Forums » Art & Creativity » Art Theft & You

Yes, plagiarism is what I meant, and I have actually experienced once. Someone took a work of a character in progress and sold it as an adoptable while claiming it belonged to them. Ultimately the piece was taken down by the unknowing soul who bought it.

However, I did not know about filing a DMCA for plagiarism when it came to that back then, if that did apply. Now I know that information for future reference whenever a piece is taken from my gallery and is sold with false claims of ownership.

It's things like what happened to me that I do worry about, and that's why I watch every conversation about plagiarism and whatnot closely. So far, I'm not impressed with the protections given to artists, but it's all we have to go on to protect ourselves.

Ultimately, my consensus on the whole thing is: I think it's fine to use photos as a reference. I don't have much of a bias for or against faceclaims. Like Kim has said, we've all been there in not knowing what not to use, even me!

The whole thing about copyright ultimately is ambiguous (in my eyes; I was never good at law), but it's all we've got to go on until some areas are clarified or changed.

So, after watching this conversation for the past few days: I finally had a chance to speak to an actual copyright lawyer(who likes to RP as a bonus!) and this is what they had to say!

For the purposes of the questions asked to the Lawyer, Faceclaim was defined to them as: Face claims = Real-life references of models/actors/people you think look like your OC.


When asked specifically about using a 'face claim'

So if you are using face claims, it's necessary to have some sort of disclaimer on the page or in the gallery like: "My character looks like x" "Good idea of what x looks like!" or some variation thereof.

The artist here would be the photographer, not the person in the photograph!

When asked about gifs and things of that nature:

So not really much help on that front, unfortunately!

I was also able to get in touch with one of my friends who works by traveling to conventions and selling art in artist alley's.

They mentioned Tom Hiddleston specifically because that was the first celebrity I could think of when asking them the question. A-kon for the same reason, as we both attended this past weekend. They also had this to say!

Again, this is all from a purely legal standpoint and not an ethical one. I figured I would share what I found out with everyone

I have beenlooking over this subject and I do agree on some points, there are a number of factors that have lead people to use 'refs' is mainly Money, though there are a large number of people who will refuse an RP unless you have a ref for your characters. this said, I do want to state that If the artist has stated flat out that they have put a copyright on it and make it known that it is not ok to do such as using them as a ref, then I agree and that should be put to a stop. IF the artist has not put a copyright mark and/or have not stated they do not want they're work being used, then it don't matter if you agree with it or not, as far as it goes, that artwork is fair game. Now Most of my characters have no refs mainly because I have almost never used them, with the rare chance I got inspired by a character from a game or something, Like my Ragna character who is based on a game character. I use his appearance from the game as a ref for his clothing, hair style, and a rough idea of his face, but the Ragna I use has a number of things that are different from the original, and I have put a warning up that I don't own the art or original character, this is just a character I made based on the original's look and or behavior.

That said, I would like to say I respect your views on the subject and your opinion as you have right to your own, so I hope others who read though all this will remember, we all have a right to think what we think and we are all entitled to our own opinions ^^ Ok thanks if you read this all the way though and have a good day!

This is simply not true, and has been mentioned several times in this thread. Every piece of art has a copyright on it when it comes into existence. My above post may help you when deciding to use an image, and the OP has listed a good number of free resources where you can find images you can legally use.

I understand that, I really do, but there is also limits to how long a copyright can protect an image and/or character.
Though there is one good way to avoid all the problems, and that is do something simple, Ask the artist for permission if you may use them as a ref, of course I am not sayin you will get a yes out of it, but at least you did the right thing.

Actually, I think this is one of those things that not all countries agree on. I do recall hearing that a copyright notice is required in order to be considered protected/valid in some countries. However, in the US, where RPR is based in, all creative works are indeed considered to be copyrighted to their creators upon creation, regardless of whether or not the creator takes further steps to better defend that copyright.

Copyrights last for 70 years.

*After the death of the creator/holder, if I remember right. And ever-lengthening, because Disney.

Hi everyone! I didn't read the whole thread, because frankly, I tend to be super careful about the art I use. I used to use dollmakers when creating new characters, and nowadays I usually commission people whose work I can afford to pay for - and whom I want to support. Unfortunately, the thread still made me feel bad for some reason. I tried to figure out what it was - and here it is.

First of all, I do not in any way think that using someone's art (or photos) without their consent is in any way okay. That said, sorry if this has already come up - but I very strongly think that using someone's art is very much NOT comparable to stealing tangible stuff. In fact, the definition of theft, by law, includes that part - it can only relate to tangible property.

When you steal shoes, they're gone. Copying stuff is very much different - nothing disappears. It's still damaging to the artist, but I really don't think it helps the artists' case to present is as a more condemnable offense than it is. Moreover, when you steal someone's stuff, there's little grey area - you usually know what you're doing - whereas there is much grey area in what's being discussed here.


I perceive some of the rhetoric used to explain why taking someone's art without their permission as too strong, which is what made me cringe away from the thread. While I very much understand that it's an emotional topic for many people (and causes problems for the site), I think it might benefit from a calmer, less extreme presentation if it's ever turned into a community article meant for all members to read. Using other peoples' art without having a permission to do it is most definitely not okay, but there are other ways to discourage it than to make it look worse than it actually is. Some US courts actually consider using the word "theft" to refer to copyright infringement to be pejorative or contentious, according to Wikipedia.

Moreover, the word "theft" is most often used to emphasize potential commercial harm of infringement to copyright holders. So it mostly wouldn't apply to RP-related uses. (Yes, there is some commercial harm, but compared to the filmmaking or music industries it's much less clearly definable.) Also relevant to this is the fact that because not all copyright infringement results in commercial loss, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that infringement does not easily equate with theft.

I think that making people feel like what they're doing (while not okay) is as bad as stealing in a store is both inaccurate and unproductive, because it's going to make them less receptive to the message.

IMO some artists can view this as their art being advertised, in a way. I sometimes do a reverse image search for a piece of art that I like if there isn't any info on the artist, and if the prices were reasonable for me (I live in an area of the world where the mimimum wage is around $2 per hour) I'd be happy to commission them.

I agree with this. I think a lot of people, myself included, don't want to participate in a discussion where emotions are running so high. I get the impression this thread is a step too near to finger-pointing. Word choice goes a long way!

The mod team has been keeping a close eye on this thread, so there isn't a need to worry about name calling or finger pointing