when the artists are no longer on a project (they were already paid their page rate) it's a way to make some money at the convention and still promote the brands. This goes for established artists who have drawn an issue or two for the big companies and for the unestablished artists who may someday draw for the big companies.

A lawyer friend of mine explained to me one time that there was a lawsuit against a married couple in the SW US (either NM or AZ, can't remember at the moment) where Paramount sued them for selling fan art of Star Trek at a sci-fi convention (a few years back Paramount had been sending incognito reps to conventions to look for bootlegs and such).  The couple happened to be lawyers as well as fans.  Constitutional lawyers, at that (what are the odds?  i dunno...).  They ended up winning the suit.  Seems that its totally legally to sell fan art of something so long as you don't represent it as anything else.

Of course, you can sue a ham sandwich for being too cheesy, regardless of the actual validity of the claim, which probably explains why conventions tend to disallow doujins and other fan art these days.  One could argue that conventions should have better legal representation/counsel, but oh well.

[raerae]

There are a few overlays floating around. Some I think are stretching, but others match up pretty damn well.

One of my friends just showed me this, though. It's not even a trace or copy, just the actual image with blood painted on.

[Knara]

There are a few overlays floating around. Some I think are stretching, but others match up pretty damn well.

One of my friends just showed me this, though. It's not even a trace or copy, just the actual image with blood painted on.

Definitely the same image, but:

- Depends on the licensing of the image
- I wish people would stop using hyperbole, there's a lot more editing going on in that image than simply just having "blood painted on".

Perhaps that's my main problem with the whole drama.  That is, people straying into hyperbole at the drop of a hat.  Drama benefits no rational argument.

[Gibson]

Perhaps that's my main problem with the whole drama.  That is, people straying into hyperbole at the drop of a hat.  Drama benefits no rational argument.

It's mine too. One person says 'tracing' and suddenly everyone is under the assumption that he's tracing, which he isn't. Granted, the Skinwalkers image is pretty damning if he didn't license the photo, but what he's done otherwise isn't even that far out of the norm. Close or not, it's obviously not traced and he's certainly not using someone else's original artwork. Elvis Presley did worse than this and he's hailed as a god.

[Rob]

Perhaps that's my main problem with the whole drama.  That is, people straying into hyperbole at the drop of a hat.  Drama benefits no rational argument.

Yes but the internet runs on LoLCats and drama. It is the fuel that drives the engine and lo be to any who resist it as they will be mashed in its relentless gears.

My feeling on all of this sort of stuff is sort of circumspect. On the one hand I am unhappy with the person doing the copying because they are cheating to get ahead and like all people who have worked much of their life fruitlessly whilst watching cheaters get ahead and get over and get away with it, it pisses me off to no end.

But that's my hang up.

The other side of the argument for me is if Shonan Jump or whoever's publishing Bleach this week doesn't care why should I? If I'm that devoted a fan I can go out of my way to let Tite Kubo know about it and after that it's up to him and his legion of samurai lawyers to take it from there.

I don't have any legal standing to do anything about it and this ridiculous effort to "educate" people about the theft so they don't support Simmons is kind of like a demon singing to a hellish choir in hell. They all know the song and everyone's suffering regardless of the song. The vast majority of these folks would have never even heard of his work and if anything he's probably made more money and gotten more promotion since the controversy came about. So it's the inverse of the intention by the fans.

And that brings me back to the creators and their lawyers.  If they cared there would be nothing to discuss because all of his comics would become the property of Kubo and any money he made selling them would be forfeit as well. Because that's the way copyright law works. And it wouldn't be hard to prove in this case. It's the kind of case a copyright lawyer dreams of. So once again, if Kubo and Shonan Jump don't care, why should I?

And that goes for any other copyright cribbings too. If DC or Marvel or whoever is getting ripped off and they don't care why should I? Let them know about it sure. But after that the only thing you can do is join the choir and suffer some more. Why not just let it go and do something productive with your time. Like eat an apple or get a haircut or finally clean those gutters your mom's been bugging you about.

[Knara]

My feeling on all of this sort of stuff is sort of circumspect. On the one hand I am unhappy with the person doing the copying because they are cheating to get ahead and like all people who have worked much of their life fruitlessly whilst watching cheaters get ahead and get over and get away with it, it pisses me off to no end.

I agree.  Were I his mentor/teacher/editor my comment upon seeing it would be, "You're better than this, Nick.  Try harder."

Just don't think I necessarily would place it into the "blatant plagiarism" camp.

[Rob]

My feeling on all of this sort of stuff is sort of circumspect. On the one hand I am unhappy with the person doing the copying because they are cheating to get ahead and like all people who have worked much of their life fruitlessly whilst watching cheaters get ahead and get over and get away with it, it pisses me off to no end.

I agree.  Were I his mentor/teacher/editor my comment upon seeing it would be, "You're better than this, Nick.  Try harder."

Just don't think I necessarily would place it into the "blatant plagiarism" camp.

Well on the off hand we're talking about two different things here I'll just throw up this definition of plagiarism.

To my mind with that definition I would say he is definitely guilty of a close imitation of another author's thoughts whilst representing them as his own work. But then the article does not seem to mention art and instead seems more aimed towards writing which frankly I think is a better use for the word plagiarism.

And I do think it's pretty blatant from the images I've seen. But that's just my opinion.

I was really looking at it more from a legal perspective (as that is where my education/experience lie) and the whole copyright infringement thing. The copyright for the Bleach characters no doubt belongs to Tite Kubo and/or his publishers. And if I were to hold theses images up in front of a jury and ask them to rule in Kubo's favor for copyright infringement they probably wouldn't even need more than a couple hours to deliberate. The evidence really speaks for itself.

Their only hope would be to prove that Kubo took all the images for the Bleach characters from other artists. And even then they would still have a problem because even if Kubo borrowed from many sources to create his characters Simmons has borrowed greatly from only one source. And Bleach as a single source carries weight as a copyright beyond any single character that may inhabit the storyline.

Obviously there's a lot that goes into this sort of thing and it probably wouldn't even go to trial as chances are Simmons would settle well before it got that far.

But from the legal perspective if they (Kubo and his publishers) don't care, why should I is my main thought. As far as whether or not it's plagiarism; man who really cares? It's not a legal term and unless he's worried about being expelled from art school I don't think Simmons probably cares either.

It's like arguing over whether or not your cat is naughty because he pooped on the carpet: on the internet.

I don't care if he is or isn't because it doesn't affect me.

if they sued Simmons and lost... well then we would have something to talk about. Then it would be torches and pitchforks time. Because defense of copyright law in general is important to all creators. But this just doesn't matter... to any of us really, unless we feel like arguing on the internet... which I understand is under consideration for the 2012 Olympic Games.

[Knara]

Their only hope would be to prove that Kubo took all the images for the Bleach characters from other artists. And even then they would still have a problem because even if Kubo borrowed from many sources to create his characters Simmons has borrowed greatly from only one source. And Bleach as a single source carries weight as a copyright beyond any single character that may inhabit the storyline.

Thing is though, this isn't a case of "he took images and constructed his entire work from someone else", but rather, "Bleach fans noticed similarities and started getting butt hurt".  The vast majority of his work is not in question, but, rather, individual frames that he obviously used as reference (but did not copy wholesale, unless Simmons is a horrible tracer).

[LegendWoodsman]

Even if he isn't being sued by Kubo, Nick is suffering the slings and arrows of public opinion. Sometimes, that is enough to affect one's career.

Simmons released a statement through his publicist(emphasis mine):

Like most artists I am inspired by work I admire. There are certain similarities between some of my work and the work of others. This was simply meant as an homage to artists I respect, and I definitely want to apologize to any Manga fans or fellow Manga artists who feel I went too far. My inspirations reflect the fact that certain fundamental imagery is common to all Manga. This is the nature of the medium.

I am a big fan of Bleach, as well as other Manga titles. And I am certainly sorry if anyone was offended or upset by what they perceive to be the similarity between my work and the work of artists that I admire and who inspire me.

[Gar]

Why not just let it go and do something productive with your time. Like eat an apple or get a haircut or finally clean those gutters your mom's been bugging you about.

You totally just ripped off the ending of Monkey Island. I'm gonna tell Ron Gilbert on you!

[Rob]

Why not just let it go and do something productive with your time. Like eat an apple or get a haircut or finally clean those gutters your mom's been bugging you about.

You totally just ripped off the ending of Monkey Island. I'm gonna tell Ron Gilbert on you!

Seriously? Great minds ... I guess. I've heard good things but I've never actually played it. So my rip off was unintentional I assure you.

_{And I'm not afraid of Ron Gilbert anyway.}

[NoahRodenbeek]

Remember in 5th grade when that kid came to class with his "original" drawing of Mario that was obviously traced from Nintendo Power.  That = Simmons.  What a d-bag move.