Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2007-07-03 06:07 pm
[ SECRET POST #179 ]
⌈ Secret Post #179 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 82 secrets from Secret Submission Post #026.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 ] broken links, [ 1 2 ] not!secrets, [ 1 ] not!fandom.
Next Secret Post: Tomorrow, Wednesday, July 4th, 2007.
Current Secret Submission Post: Here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

9.
Japanese fanartists do.
That's the difference.
When people use official works it has a wide-spread recognition that acts like free advertizement, while conversely, if someone uses fanart (which a lot of the time goes uncredited), the artist is left unnamed and unknown. Especially when I think people get it from 4chan rather than from the artist's site which doesn't help counteracting the anonymity of it.
Not to mention that J-artists put EXPLICIT DISCLAIMERS (in english!) on their sites to NOT TAKE IMAGES but it virtually goes ignored. If an English artist were to explicitly make that rule known I bet you more people would respect it than one would with a Japanese one. Since I think the behavior is if it were an English artist, one wouldn't hesitate to send a quick email (because they KNOW the language) asking if they could use their art, but if it were a Japanese artist they just skip that step. And that's the step that pisses the artists off.
It's more about etiquette rather than internet morality. Personally I think using fanart without permission and pirating music are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BALLPARKS so that comparison fails.
Re: 9.
Re: 9.
I think, reading the comments on here, that most people just don't believe that fanartists have the right to set restrictions on fanart.
Yes, thank you, that's exactly what's been bothering me about all the comments that agree to use fanart without regard.