a site using FF skins to showcase copyright infringement

[deano_ue]

AA posted this on his blog

http://brittonpayne.com/Marvel/InfringingSkins.htm

it's an article that shows various games that have used copyrighted characters, but for FF it uses all my skins and honestly i'm not happy and a bit worried, that my work is being linked to what appears to be a law article

I don't want this to come back if i'm trying to get a photography job somewhere, ohh he's the guy who steals work

i'm not gonna play dumb and say i didn't know it was illegal but i don't know what to do

[AfghanAnt]

i'm not gonna play dumb and say i didn't know it was illegal but i don't know what to do

I really wouldn't call it anymore more illegal that fanart.

Also I am sure you have no reason to worry, I think the article is from a year ago.

[Previsionary]

i'm not gonna play dumb and say i didn't know it was illegal but i don't know what to do

I really wouldn't call it anymore more illegal that fanart.

Also I am sure you have no reason to worry, I think the article is from a year ago.

Somewhere around there (2007). The main site actually seems to support an article on copyright infringement, marvel's history with it, and possible solutions. Me thinks it's a dissertation/thesis and the online portion was used as extra support and evidence of the practice. Though, it does have some inaccuracies regarding what went on with Marvel and FF, it does go on to reference Alex's Faq about what a skin is and so on.

[Podmark]

Man that sucks that it's all your work. But whoever did it probably just grabbed the art from one spot and you were the unlucky guy. I guess you could ask to have your work removed if you can find the contact.

[stumpy]

As noted, the article is a couple years old. And, interestingly, the author was a legal intern at DC Comics back in 2005. He draws some comic strips himself (I chose that example because it's the only superhero one I saw and it has the logos carefully obscured).

There's sort of an irony in that the FF skins are fan art and many consider them sort of separate from normal copyright issues (legal concerns, to the extent there are some, are often more concerned with making them available). At the same time, the pictures of TUE's work in the article are there courtesy of the principle of fair use, which is another exception to copyright (excerpting someone else's work to illustrate some other point).

From the standpoint of an academic article, it's definitely wrong that TUE isn't referenced properly. From the standpoint of TUE's concern about possible repercussions from people knowing he's made what the author claims are infringing skins, it may be best that he's left out of it. As it stands, there isn't any cause for concern because no one who doesn't already know TUE's work is going to find out by reading that article (though they might from AA's blog piece).

[UnfluffyBunny]

Man that sucks that it's all your work. But whoever did it probably just grabbed the art from one spot and you were the unlucky guy. I guess you could ask to have your work removed if you can find the contact.

there's a link to request removal on this page:
http://brittonpayne.com/Marvel/Terms.html

[deano_ue]

this si the e-mail i plan on sending

dear name

Your website in question (web addy) was brought to my attention by a separate party as something i may have found in interest. Though i do understand your stance and what you are trying to get across with your point, i do not appreciate that you have singled out my freedom force based skin work for this section of your site, Every image you have used as an example is from my old gallery. I would like to ask how you came across the section of image? There is no profit to be made from these skins and out side of a small community they are not released and are usually classified in the same vain as fan art. In fact i use these image to showcase what i can do digitally and have done private commissions for people based on them for original pieces.

I would also like to inform you that yes while marvel did send a cease and desists letter to the website the skindex it was not due to freedom force content but was due to the site starting to charge for skins of characters for the sims game.

Even though I understand the site of over 2 years old I am askin would you kindly please remove the images in question, as i do not want something like this to have an ad versed effect on my other more major aspects of my portfolio such as my photographic work which i do hold the copyright to

thanks you kindly

UE's real name


I'm not to sure about the last bit mentioning my photography how do that sound

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

A pretty good letter, aside form a few spelling and grammar issues that you probably haven't had the time to go over yet.

[Tortuga]

I cannot imagine that an outdated, unknown website involving pics/content about an outdated and relatively unknown PC game could possibly interfere with you getting a job unless you bring it up, put "The Ultimate Evil" as your full name on your resume, and include the web address.

If all that happened, then I could see it become a problem because the company would think you're just a little nuts and not very unprofessional.

[deano_ue]

I cannot imagine that an outdated, unknown website involving pics/content about an outdated and relatively unknown PC game could possibly interfere with you getting a job unless you bring it up, put "The Ultimate Evil" as your full name on your resume, and include the web address.

If all that happened, then I could see it become a problem because the company would think you're just a little nuts and not very unprofessional.

you been speaking to my doctors

nah trust me if you've seen my portfolio site the only place the name i use here appears is on the file/files that my av appears on skin/illustrations. I can defiantly see where you're coming from tort but there is just something that doesn't sit with me maybe its the idea that my work has been taking without so much of a can I?

[BentonGrey]

I can certainly understand your concerns TUE, and I think it would make me more than a little uncomfortable to have the DCUG linked to something like this, outdated or not.  The upshot is that since the article is so old, the author shouldn't really have a problem removing the images since they have likely served their purpose.  I think your letter lays it out well, but do make sure to address those grammatical issues.

[stumpy]

I agree with Tort that you aren't likely in any legal or career jeopardy from the article. There really isn't any likelihood that someone who doesn't already know your work will connect the images he uses to you professionally. In reality, no one who doesn't already know you would  even connect them to you here as TUE. That's on top of the fact that no one who isn't a lawyer is terribly likely to even read the article and only a lawyer (and not many of those) would have any reason to care about any legal proceeding against you.

As a side note, I sort of disagree that he won't care about removing your images because the article is old. 2006 isn't really old by journal article standards. And, since his article was published in his law school's law review, he very likely still has it on his c.v. He notes on his résumé that he received the "Fordham University School of Law Writing Award". I don't know if it was for that article, but (though I have some issues with some of his approach) it was a decent piece and he may well not want to dismantle it in any way. He may want to keep it there for as long as he maintains the web site.

Just from the standpoint of someone using a few thumbnails of your work to illustrate some of the things available to Freedom Force gamers, he doesn't need permission to do it. Obviously, getting permission would be an appreciated courtesy. But, from what I know, it generally falls under "fair use" to use samples/excerpts of copyrighted material for purposes of discussion, illustrating a point, etc. (And, who owns the characters has nothing to do with it. If he were writing an article examining legal issues involving materials available at Marvel's site, he could do the same thing with small samples of their content.) I'm not saying you can't mention that it would have been nice for him to ask permission or even request that he not use your work as examples. But, he isn't obligated to take the images down.

Really what he is obligated to do is give you credit, if that's what you want. (And, he should have at least tried to credit you or post links even if he couldn't find you for a real citation. But, since you are concerned about your connection to the copyrighted characters, it may be best that he didn't.) A scholarly article like his is supposed to provide citations for the materials that it references as sources or examples. Some publications play fast and loose with citations for material found on the internet, but a respectable journal would want his sources listed. If this is a peer-reviewed article, he probably got away with it because the material is on a separate web page. If it had been in the journal itself, his editors should have asked for sources.

Anyway, I don't want to discourage whatever course of action you want to take. But, be aware that, if you tell him that you are the creator of the material he is using, he doesn't have to take it down. And, he can put himself in the clear, in terms of the issue of giving credit just by changing the web page so that you are listed as the creator of those skins. That may not be what you want...