13 ms·

Apparently the motivation for the attack was that "KyoAni has stolen something from the attacker", unconfirmed reports that the something in question was a Ligh

Apparently the motivation for the attack was that "KyoAni has stolen something from the attacker", unconfirmed reports that the something in question was a Light Novel the attacker wrote but got rejected by KyoAni, which apparently then got turned into an original work by the studio (possibly stealing here and there from the LN or anyhow drawing inspiration from it) without crediting the attacker or compensating him. I can see this happening in all honesty, I am sure that editors get to read a lot of stuff from applicants which can then be polished to produce something in-house, kind of like when bigger companies fish for start-ups tech to reimplement it in-house. Anyhow, the article doesn't mention it but I just though I would write this down in case anyone was curious about the potential motivation.

mrob 7y ago
Japanese sources are reporting a eyewitness account of the suspect saying "パクりやがって", which could be translated as "they plagiarized" (and definitely not "I'm sorry" as Google Translate claims). See https://www.edrdg.org/jmdictdb/cgi-bin/entr.py?svc=jmdict&sid=&q=2020400 https://www.edrdg.org/jmdictdb/cgi-bin/entr.py?svc=jmdict&si... https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190718-00000075-asahi-soci https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190718-00000075-asahi-s...
mabbo 7y ago
That's half of it (if true). The other half is a mentally ill person.
- goldenkey 7y ago
  Explain to my why you value life over principles in a universe that neither designates value to either? Having a different world view does not make a person mentally ill. Willing to die for principles means strong feelings, no more, no less. You may find what he did heinous but violent behavior is not necessarily indicative of mental illness. It just tends to be a combination of 3 things: 1) value of self biology/life 2) value of others biology/life 3) strength of belief that ideology and impact of events supercedes 1 and 2 It is convenient to claim every violent person is mentally ill when the reality is moreso the 3 aforementioned precepts, and a short-temper/hot handle.
  - maeln 7y ago
    Putting so little value in other people life is a mental illness. Its not a question of perception. Considering your intellectual / material property over someone life is being a sociopath.
    - goldenkey 7y ago
      It totally is a question of perception and philosophy. Death is literally a part of life. We all die. The value of life is what you make of it. The fact that this arsonist got roasted himself shows his perspective on the idea of "precious bodies" in general. He was wronged, palgiarized, steamrolled by an idomitable corporation and had no recourse. Je expressed in through corporeal action. You may disagree with the morality of his actions but your assessment of mental illness is just a way to end any discussion about what life is worth when it comes to being traded for political action, injustice, change, etc. We all live for something. Everyone chooses what to live and die for unless circumstance chooses for them.
      - Razengan 7y ago
        At what point would you draw the line over "killing for something?" How about religion? Voices in someone's head? What if they affected you or your loved ones? Will you still laud their ""principles""?
      - maeln 7y ago
        Society don't really care about you philosophical reflection on life and death. If this man was in fact defrauded by the company, he could have gone to court to solve the issue. Him considering that committing a mass murder, killing and injuring many innocent, is justifiable for the plagiarism is a mental illness. Trying to spin the conversation around philosophy and moral views to justify a mass murder is useless and seriously worrying about your own mental state and moral compass.
        Kaiyou 7y ago
        There's no guarantee justice is upheld in court. Remember Dirty Harry? Most likely the legal route was already tried.
m0llusk 7y ago
Intellectual property issues once again. People think they own ideas and glorify themselves as originators. In reality once an idea is communicated it is free. All people can really do is add value to an idea by promoting it, framing it, demonstrating it, aiding in its application, and so on. Yet here intellectual property has scaled beyond mere value into critical relevance and even a person's identity itself. An individual went way out of bounds here, but some unworkable ideas about intellectual property helped to define the path. Modern cultures really need to come to terms with the nature of intellectual property in the Internet era. It's not just about protecting a mouse anymore.
- gdhbcc 7y ago
  Could not agree more.
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  This isn't necessarily true in the field of artistic production, in my opinion. In this case this person presumably submitted their work for acceptance to a company, and the company rejected their work but then stole it. This is a massive violation of industry ethics, and still generates much fury to this day if it happens. (For example, if Tor published a novella under an editor's name, but the novella was actually written by an author who was told the work was not accepted into Tor, this would cause a massive uproar.) Part of the issue is that the publishing party purchases first-publishing rights of the work submitted to them. By definition, they need to recieve unpublished, highly protected work that hasn't been shown to anyone else (or shown to an audience).
- bogwog 7y ago
  > Intellectual property issues once again. People think they own ideas and glorify themselves as originators. A novel isn't an "idea", it's a work of art. Copyright law protects artists from having their work copied. You don't need to "glorify yourself" to believe that you should have that basic right. Going on a killing spree because someone stole your idea is obviously insane, but I can understand the frustration. Someone can spend years of their life working on a single piece, and having it stolen is like someone stole those years from you. The incentives to steal work like this are huge which is why copyright law needs to exist, otherwise we'd have either more killing sprees or less art.
skgoa 7y ago
And this is why most companies doing anything having to do with media will not ever even read/watch works that were sent to them unsolicited. There are so many ideas being in different states of development at any given time that there is a failry high risk of inadvertenly opening yourself up to being accused of plagiarism.
- Filligree 7y ago
  Well, not exactly this.

mrob 7y ago

Japanese sources are reporting a eyewitness account of the suspect saying "パクりやがって", which could be translated as "they plagiarized" (and definitely not "I'm sorry" as Google Translate claims). See https://www.edrdg.org/jmdictdb/cgi-bin/entr.py?svc=jmdict&sid=&q=2020400 https://www.edrdg.org/jmdictdb/cgi-bin/entr.py?svc=jmdict&si... https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190718-00000075-asahi-soci https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20190718-00000075-asahi-s...

mabbo 7y ago

That's half of it (if true). The other half is a mentally ill person.

goldenkey 7y ago
Explain to my why you value life over principles in a universe that neither designates value to either? Having a different world view does not make a person mentally ill. Willing to die for principles means strong feelings, no more, no less. You may find what he did heinous but violent behavior is not necessarily indicative of mental illness. It just tends to be a combination of 3 things: 1) value of self biology/life 2) value of others biology/life 3) strength of belief that ideology and impact of events supercedes 1 and 2 It is convenient to claim every violent person is mentally ill when the reality is moreso the 3 aforementioned precepts, and a short-temper/hot handle.
- maeln 7y ago
  Putting so little value in other people life is a mental illness. Its not a question of perception. Considering your intellectual / material property over someone life is being a sociopath.
  - goldenkey 7y ago
    It totally is a question of perception and philosophy. Death is literally a part of life. We all die. The value of life is what you make of it. The fact that this arsonist got roasted himself shows his perspective on the idea of "precious bodies" in general. He was wronged, palgiarized, steamrolled by an idomitable corporation and had no recourse. Je expressed in through corporeal action. You may disagree with the morality of his actions but your assessment of mental illness is just a way to end any discussion about what life is worth when it comes to being traded for political action, injustice, change, etc. We all live for something. Everyone chooses what to live and die for unless circumstance chooses for them.
    - Razengan 7y ago
      At what point would you draw the line over "killing for something?" How about religion? Voices in someone's head? What if they affected you or your loved ones? Will you still laud their ""principles""?
    - maeln 7y ago
      Society don't really care about you philosophical reflection on life and death. If this man was in fact defrauded by the company, he could have gone to court to solve the issue. Him considering that committing a mass murder, killing and injuring many innocent, is justifiable for the plagiarism is a mental illness. Trying to spin the conversation around philosophy and moral views to justify a mass murder is useless and seriously worrying about your own mental state and moral compass.
      - Kaiyou 7y ago
        There's no guarantee justice is upheld in court. Remember Dirty Harry? Most likely the legal route was already tried.

m0llusk 7y ago

Intellectual property issues once again. People think they own ideas and glorify themselves as originators. In reality once an idea is communicated it is free. All people can really do is add value to an idea by promoting it, framing it, demonstrating it, aiding in its application, and so on. Yet here intellectual property has scaled beyond mere value into critical relevance and even a person's identity itself. An individual went way out of bounds here, but some unworkable ideas about intellectual property helped to define the path. Modern cultures really need to come to terms with the nature of intellectual property in the Internet era. It's not just about protecting a mouse anymore.

gdhbcc 7y ago
Could not agree more.
SolaceQuantum 7y ago
This isn't necessarily true in the field of artistic production, in my opinion. In this case this person presumably submitted their work for acceptance to a company, and the company rejected their work but then stole it. This is a massive violation of industry ethics, and still generates much fury to this day if it happens. (For example, if Tor published a novella under an editor's name, but the novella was actually written by an author who was told the work was not accepted into Tor, this would cause a massive uproar.) Part of the issue is that the publishing party purchases first-publishing rights of the work submitted to them. By definition, they need to recieve unpublished, highly protected work that hasn't been shown to anyone else (or shown to an audience).
bogwog 7y ago
> Intellectual property issues once again. People think they own ideas and glorify themselves as originators. A novel isn't an "idea", it's a work of art. Copyright law protects artists from having their work copied. You don't need to "glorify yourself" to believe that you should have that basic right. Going on a killing spree because someone stole your idea is obviously insane, but I can understand the frustration. Someone can spend years of their life working on a single piece, and having it stolen is like someone stole those years from you. The incentives to steal work like this are huge which is why copyright law needs to exist, otherwise we'd have either more killing sprees or less art.

skgoa 7y ago

And this is why most companies doing anything having to do with media will not ever even read/watch works that were sent to them unsolicited. There are so many ideas being in different states of development at any given time that there is a failry high risk of inadvertenly opening yourself up to being accused of plagiarism.

Filligree 7y ago
Well, not exactly this.