ANNOUNCEMENT: REGARDING THE SELLING OF MSPA STUFF

[Lexxy]

As some of you may have already noticed, the rules have recently been revised as follows:

Commerce:
Andrew has respectfully requested that no one sell MSPA-related products or services without his explicit permission. We have also decided that business in general is not to be carried out through the forums. If you do any kind of commission work and would like to advertise it in your signature with a link (ie: Click here for commission info!) that's fine, but you may not make threads to sell your services or products, and you may not actively advertise said services or products in existing threads. It has become too difficult and too widespread to moderate effectively.

Again, YOU MAY NOT SELL HOMESTUCK STUFF WITHOUT ASKING ANDREW. Please do not ask a moderator or a member of one of the creative teams to ask for you if you can't get through to him either. I know he's busy and difficult to get a hold of, but you're really putting them on the spot by doing so and that is quite unfair to them.

What does this mean for those of you who are currently peddling MSPA/Homestuck-related wares?

It would be a tremendous, TREMENDOUS help to the moderation staff if you could do your best to take down your own marketing. Even something as simple as wiping out the content of the original post and replacing it with "Sorry, no longer allowed!" or other such messages of condolence/explanation would be fine. We don't expect you to scrub every single post you've made, just the big ones with the most details.

If you would like to have your thread locked (or even deleted, if it would simply be too much work to scrub it) so you can start anew without having all this TOTALLY ILLEGAL CONTRABAND sprinkled throughout, just let a mod know!

If you have any questions or wish to report any kind of questionable activity, please don't hesitate to use the report function when applicable, or contact Blueberry, Tynic, Lexxy, or any other available moderator directly. I will also leave this thread unlocked for a time for questions/discussion.

[Lexxy]

For those of you who are interested, he spoke on the matter himself on his formspring today:

show spoiler

hide spoiler

Here is a thing to understand first. If you accept a commission to draw a Homestuck character without my permission, does that mean I will file a cease and desist order? Or if you sell an HS sketch at a convention, will I hunt you down, kick over your table, and then muss up your hair and stomp on your glasses?

No, that would be silly.

I just clarified what the official position is, which is that you shouldn't attempt to profit from my work, or anyone else's for that matter, unless you have permission. It's not that I'm suddenly outraged people are doing HS commissions and stuff. I've previously taken an ultra passive attitude to all this. But the result of that, as well as the result in HS's growing popularity, has been a surging culture of casual copyright violation, which though seemingly harmless case by case, in totality is starting to look problematic. In particular, it seems to be leading to increasingly flagrant violations here and there, things which are more serious than a simple commission, and which I would be inclined to take measures to stop. It's easy to see how this trend develops. Someone notices wave after wave of HS artwork being sold by others, and presumes it's ok to take it a little further. And then further...

I think it's better to address this before it turns into a bigger problem. Honestly, the theoretical money I am losing is not what is motivating me here. When you do an HS commission, I can't really imagine how that translates to dollars leaving my pocket, other than projecting losses in the very big picture if stuff like that goes unchecked. It's mainly a little unsettling to watch so many people at once act so casually about profiting off another's IP without asking, and even more unsettling to imagine it spiraling out of control.

It may be the case that a sketch of a Pokemon sold to your friend is an unenforceable violation, and Nintendo will never get involved, but it is still technically a violation. Please understand the fact that it is unenforceable does not make it less of a violation. You have profited from Nintendo's property, without permission. Which is not to say there are not degrees of violation beyond this which are more flagrant, but we should be clear about it. Knowing that, you might decide to do it anyway. Or you might decide to ask Nintendo permission. (They would say no. I might not, though.)

Requiring you to ask permission isn't much of an imposition. But I hesitate to guarantee satisfaction even if you do, because for one thing, your email might slip through the cracks and I might not get back to you. It's happened before. I've had requests like this, and some I've responded to favorably, while others I didn't get around to replying to. Which I feel bad about, as I generally feel bad I can't answer all my mail, but that's how it goes. All I can say is, if you're wondering, ask. I may say yes. I may say no. I may not respond. If I don't, then you may use your discretion, while understanding the position I have taken. If you cross a line, there's a good chance you'll hear from me eventually.

I'd rather this not be about finding out exactly what I do or don't allow, and then just getting down to furiously attacking that wiggle room I give. I'd rather it be about respect for the property of artists. Everyone who this affects is an artist as well, presumably. If you're an artist, you should care about this topic and evaluate your standards, because you are undoubtedly hoping others will respect your work and your rights as well. Imagine you are at a convention, selling Pokemon drawings or such. If you knew one of Nintendo's most aggressive lawyers was lurking nearby, would you still do it? Is it fear of being prosecuted that motivates you to stop? Or is it the fact that you do not own Pokemon, and though it belongs to a multi billion dollar company that won't feel the slightest hardship because of you, it doesn't seem right, because these aren't your creations? Or maybe it is less about respect to the original creator, and more about taking pride in selling what you have created yourself, or at the very least, that which you have been given the right to?

And if the idea of selling black market Pokemon stuff makes you feel uncomfortable, where the owner has millions of dollars applied to a legal staff interested in crushing IP violations no matter how well intended, then why would you feel better about selling stuff owned by a guy without a tiny fraction of those resources, who has heretofore shown not even the slightest interest in taking action against his enthusiastic fans?

These are things for you to think about, and then act according to your internal compass on the matter. I am not going to TAKE YOU DOWN if you sell a sketch of a troll to a friend or whatever. I'm just letting you know my position, and will be reasonably content to let the fans govern themselves, unless certain lines are crossed. Then we will talk.

And if you'd like to read a summary of US copyright law and how that relates to creative property and fan art, I wrote the following article about it on my tumblr:

show spoiler

hide spoiler

Intellectual Property, Copyright Law, and Fan Art

Preface

Between the girl whose necklace concept was stolen by Urban Outfitters recently, and Andrew’s announcement regarding his official stance on fan-created merchandise, I’ve noticed a lot of people are completely unaware of copyright law and what it does and does not dictate. Since I’ve never fully educated myself on that either, I took some time to actually read through relevant US copyright law and thought I might share what I learned with you guys, so you can be informed as well!

If you have ever created or enjoyed fan art, whether you are an artist or simply an enthusiast, please take a few minutes to read this.

I know you might be thinking, "Well I don’t draw fan art so this doesn’t affect me," but some of the most vocal objections to Andrew’s official stance weren’t from artists at all, so if you’re going to get involved in or complain about something, you might as well know what you’re talking about, hey?

What is Intellectual Property?

Intellectual Property refers to "creations of the mind" that are treated as assets (real, tangible property) and protected by law. In the context of the visual, musical, performance, and literary arts, this includes (but is not limited to) things like novels, poetry, scripts, lyrics, drawings and paintings, sculptures, scores, choreography, and architecture, and is under the jurisdiction of copyright law.

What is Copyright?

Copyright is the exclusive right granted to a creator (artist, author, composer, etc) to control their original creations. Artistic works to not need to be registered or published in order to be protected. They are covered by copyright law the moment they exist in a fixed medium.

Broken down:

Exclusive Rights - This refers to the copying, distributing, and adapting of the original material.

• Copying - Also known as plagiarism. With regards to visual art, this includes both claiming credit for work you have not done and stuff like tracing, though the latter of which can also fall into "derivative works" territory, depending on the nature of any changes that are made in the process.
• Distributing - This means sharing, whether for free or for profit. In such cases that the content itself is distributed by the creator for free, such as a webcomic, posting actual images from the comic wherever you want isn’t a problem so long as you don’t claim credit for it. Selling it, however, would be against the law. Free distribution of works that must be paid for to acquire are also against the law; for example: scanning the pages of a print comic and posting them online, or donating to the art team and then putting their wallpapers on 4chan.
• Adapting - This is where "derivative works" and fan art really come in. To adapt an original work is to change it in some way that uses the concept of the original as the basis. Artists might adapt their own work by changing outfits, mediums, colors, or styles. Others may adapt it by making changes to traced images, editing existing work (sprites, screen caps, drawings), or making their own interpretations of the original artist’s concepts; aka: Fan Art.

Fixed Medium - Creative content can’t be protected unless it is made permanent in some way; visual arts must be rendered, music must be written or recorded, literature must be transcribed. Whether or not said work sees the light of day has no bearing on whether or not it is protected, so a work need not be published or even registered with the government to be protected.

How does this affect Fan Work?

Technically, this means fan art, fan music, and fan fictions are illegal in and of themselves because they are derivative works of protected content.

r o f l

But before you get your panties all in a bunch, it’s pretty clear that no creative entity in their right mind gives a shit. It is virtually never enforced due to it generally being a positive reflection on the original work, as it is a common expression of adoration or attachment within a fanbase. It would also be extremely difficult if not impossible to do, and a tremendous waste of time, money, and legal resources. I think the only time I have ever heard of anyone caring about fanart is when Tim Buckley flipped his shit, but he’s an asshole and his comic sucks.

In short, the existence of fan work is a non-issue.

However

Selling fan work is an issue. It has been enforced in the past, and an artist has every right to take legal action against it if they so choose. When you decide to sell merchandise or take a commission that features another person’s original creations, you need to come to terms with the fact that what you’re doing is against the law, regardless of the direction your personal moral compass points. Just because the likelihood or plausibility of legal action being taken is low doesn’t make it any less wrong, and just because the practice is a widespread, integral part of the fan art community, or certain artists’ livelihoods depend on the income it generates, doesn’t mean you are somehow entitled to be able to do it, or that someone who asks you to stop is somehow in the wrong or being some kind of douchebag.

Especially if that person is an independent artist themselves.

Does this mean the original artist owns my fan work?

No. Unless you have directly edited existing artwork, the art itself is yours. However, as much as the original artist cannot claim and distribute it themselves, you don’t have the right to distribute it either unless you have permission.

What about fan characters or inspired works?

Those are actually completely fair game! To use Homestuck as an example, if you have made a fan kid or fan troll, or invented your own Land of ___ and ___, or composed a piece of music that was inspired by the comic, but doesn’t actually use anything Andrew or his creative staff has made, guess what? Not protected! That’s because styles and concepts can’t be automatically copyrighted, and many cases, can’t be copyrighted at all.

However, if you draw your (or someone else’s) fan character in the same picture as an existing character, you no longer have the right to distribute it because it contains protected content.

Can’t I hide behind the "fair use" clause?

Since revising the rules on MSPAF and posting my initial tumblr entry about Andrew’s announcement, I’ve seen a few comments here and on other sites, such as 4chan, stating that you can just call a piece of fan work a parody or satire and magically be absolved from legal persecution.

WRONG.

Parody and satire are only protected by fair use if the nature of the derivative work meets certain standards with regards to criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, as well as criteria based on the character of the derivative work, the purpose (commercial or nonprofit), and its effect on the potential market or value of the original, copyrighted work.

Isn’t everything on the internet public domain?

NOPE.AVI

US Copyright Law dictates that copyrighted works are protected until 70 years after the original artist’s death. Even in cases of anonymous, pseudonymous, or joint works, copyright protection lasts up to 95 years from publication (or 120 years after creation) before the material becomes public domain.

Where can I read about US copyright law myself?

The entirety of US copyright law and its related articles are available to read and download here! It’s 350 pages long, but most of the relevant stuff can be found within the first 20 pages of the first chapter (you can skip the preface entirely, it just documents all the statutory enactments which is basically all the legal stuff that went into the creation of the content of the document).

I don’t live in the US, do these laws still apply to me?

While copyright laws differ from country to country, US law is only irrelevant if the activity you engage in happens solely within your country of residence. Work posted on such sites as DeviantArt is subject to US copyright law because it’s an American website, with servers based in the US. Regardless of where you’re from, though, if the creator of an original work has asked people to stop selling merchandise based of it without their permission, respecting their wishes is still the right and respectful thing to do.

On a personal note, I am really, truly taken aback by some of the responses Andrew’s announcement has garnered. I know there was a fair bit of misunderstanding earlier, some of which persists because people either don’t understand that his request is in no way, shape, or form a ban on fan art and the selling thereof, or haven’t read his formspring explanation, and maybe some of that is my fault for not being thorough enough in my initial explanation. BUT, some of you have been borderline malicious if not blatantly spiteful about it. I am seriously shocked and severely disappointed, not by those who were saddened by the news, or genuinely didn’t know about copyright law, or even thoughtfully questioned the move, but by those who had the audacity to insult him over this decision.

I’m not judging anyone here. I’ve done commissions featuring other creators’ IP without permission (Avatar, Hellboy), and will likely continue to do it as the opportunities arise, but I do so while being fully aware of what it is I am doing and what the implications are. I’m not delusional. I also wouldn’t hesitate to take any of it down if I were asked to by the owners or their representatives, but that’s just me. Your moral stance on this issue is entirely your own, and you are as free as the next person to do as you wish in accordance to what you personally believe is ok to do, but you don’t have to be a dick about it.

And a handy visual guide by Scorium!

Remember kids:
Asking permission and being allowed or denied is better than doing whatever you want, and not caring about the artist's feelings on the matter.

show spoiler

hide spoiler

Note: mspaquestions@gmail.com is now the address you should contact to ask about getting permission.

[LuciferZ]

I am surprised no one has decided to post here yet, after you considerately left the thread open for discussion.

I don't want to make some long and windy post about my thoughts so I'm going to try and crystallize my opinion, as irrelevant as it is. I can see why Andrew doesn't want unrestricted capitalization of his IP, but at the same time, commission work in fandoms is practically a fundamental operation of the universe. From lowly Sonic edits to hand painted WoW personas. If everyone who takes Homestuck commissions were to obey this new rule and ask Andrew via email, the man would be buried in mail. And how would that work? Would I have to ask per commission, with details of what it is I am asked to draw? Would I ask for myself and then get a stamp of approval across the commission board?

I guess what I'm saying is, there are a lot of people in this fandom who have been getting a comfortable amount of pocket money out of commissions, and suddenly what they do and what they have lined up is possibly forbidden on high. There are a lot of questions left unanswered. If Andrew doesn't answer them, or give more detail about this new rule, some people are going to say 'fuck it' and do what they want anyways, and people who respect Hussie will stick to it but be unhappy that the 'jerks' ignoring the rule are still profiting. So all parties would benefit if Andrew explained more what this entails.

Will he be saying no frequently? Or is this really just a polite formality? What might he refuse for? Content? Quality? If you are charging too much or making too much? If you are catering to too many people?

Is he going to really stick to this? When he has a hundred request emails a day, will he reply to them? It's nice to say "use your judgement if I don't respond" but many would simply take that nervously to mean "no you arent even worth replying to" and settle for doing nothing. I imagine most people WANT to abide by this. We respect Andrew for what he has made. But when suddenly something you considered your personal business and right becomes a grey area of 'doing what you want' and 'offending hussie' it is probably going to cause some conflict.

tl;dr
i got a lot of questions
also, "By Andrew's decree, there is to be absolutely no selling of any MSPA products of any kind without explicit consent from Andrew himself." really? are the clouds parting and a booming voice filling us in on the haps? dost thou have any more commandments from the heavens, moses? No offense, but if you want everyone to respect Andrew's wishes, maybe word that more in the spirit of mutual respect.

[kwinse]

Just my two cents, but the fact that people have been doing something (and will continue doing so) does not on its own make the act of doing that something right, legally or morally.

People taking commissions involving IP they do not own (or own the rights to etc.) do violate the law, even if it is realistically impossible to stop them all.

[LuciferZ]

That's not your two cents, that is actual fact. That is the law's two cents. What you said is the truth of the matter, and always has been. But facts and laws are usually ignored because of personal opinions. I am saying that the lax policy before has made many feel entitled to profiting regardless of its actual legal standing. If the situation is unclear, or they take it to be a slight against their 'right', then some of these people will A) Keep violating the law and Andrew's request, and B) Now they might be assholes about it because they are actively facing and denying that what they are doing is wrong.

I don't see how that profits anyone. I just see this, as it is right now, causing more drama than it needs to simply because it is vague.

Also I hope I don't sound like I'm trying to argue with you kwinse, your point just gave me this thought process is all.

[Twigwise]

So, related, if I want to, say, sell handmade sculpey figurines of Homestuck characters at a convention (which I do, in addition to other characters) how do I get in contact with Mr Hussie? How would I, say, send him royalties (like 30 to 50 percent of the profit) for the figures? I don't want to take his characters to make money, persay, but because not only are they fun and addicting to draw/sculpt, I know there's many people who would like to have the figurines because they wouldn't be able to make them themselves. I don't want to break the law or you know make Andrew loose money, but it's hard to figure how to get in contact with a guy who's always quite busy.

[Vero]

Added to that, I'm sure there are people who just regularly take commissions, and regularly ask for commissions who would have no idea this rule change even took place because they don't go on these forums/don't follow Hussie's news.

[Wesley Foxx]

Will he be saying no frequently? Or is this really just a polite formality? What might he refuse for? Content? Quality? If you are charging too much or making too much? If you are catering to too many people?

As he said himself in his formspring reply,
"I'd rather this not be about finding out exactly what I do or don't allow, and then just getting down to furiously attacking that wiggle room I give. "

[NotASenator]

So, related, if I want to, say, sell handmade sculpey figurines of Homestuck characters at a convention (which I do, in addition to other characters) how do I get in contact with Mr Hussie? How would I, say, send him royalties (like 30 to 50 percent of the profit) for the figures? I don't want to take his characters to make money, persay, but because not only are they fun and addicting to draw/sculpt, I know there's many people who would like to have the figurines because they wouldn't be able to make them themselves. I don't want to break the law or you know make Andrew loose money, but it's hard to figure how to get in contact with a guy who's always quite busy.

On every news post on the MSPA page, his name at the top of the post is a link to his email address. That's how you get in touch with him.

[Twigwise]

So, related, if I want to, say, sell handmade sculpey figurines of Homestuck characters at a convention (which I do, in addition to other characters) how do I get in contact with Mr Hussie? How would I, say, send him royalties (like 30 to 50 percent of the profit) for the figures? I don't want to take his characters to make money, persay, but because not only are they fun and addicting to draw/sculpt, I know there's many people who would like to have the figurines because they wouldn't be able to make them themselves. I don't want to break the law or you know make Andrew loose money, but it's hard to figure how to get in contact with a guy who's always quite busy.

On every news post on the MSPA page, his name at the top of the post is a link to his email address. That's how you get in touch with him.

Thank you very much! I'll get to asking permission, then.

[Blueberry]

Andrew is well aware of the sheer amount of work the fanbase produces, and he doesn't want to discourage that creativity at all.

If everyone who takes Homestuck commissions were to obey this new rule and ask Andrew via email, the man would be buried in mail. And how would that work? Would I have to ask per commission, with details of what it is I am asked to draw? Would I ask for myself and then get a stamp of approval across the commission board?

I am not one of the people who has talked to Andrew personally about this, but my guess is that you should contact him with some examples of what you do and the sort of price ranges you charge. If he wants to take a commission then you can work that out with him yourself.

Also, like I said, he's well aware of the amount of things that are produced, and the fact that he decided to make this announcement shows that he is willing to accept the aftermath, including responding to hundreds of emails.

[Eyes5]

I got Andrew's permission to sell commissions a long time ago. How should I conduct myself on the forums and elsewhere? Maybe I should write after some of my posts "Sanctioned by Andrew" or something so people don't yell at me for ripping off his IP.

Well, this isn't a problem for me or anything. I guess I'm only concerned because it feels a bit flaunty. Like, hey lookit me, I got permission, buy my stuff, etc.

[Blueberry]

Any posts specifically advertising commissions are no longer allowed on this forum, permission or not. I personally would probably deal with things on a case-by-case basis, but with the amount of traffic your stuff gets from the fandom you could probably add a note to your website (on the bottom of the commission info or the top (maybe?) of your plushie gallery?) saying something like "Characters from Homestuck used with permission of the author" or something like that.

(feel free to wait for Lexxy and/or tynic to weigh in, I was just online and thought I would offer my 2 cents)

[tynic]

I think it would be appropriate to just make a note on your sales site, "MSPA/Homestuck characters are property of Andrew Hussie and are offered with permission", or something like that, to note that it's officially sanctioned. Otherwise I wouldn't worry about it.

[Miff]

I have two main concerns with this.

1) As a commission buyer what rules are imposed on me?

and

2) What does Andrew consider "his property" anyways? Does this rule extend to fan-characters? What about the Troll race in general? Can we draw fantrolls? What about fannon races such as Bugs, Spambots, or Lyndians? What about humans playing SBURB? What about character from MSPAFAs?

[Lexxy]

also, "By Andrew's decree, there is to be absolutely no selling of any MSPA products of any kind without explicit consent from Andrew himself." really? are the clouds parting and a booming voice filling us in on the haps? dost thou have any more commandments from the heavens, moses? No offense, but if you want everyone to respect Andrew's wishes, maybe word that more in the spirit of mutual respect.

You raise a valid point here, and I've revised the rules thread as well as the OP in this thread to reflect this change. I frequently write the rules very dry and to-the-point, BUT I think this is more in the spirit of his own words :>

Added to that, I'm sure there are people who just regularly take commissions, and regularly ask for commissions who would have no idea this rule change even took place because they don't go on these forums/don't follow Hussie's news.

He fully understands that people are going to violate his request, whether on purpose or through lack of awareness. That's just how these things go.

I have two main concerns with this.

1) As a commission buyer what rules are imposed on me?

and

2) What does Andrew consider "his property" anyways? Does this rule extend to fan-characters? What about the Troll race in general? Can we draw fantrolls? What about fannon races such as Bugs, Spambots, or Lyndians? What about humans playing SBURB? What about character from MSPAFAs?

1) Even though I just did some reading up on copyright law, I'm not really sure what this means for you as a consumer. I think it's up to the artist to get permission, but if you purchase something that is made and sold without consent, that probably makes it akin to buying bootlegged/pirated content? Like, it's not legal, in any case, but it's not something I would fret too much over to be honest. Andrew isn't going to come after you for it or anything.

2) It has nothing to do with what he considers his, and everything to do with what copyright law dictates. Fan characters and inspired works that don't actually have any content that Andrew created, but are based off his concepts, are fair game. SBURB is Andrew's, but the format of the comic as copied by fan adventures is a concept that isn't protected under copyright, so fan adventures are fair game as well.

I actually spent several hours this morning reading US copyright law with regards to the arts and wrote an article about it on my tumblr, which I'll go ahead and edit into the second post of this thread under Andrew's formspring quote. I tried to make it as concise and understandable as I could, so hopefully that will help clear things up a bit?

[Stop Him]

Can’t I hide behind the "fair use" clause?

Since revising the rules on MSPAF and posting my initial tumblr entry about Andrew’s announcement, I’ve seen a few comments here and on other sites, such as 4chan, stating that you can just call a piece of fan work a parody or satire and magically be absolved from legal persecution.

WRONG.

Parody and satire are only protected by fair use if the nature of the derivative work meets certain standards with regards to criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, as well as criteria based on the character of the derivative work, the purpose (commercial or nonprofit), and its effect on the potential market or value of the original, copyrighted work.

I'd like to expand on this a bit, because Fair Use is one of the most misunderstood (and under-appreciated) features of US Copyright law.

1) The standards for judging Fair Use are pretty subjective, and do not depend on having or not having any set amount of the aforementioned criteria. Many works that are very much for profit have qualified for Fair Use, for example, while just as many non-profit works have failed the test. It's much like asking a judge to decide whether or not something "is art" or not. Just because you may think something falls under Fair Use does not mean the next person will, and that next person may be running the court that decides your case.

2) Which is the other important point: Fair Use is determined by lawsuits. Making some bit of fanart and saying "Fair Use!" does not protect you legally in any way. If a lawyer sends you a Cease and Desist order, you can say "Hey, Fair Use, dude", and possibly, if your case seems strong, they may back off, but they don't have to. They can still sue you. Hell, they can sue you regardless of how strong your case is, if they feel like burning the money.

A Fair Use defense happens something like this: Someone sues you for ripping off their stuff. You go to court, and you say, "Well, yeah, I ripped off this stuff, but I think it's okay under Fair Use because of etc etc etc." You are, in essence, admitting to a Copyright violation, but saying it doesn't count for some reason. Then a judge looks at all the arguments and decides whether or not your work does indeed qualify as Fair Use, and see point 1 above.

If you lose, you're probably liable for damages, and even if you win, you've gone through an expensive lawsuit.

This is a civil matter, and does not operate under the same "innocent until proven guilty" standards found in criminal cases. In a case that hinges on Fair Use, it is presumed that you have violated the copyright, and it is up to you to convince the court of your innocence.

[Miff]

2) It has nothing to do with what he considers his, and everything to do with what copyright law dictates. Fan characters and inspired works that don't actually have any content that Andrew created, but are based off his concepts, are fair game. SBURB is Andrew's, but the format of the comic as copied by fan adventures is a concept that isn't protected under copyright, so fan adventures are fair game as well.

I actually spent several hours this morning reading US copyright law with regards to the arts and wrote an article about it on my tumblr, which I'll go ahead and edit into the second post of this thread under Andrew's formspring quote. I tried to make it as concise and understandable as I could, so hopefully that will help clear things up a bit?

The MPAA/RIAA haven't gotten copyright infringement to be a criminal act yet, so it's currently a civil action. That means that the definition of the law doesn't matter in the short term, as, theoretically, Andrew can just say "hey I own the idea of grey-skinned humanoids with red/orange/yellow horns and orange eyes and rainbow blood" and file a lawsuit that stands a good chance of at least going to trial where the court will decide whether the species is eligible for copyright protection.

However, if he's like "nah, that's not specific enough to be totally mine" then there's no way he'd complain over it as long as he doesn't claim that it's protected under copyright.

It may be up to the courts to decide whether a specific use is a violation, but anything in resemblance is still enough to file a case. (Such as all those people who accused J.K.Rowling et al. of copying ideas in Harry Potter.)

[Stop Him]

That means that the definition of the law doesn't matter in the short term, as, theoretically, Andrew can just say "hey I own the idea of grey-skinned humanoids with red/orange/yellow horns and orange eyes and rainbow blood" and file a lawsuit that stands a good chance of at least going to trial where the court will decide whether the species is eligible for copyright protection.

How do I protect my idea?

Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.

[Steev]

Ok I'm stuck and I have no idea where to take this question, because it's not worth bothering Andrew with (it is a tiny scale question) :

I have started on exactly one Homestuck-related commission shortly before this announcement, with permission from an art forum moderator. I really don't want to just bump my commissionee from getting a Scalemate since I've already begun making it. Is it ok to finish this thing and get it to them, and then be done with commissions? I really don't know what I should do...

[Blueberry]

Andrew has said that commissions that are already in process are allowed.

[InnerRayg]

It sort of boggles my mind that people would even consider doing commissions of his characters without permission anyway.

[Weeaboo]

oh yes, i saw this on tumblr. still glad that we can make and give away things about his characters for free.

on the note that he wants us to stop selling and profiting from his creations, i have to say i'm surprised he didn't do this sooner.

although i wonder if he'd still be open to people selling them but splitting the profits between the maker and him?

[Steev]

Andrew has said that commissions that are already in process are allowed.

Thanks for the clarification! I missed that when I read this stuff over.

[michi]

I have a law degree. However, the following is NOT legal advice.

In response to the question about the purchaser of such illegally-commissioned works, I note that in general in the law, the very best and most righteous holder of property is one who is a good faith purchaser for value without notice. I am fairly certain this applies here as well.

What does that mean? That means that if you purchase

a) in good faith -- without malice or an intent to trick anyone or commit fraud or do something bad AND
b) for value -- you properly paid a fair market value for the good (be it in $$$ or in trade) AND
c) without notice -- without notice that something was incorrect, without knowing what you were doing was somehow wrong, without knowing an item was stolen or otherwise shouldn't have been sold to you -- this includes things that AREN'T illegal to sell, like the coffee you buy in the morning, because, well, you had no notice that anything was amiss

then you are, by the law, almost 100% certainly always going to be the most appropriate person to hold absolute title to something that no one is able to take away from you.

(A few jurisdictions have variations for real estate, not important here.)

So, while I'm neither conversant on IP law nor officially a lawyer for a few more months, if you previously bought a commissionned item in the above manner (you paid a reasonable amount for it with a pure heart and had no idea at the time it was wrong), you shouldn't worry.

If anything lexxy or others report contradicts this, go with them.