MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Any general discussion regarding fan-created works of the Dragon Ball franchise, including AMVs, fan-art, fan-fiction, etc.

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by rereboy » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:43 am

Doctor. wrote:
rereboy wrote:From my understanding, neither does this guy.
Yes, he does. His videos have ads.
He receives money from youtube due to the traffic and views he generates, similarly to a guy that does "Let's plays" on youtube or any other kind of similar situation. That's not direct at all. Heck, Teamfourstar has or had a website of their own and they even sell or sold merch (like T-shirts) that ride or rode off the popularity from the entertainment that they create or created by using the original footage and art from the series.

User avatar
Doctor.
Banned
Posts: 10558
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 10:02 am
Location: Portugal

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by Doctor. » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:51 am

rereboy wrote:
Doctor. wrote:
rereboy wrote:From my understanding, neither does this guy.
Yes, he does. His videos have ads.
He receives money from youtube due to the traffic and views he generates, similarly to a guy that does "Let's plays" on youtube or any other kind of similar situation. That's not direct at all. Heck, Teamfourstar has or had a website of their own and they even sell or sold merch (like T-shirts) that ride or rode off the popularity from the entertainment that they create or created by using the original footage and art from the series.
He receives money from youtube due to the videos he makes, where he steals other people's animation and passes it off as his own. That's as direct as it can get.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by rereboy » Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:51 pm

Doctor. wrote: He receives money from youtube due to the videos he makes,
Like any reviewer, debater, tester, fandubber, montage maker, top 10 maker, Let's play enthusiast, speed runner gamer, and any other kind of people that do a great number of activities based on copyrighted material and have an account on a website like youtube that allows them some sort of compensation based on views and similar.
where he steals other people's animation
Not fundamentally different from Teamfourstar using the series' footage and editing it.
and passes it off as his own.
Morally bad, but ultimately not relevant for the issue of "making money off the franchise by using its original art and footage". That's purely about honesty.
That's as direct as it can get.
No, as direct as you can get would be him actually selling the product directly to an audience. Even directly selling T-shirts to fans that ride off a fandub that used and edited the original art and footage of a series (like Teamfourstar did) is much closer to directly profiting and I have no problem with that. Why should I then have a problem with this guy? Liking him or not has nothing to do with the actual issue, so I try to not confuse things.

User avatar
Doctor.
Banned
Posts: 10558
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 10:02 am
Location: Portugal

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by Doctor. » Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:06 pm

rereboy wrote:Like any reviewer, debater, tester, fandubber, montage maker, top 10 maker, Let's play enthusiast, speed runner gamer, and any other kind of people that do a great number of activities based on copyrighted material and have an account on a website like youtube that allows them some sort of compensation based on views and similar.
I don't understand why you keep pointing towards other people while simultaneously ignoring nuance and context. What Mastar is doing is nothing other than plagiarism. You don't write and publish a book when entire paragraphs are stolen from other authors. You don't write a dissertation without crediting the right people.

Videogame playthroughs and stuff of the sort have always been a gray-area and the issue always boils down to "the company lets them do it because it's good publicity."
rereboy wrote:Not fundamentally different from Teamfourstar using the series' footage and editing it.
Yes, it is. Teamfourstar credits the people they're taking their material from and, as previously stated, they don't profit directly from their videos. They profit from indirect sources, such as merchandise, donations and their gaming channel.
rereboy wrote:Why should I then have a problem with this guy?
He's a plagiarist who makes money out of it.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by rereboy » Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:07 pm

Doctor. wrote: they don't profit directly from their videos. They profit from indirect sources, such as merchandise, donations and their gaming channel.
Like this guy, then. Youtube channels, donations.
Doctor. wrote: Yes, it is. Teamfourstar credits the people they're taking their material
That's the difference, yes. A matter of honesty. We can call it plagiarism since plagiarism is, in essence, a lack of honesty while copying and altering stuff.

However, even though his lack of honesty might make me not like him on that level, that doesn't change the fact that the core issue here (aka making money off the franchise by using its original art and footage or even story) is not that.

The main issue here is people making money off the franchise by using its original art and footage or even story. And a person can be completely honest about using the original art and footage or even story of a franchise and making money of it, or that person can be dishonest about it, but that doesn't change the fact that that person is either making money off the franchise by using its original art and footage or even story, or he is not, regardless of how honest he is about it.

That's why the issue of honesty is another issue altogether. Teamfourstar and this guy are different in regards to honesty, but regardless of them being honest about it or not, both make money off the franchise by using its original art and footage or even story, and they both do it in similarly indirect ways (donations, youtube channels, merch).
I don't understand why you keep pointing towards other people while simultaneously ignoring nuance and context. What Mastar is doing is nothing other than plagiarism. You don't write and publish a book when entire paragraphs are stolen from other authors. You don't write a dissertation without crediting the right people.
You are the one that is ignoring context and confusing the issues here. I never denied the moral issue of not being honest. I just don't confuse it with the actual main issue here since people can make money off the franchise by using its original art and footage or even story, regardless of them being honest about it or not.
He's a plagiarist who makes money out of it.
I could have a problem with the issue of him not being honest but, frankly, it really doesn't matter to the franchise at all. As for him making money, his indirect revenue doesn't depend on his honesty so it's irrelevant. He would still make money off youtube and donations even if he had a disclaimer giving all the due credit.
Videogame playthroughs and stuff of the sort have always been a gray-area and the issue always boils down to "the company lets them do it because it's good publicity."
These issues are all a gray area where it, legally, boils down to what the company really wants to stop or not. The difference is just that there's not a moral issue of honesty because in terms of making money off the franchise, it's pretty much all the same, they are all all indirectly profiting.

User avatar
VegettoEX
Kanzenshuu Co-Owner & Administrator
Posts: 16508
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:10 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by VegettoEX » Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:24 pm

You guys are just saying the same things over and over in increasingly hostile terms toward each other. I'd say you've already given your two cents plenty on these disingenuous practices. Thanks.
:: [| Mike "VegettoEX" LaBrie |] ::
:: [| Kanzenshuu - Co-Founder/Administrator, Podcast Host, News Manager (note: our "job" titles are arbitrary and meaningless) |] ::
:: [| Website: January 1998 |] :: [| Podcast: November 2005 |] :: [| Fusion: April 2012 |] :: [| Wiki: 20XX |] ::

User avatar
shadowfox87
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 775
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:09 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by shadowfox87 » Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:11 pm

I believe there was already a thread about this: viewtopic.php?t=35017

In terms of the legality of this whole issue, is Mastar infringing copyright? Yes, he is. However, whether a copyright holder chooses to exercise their right is essentially a cost/benefit analysis. There is a beneficial effect of having fans build sites, curate libraries of resources and constantly talk about and consume your content. To put it simply, it's bad for business if a copyright holder were to sue everything on the internet that is infringing copyright. Instead, it is wise for them to go after people when they believe they are losing profit. Note that what Mastar is doing does not fall under "fair use" as he is profiting from it. Fair use does apply when people make fan-animations, fan-art, etc. as it is considered parody or criticisms. It does not apply when profit is being made. In this case the copyright holder is Toei, Shueisha, and Bandai with most of the animations being copyrighted by Toei. The same case goes for music or songs that have exact lyrics or pieces of other songs. Same thing goes for people who draw and sell arts at ComicCon. They are considered "derivative" works and are subject to copyright infringement as well. Usually in these cases, the copyright holder gives permission. However, if permission does not ask, it does not prevent others from copying.

If you don't believe anything I say, ask any IP lawyer or just read yourself:
Copyright Law - https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf
Fair use ( Section 107 of the Copyright Act) - http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/ ... -000-.html
DBS Manga vs Anime Differences: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=42062
Timelines Explanation: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=42105
Log Power Scaling: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40610
Science of Ultra Instinct: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40707

User avatar
GigaDrill
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 9:46 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by GigaDrill » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:45 pm

Doctor. wrote:The guy was getting criticized pretty heavily a few months (or even a year?) back for his tracing (which wouldn't be an issue if he didn't profit off of it AND he credited each animator he's tracing over), but now everyone was rightfully calling him out before is turning a blind eye to him because apparently he's actually a chill dude to talk to? Who the fuck cares? That kind of cowardly behavior is disgusting; you don't ignore scummy behavior because the person doing it might be a decent guy.
You'd be amazed how much more people can get away with if they have a certain charisma to them than if they didn't.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by rereboy » Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:10 am

shadowfox87 wrote: Note that what Mastar is doing does not fall under "fair use" as he is profiting from it. Fair use does apply when people make fan-animations, fan-art, etc. as it is considered parody or criticisms. It does not apply when profit is being made.
That's not really accurate. Something like, for example, a documentary movie or a parody movie can be made and sold using material that falls under fair use. And obviously profit is made with them, and direct profit at that. Profit is not what really draws the line. For example: "Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994)[1] was a United States Supreme Court copyright law case that established that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use. This case established that the fact that money is made by a work does not make it impossible for fair use to apply; it is merely one of the components of a fair use analysis". And in this case it's indirect profit (donations, youtube ads), not direct profit, that is in question. For all intents and purposes, namely legal ones, he is making his videos available to anyone that wants to see it for free. But of course, due to the nature of all this, which is highly dependent on interpretation, there is always a risk of a lawsuit.

User avatar
shadowfox87
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 775
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:09 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by shadowfox87 » Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:03 am

rereboy wrote:That's not really accurate. Something like, for example, a documentary movie or a parody movie can be made and sold using material that falls under fair use. And obviously profit is made with them, and direct profit at that. Profit is not what really draws the line. For example: "Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994)[1] was a United States Supreme Court copyright law case that established that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use. This case established that the fact that money is made by a work does not make it impossible for fair use to apply; it is merely one of the components of a fair use analysis". And in this case it's indirect profit (donations, youtube ads), not direct profit, that is in question. For all intents and purposes, namely legal ones, he is making his videos available to anyone that wants to see it for free. But of course, due to the nature of all this, which is highly dependent on interpretation, there is always a risk of a lawsuit.
Thanks for pointing that out. You're absolutely correct. Just because someone is making profit off copyrighted material, does not automatically mean it is not fair use. While making profit is weighed against fair use, if someone can prove that their derivative work is "transformative", then it can be considered fair use even if it makes profit. This is essentially the decision reached by the Campbell case and the post-Campbell fair use law. It's quite subjective in what really constitutes a "transformative" work. Documentaries, music remixes, parodies, etc. It's not clear whether Mastar's work is truly transformative or would be considered fair use. To that note, there's still a risk of copyright infringement and the copyright holder can still suit, but the outcome of that case isn't clear.
DBS Manga vs Anime Differences: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=42062
Timelines Explanation: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=42105
Log Power Scaling: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40610
Science of Ultra Instinct: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40707

User avatar
successoroffate
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 906
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:10 pm

Re: MaSTAR Media (Should we talk about this?)

Post by successoroffate » Tue May 22, 2018 1:25 pm

Because of his popularity and his clickbait practices, I personally blame MaStar media for the fake "Yamoshi" or "Dragon Ball Super Movie's saiyan villain" depiction going around
(you know the one)

Image

We all know it's fake. We all known is from his traced "Movie." Yet, if you look for "Dragon Ball Super Movie" content on youtube, 99% of the villain's depictions are based off his take on his appearance. People are taking his take as fact. Misinformation and Clickbait are dangerous tools.
Big Green: Do whateveryoulike, Ghos
Broly: haha He calls me a goohst, but IMMMD DA DEVVVVAAALLL! RAHAHAHAHA!
-----
Trunks: "Dhe computer selffishy intesnafiy dosuementos."
Android 13: Yum Boy
-----
Vegeta: The Legendary Warrior of SpaZe.

Post Reply