Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



confluence ([info]confluence) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
Re: Gah.
I know of a fair amount of actual people, not faceless 'companies', who use the word thusly.

Yeah, I know it's a common usage of the word in some fan circles, and I see the rationale. I still don't like it, and I can see how people from different internet communities can misunderstand each other over the usage of this word. I get the impression that when artists use it they are usually referring to plagiarism (e.g. someone tracing or Photoshopping over someone else's art and passing it off as their own -- so credit is what is being "stolen"). When companies use it, they are complaining purely about copyright infringement (and their usage of the word attempts to evoke an image of tangible and unambiguous material loss). Then there's the separate issue of whether the perpetrator is making money off the infringed or plagiarised work (something else which could be considered "theft"). And there's the problem -- saying "this art has been stolen" does not say which aspect(s) of the infringement you're actually objecting to.

...oops.
*mops up*


(Read comments)

Post a comment in response:

From:
( )Anonymous- this user has disabled anonymous posting.
Username:
Password:
Don't have an account? Create one now.
Subject:
No HTML allowed in subject
  
Message:
 
Notice! This user has turned on the option that logs your IP address when posting.
 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map