Questions about selling and ethics

[Lileya]

Well, its not like the sprites on those websites are the property of the people that ripped them from the games and posted them on their website... They are the property of the makers of the games: Nintendo, Square, Capcom, etc. It's already "stolen" property... o_O (which, BTW, I have no problem with... I'm just trying to prove a point!)

What's the difference between using a sprite from a website and taking a screenshot of the same sprite with an emulator? Who's gonna tell the difference really?

Like I said anyway: those sprites aren't the property of the website owner in the first place. We were already in a grey area... Technically, the website owner IS doing something illegal! Not that anybody from Nintendo or Capcom will seriously consider sueing them, but they would have the legal right to force the owner to remove their property from their website.

Sprites are a general term. What you are talking about are sprites specifically pulled from a game and no changes made. Yes, use those as much as you want. But there are also sprites like this: http://mr-skateboarder.deviantart.com/gallery/31957181. That kid is amazing. Even though he put in a post that his sprite's are free for use, I still asked his permission to use them for my quilts. Those you should ask before using or you are a turd.

The sprites from this guy is still not necessarely his property. If it's an original character that he developped himself, then yes, it's all his. If it's a sprite of a character from a comic book (Daredevil, The Thing, Deadpool...), video game, etc, then it's not his legal property. He is NOT allowed to sell it and make money with it. No matter how many hours he spent creating those: those characters are the property of Marvel (it even states so on his DA page).

Now clearly, if you do try to make money selling patterns based of characters from Nintendo, Capcom, Marvel, etc, the chance that their lawyer contact you to take down you Etsy page or wathever is very slim, but it doesn't change the fact they can force you to stop selling said product if they want to.

I have a friend that would love to draw a comic book based on a video game that wasn't very popular. She's started it and is hoping to post it on her DA page at some point. Of course, she would love to sell it and make money with it (seeing as she is spending so much of her time on this project). But she won't do it : she could get sued.

If I steal somebody's else laptop, then I get it stolen from me a few weeks later, should I go to the police to report somebody stole "my" laptop...?

No offense but if I take somebody's pattern from this forums that was creating with KG-Chart, based on a screenshot/sprites from a video game and I try to sell it on Etsy, I would find it pretty darn ironic if the person comes and complain to me that I should take it down because "they" created this pattern. What legal rights would they exactly hold against me? The screenshot/sprite wasn't even theirs in the first place...

Before I get totally flamed : This is merely an example! I will NOT take the patterns from this website and sell them....... Neither did it ever cross my mind. I give due credits when I use somebody else's pattern. I'm strickly making a point...

[Pyper]

Just a thought.

In music if a piece is in copyright the artist owns it. If the copyright is expired or it is otherwise public domain, then any arrangement made is the property of the arranger. I would imagine this to be similar with artworks/images, especially based on public domain works eg lovecraft. I would argue that an arranger has rights to their arrangement, even if they do not have the original rights to the characters/assets used in the arrangement.

[kuja.girl]

Public Domain is a totally different bag of fun as is music.

Also, I vote that we use "turd" as the official term for people who rip off patterns/sell paid-pattern materials!

[funkymonkey]

I second the "turd" usage, I have actually used it in an conversation IRL to describe the behavior mentioned.

Also, as a music composer/arranger, if you get permission to make a licensed arrangement of a copyrighted piece, you give your rights over to the original owner. You could negotiate in a contract if you get royalties, etc, but the actual copyright stays with the original entity, not with the arranger.

[Eliste]

In music if a piece is in copyright the artist owns it. If the copyright is expired or it is otherwise public domain, then any arrangement made is the property of the arranger..

That can be completely right or wrong depending on what country you live in.

[Pyper]

I based it off what I have seen happening in the Australian music (particularly folk) scene and what seems to happen with orchestral/musical/production arrangements, so it may well be different in other countries and even other codes of music.

[ThreadedPixels]

I generally try to make my own patterns, but if there's something I'm having issues with and I see a pattern (normally on DA), I message the person asking permission before I make it to sell. I actually got a decent start on magnets borrowing patterns from a friend.

[Eliste]

I based it off what I have seen happening in the Australian music (particularly folk) scene and what seems to happen with orchestral/musical/production arrangements, so it may well be different in other countries and even other codes of music.

I would caution against assuming that what applies to music will apply to crafts. That is not always the case. It certainly isn't in the UK or Ireland, and I think not the US either. And since Australia borrows heavily from the UK...

NOTE TO EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD

This whole conversation is making me, as a law student, very uncomfortable. Your jurisdiction may have completely different laws compared to anyone else on this board. Most people assume that if its on the Internet, it applies to them. It does not.

If you are wondering about the legalities of something, you need to go find a lawyer WHERE YOU LIVE OR ARE PLANNING TO SELL and ask them for advice. Because while some of what is said here may be correct for some places, it really isn't for others.

Assuming that we can even have a conversation on this stuff, which so different depending on where you live and gives intellectual property lawyers a headache sometimes, is asking for trouble.

[RMDC]

I'm jumping in to very strongly second Eliste's concerns. My wife is an attorney, and I ground my way through law school with her, even if I didn't attend classes. IP law is a twisty, uneasy realm in the most forgiving of jurisdictions; it certainly doesn't translate across borders. Please, please, please: if you're going to try to make money on a consistent basis by using someone else's IP, consider hiring a lawyer. You can probably get away with a not-too-terrifying consultation fee at worst, and some attorneys will give you a free consultation on small matters like this.

With regard to the original intent of the thread (that is, "is this ethical" as opposed to "do I reasonably have to fear legal action"):

I've got no problem with it. My personal line is the sale of individual, handmade end products - the magnets in question, for example - for a modest fee, including allowances for both supplies and labor. It doesn't pass the US copyright smell test, but it's certainly not what the laws, at their best, are there to prevent. Frankly, Nintendo and all the other big names rely on every far-flung aspect of their fan communities to keep their profit margins bright. We're providing them with free advertising and labor.

The conditions which cross my personal line are:

• products based on individuals' work or the work of a small collective (like if I started marketing Red String bookmarks, no matter how lovingly hand-stitched);
• products which are mass produced (even if you hand-painted Kirby swallowing Giygas - which is super awesome and now I want to make it - if you're churning out lithographic prints, it's like cheating);
• selling your IP which is a direct translation of others' IP (i.e. selling patterns rather than end products, no matter how ingenious your humorous caption or how many hours you spent in MSPaint).

I know that last point puts me at odds with the Etsy shops of some people on this forum. Regardless, it is that principle on which I am most unmovable.

So, Ducky, tl;dr is that as far as I'm concerned, you're in the moral clear, and you're almost certainly not going to * off any major corporations, either.