Comment

Comment on AI Didn't Break Copyright Law, It Just Exposed How Broken It Already Was

…chicagobar.org/…/the-fine-line-between-fan-art-f…

It’s copyright infringements but like I said, most won’t bother fans not making a dime. There’s economic advantages to having fans create and distribute your content for free. A company can choose to copyright strike anything with their characters in it at anytime.

source

Sort:hotnew top

ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Skimming the article seems to affirm that the danger is profiting off of fan works, not the works themselves. Just because a company can sue you over it (even in situations where you made no profit off of it), that doesn’t mean you broke any laws. You can be sued for anything, its up to the court to determine if a law was broken.

source
- Grimy@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  
  Fan fiction and fan art, without appropriate permissions or licenses, are usually an infringement of the right of the copyright holder to prepare and license derivative works based on the original. Copyrights allow their owners to decide how their works can be used, including creating new derivative works off of the original product.
  
  Seems pretty clear. It’s at the discretion of the owner. The profit aspect doesn’t matter in terms of the law, it just makes it likely that companies will go to court over it.
  
  Additionally, usually as long as the fan content is non-commercial, it is not a problem with copyright holders.
  
  Notice how it says with copyright holders and not with copyright laws.
  
  source