6 ms·
Copyright isn't level legal vs illegal, it's infringing vs non-infringing. Fan art very often could be argued to be infringing, but no company has any reason to
by Taywee 4y ago
Copyright isn't level legal vs illegal, it's infringing vs non-infringing. Fan art very often could be argued to be infringing, but no company has any reason to pursue it in the vast majority of cases, so they just don't.
It's very confusing, especially when you have to consider trademark as related but separate.
- jefftk 4y agoI don't get your distinction: copyright infringement is illegal, so "infringing" implies "illegal"
- dredmorbius 4y agoInfringement carries both civil (noncriminal) and criminal proscriptions and liabilities under much law, e.g., under US law, 17 USC Chapter 5: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-5 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-5>
- Taywee 4y agoFrom that link, criminal copyright infringement depends on specific circumstances that don't directly apply here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/506 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/506
- dredmorbius 4y agoIt's unclear whether "here" refers to the artists spoofing Disney, or other actors pirating / duplicating artists' work for commercial use. In the former case, I'd agree. In the second, there's a clear violation of 17 USC 506(a)(1)(A).
- Taywee 4y agoIt's civil vs criminal law. Illegal usually implies breaking a law and committing a crime. Copyright infringement is a civil matter, not criminal.
- dredmorbius 4y agoFalse. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33999561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33999561>