🧵 Disney stole 3D model
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Jan 2025 18:14:15 UTC No. 1006140
Disney is still selling stolen 3D artwork and never apologized to artist. Keep your eyes peeled.
https://youtu.be/ylKLIjlDEi8
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Jan 2025 18:24:28 UTC No. 1006142
apologized? No they owe him money.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Jan 2025 19:50:12 UTC No. 1006149
>>1006142
they owe him nothing tbphwyfmlm
internet losers need to learn they don't own the fanart they make, they never have and never will and the only reason they can e-beg through patreon or whatever while profiting from IPs they don't own is mere courtesy and good will from those multibillion dollar companies
Anonymous at Sat, 25 Jan 2025 00:00:30 UTC No. 1006157
>>1006149
Glad someone said it, so I don't have to.
Anonymous at Sat, 25 Jan 2025 03:35:53 UTC No. 1006165
>>1006140
I came to this thread expecting Disney to be unscrupulous, but if it's not his original IP, well, tough shit boyo.
Anonymous at Sat, 25 Jan 2025 14:27:33 UTC No. 1006188
>>1006157
>>1006149
That's not how the law work, edgy trannies
Anonymous at Sat, 25 Jan 2025 19:14:53 UTC No. 1006206
>>1006149
unironically this.
also this is disney, they can do whatever the fuck they want even if they don't have the law on their side. even if the guy somehow finds a lawyer brave enough to sue and somehow reach a positive outcome for the artist, they will settle it behind closed doors and NDA him for the rest of his life. in the 0.0001% chance that the guy actually wins, is it really a victory if he can't tell anyone about it?
personally I can't wait for the day that a big porn animator learns this lesson and catches a massive suit. imagine the meltdown. and it WILL happen, it's only a matter of time. one day some random ultra religious lawyer will get promoted to a high position in a massive company like actiblizz and absolutely bring the hammer down. and once there's blood in the water then the payment processors will swoop in and finish the job. you should screencap this post. in fact i will screencap it myself and have it on hand for the day that I am proven right.
Anonymous at Tue, 18 Feb 2025 13:18:58 UTC No. 1007719
>>1006188
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ander
>It was strikingly clear to the Court that Anderson's work was a derivative work; that under 17 U.S.C. section 106(2) derivative works are the exclusive privilege of the copyright holder (Stallone, in this case); and that since Anderson's work is unauthorized, no part of it can be given protection.
Fanart is not entitled to copyright protection