Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Discussion regarding the entirety of the franchise in a general (meta) sense, including such aspects as: production, trends, merchandise, fan culture, and more.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

WittyUsername
I Live Here
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:09 am
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by WittyUsername » Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:59 am

pixie_misa wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:29 am
WittyUsername wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:20 am
pixie_misa wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:06 am

1. Newgrounds's big heyday was over 15 years ago, people can change quite a lot in that amount of time. Just because someone got popular on that website making ignorant edgy jokes says nothing about who they are right now.

2. It's very possible they wouldn't know those views, because believe it or not not everybody keeps a working mental dirtsheet of everyone you think they should be weary of. Just because you've seen it, doesn't mean its common knowledge. A *lot* of people online seem to have this problem.

3. You seem to think every voice actor is just staring down a huge stack of easily nabbed up well paying gigs, and that they aren't having to weigh lots of potentially not great options so they can still keep their career going and pay their bills.

Your whole view is particularly abhorrent when you consider just how historically underpaid and generally poorly treated voice actors are. From having to fight to get paid for things like screams to having to fight for the right to even find out bare minimum details of the work they've been hired for, voice actors have it pretty rough. Many of these jobs are non-union as well, which means they get screwed over even more when it comes to benefits, etc.
As far as I’m aware, one of the only Newgrounds artists who has actually “changed,” has been Egoraptor/ Arin Hanson, and he’s become a pariah to the rest of the Newgrounds crowd.

As for Psychicpebbles, as I said earlier, he’s not only a good friend to JonTron (a literal white nationalist), but he himself expressed similar views to JonTron as recently as 2017. He also was an enabler/defender of Shadman, a guy who drew NSFW art of actual real life children, and he and his buddies at OneyPlays seem to be fans of Kiwi Farms, which is an alt-right harassment forum that’s dedicated to humiliating people they see as easy targets, especially autistic and trans people. He has never expressed any desire to change. I have no respect for anyone who chooses to work with someone like that.

I get that voice actors get paid peanuts, especially doing anime, but I have no sympathy for any of them.
Ok you realize that not every show has these people working on them, right? You're literally saying "fuck all voice actors" because a voice actor is on the cast list of a single show made by a person you don't like. Do you seriously not see why that's fucking ridiculous? Do you not see why you just look like a huge asshole right now?

Like, you realize that voice actors who have *nothing to do* with any of the shit you've laid out exist and work on things too right? What the fuck did they ever do to earn your scorn?
I don’t see any other voice actors calling out Erica Lindbeck for working with the guy. If anything, I’m pretty sure a lot of them probably congratulated her. Plus, as I said before, a lot of voice actors have ties to this Newgrounds shit, and have been involved with similarly problematic creators. It just makes all their bravado about BLM and trans rights feel really disingenuous.

pixie_misa
Not-So-Newbie
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat May 30, 2020 8:57 am

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by pixie_misa » Fri Jan 28, 2022 2:06 am

God you are such an asshole. Go fuck yourself.

WittyUsername
I Live Here
Posts: 4163
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:09 am
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by WittyUsername » Fri Jan 28, 2022 2:34 am

Fine. Maybe I went too far when I said that all these VAs deserve to lose their livelihood. I’ve been particularly angry today, and I guess I forgot that at the end of the day, these people are still human, even if most of them rub me the wrong way. I apologize for my harsh words, and for derailing the thread.

User avatar
RandomGuy96
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8862
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:57 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by RandomGuy96 » Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:52 pm

I think this internet generation just became waaaaaaay too used to violating the law, to the point of having a severely warped perception of what the law actually is. We lived in a golden era where the internet was too obscure to be as widely policed as it is now. I'm not going to act like I'm above that sort of thing with my gigabytes of pirated historical monographs and RPG sourcebooks, but let's not act surprised when the chickens come home to roost.

I'll parrot many other people in saying that a LOT of anime YouTubers are flat-out stealing shit and would not have their cases hold up in court. Not that any of them would even go to court because a lot of these "wraths" are the result of algorithms in the first place, because all but the absolute biggest YouTubers are tiny gnats on the scale of any notable media company.
The Monkey King wrote:
RandomGuy96 wrote:
dbgtFO wrote: Please elaborate as I do not know what you mean by "pushing Vegeta's destruction"
He's probably referring to the Bardock special. Zarbon was the one who first recommended destroying Planet Vegeta because the saiyans were rapidly growing in strength.
It was actually Beerus disguised as Zarbon #StayWoke
Herms wrote:The fact that the ridiculous power inflation is presented so earnestly makes me just roll my eyes and snicker. Like with Freeza, where he starts off over 10 times stronger than all his henchmen except Ginyu (because...well, just because), then we find out he can transform and get even more powerful, and then he reveals he can transform two more times, before finally coming out with the fact that he hasn't even been using anywhere near 50% of his power. Oh, and he can survive in the vacuum of space. All this stuff is just presented as the way Freeza is, without even an attempt at rationalizing it, yet the tone dictates we're supposed to take all this silly grasping at straws as thrilling danger. So I guess I don't really take the power inflation in the Boo arc seriously, but I don't take the power inflation in earlier arcs seriously either, so there's no net loss of seriousness. I think a silly story presented as serious is harder to accept than a silly story presented as silly.

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:44 am

MasenkoHA wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:26 pm
dva_raza wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm
I 100% regarded Abridged as a parody because a parody exaggerates aspects about the original work for comedic effect and it seems to me they do exactly that.
I'm not sure what is a "legal" definition of a term, I googled it but it's unclear lol. Is the legal definition different from this?:
"A parody takes a piece of creative work and imitates it in an exaggerated, comedic fashion, often serving as a criticism or commentary on the original work or the artist."
Regarding the criticism that's conveyed through a parody, maybe I'm wrong but I thought it referred to the pointing at something bad or ridiculous about the work itself or the writer’s style, (or even an acknowledgment of it’s merits), not that it needed to make a critical analysis of it.
It’s a parody that uses the anime’s actual footage. That’s the key thing. It’s not “two dudes dress up as Dragon Ball Z characters and make a parody video “
Well that's just a different kind of parody but one that uses original material, even extensively, is still permitted if it's for a parody

Put it this way, in the grand scheme of things how is that any different than what FUNimation did with Dragon Ball Z back when they produced the show for syndication? They cut scenes and re arranged scenes around to suit their purposes and dubbed over the footage and punched up the script with “jokes” and even used their own original music they had Saban produce for them!

Unless there are other aspects that I don’t know about that should be taken into account, I would think the differences are:
That Abridged is not just cuts and re arranged scenes, there is heavy editing, the dialogue is not just punched (which is always done in localization anyway), it’s a new creation. Done cleverly to fit the concept of a parody and that is what makes the 3rd difference: the purpose. Maybe it’s sutil, but even if both are meant for entertainment, the new dialogue designed to mock ridiculous aspects about the original is what diverts the purpose to “critisism” and that should be enough to make it a parody, I don’t see how could it not. There is no way Abridged could pass as the original
Regarding the songs, for Youtube, I thought it was allowed to use unlicensed stuff for background, you just can’t monetize, and if they went to court probably it's problematic although I heard that even then, again, the it being a parody allows usage of unlicensed music but this I'm not sure.

Either way I just discovered Abridged few months ago so I don’t actually know their situation or what they have said on the matter when that happened, but have they actually LOST a dispute on Youtube?

User avatar
VegettoEX
Kanzenshuu Co-Owner & Administrator
Posts: 17537
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:10 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by VegettoEX » Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:19 am

None of what you're describing is accurate / based in actual intellectual property law. It's so far off base that I'm not sure I can even figure out where to begin.

Let me again preface this by saying that I'm not a lawyer, I'm not offering legal advice, and I too am not fully educated on every little aspect of this, but:

Have you actually read any legal documentation on this stuff? Or are you just assuming things? Words have actual meaning, and their strict legal definitions don't always reconcile with how you use those same words in everyday conversation (think back to the "dismissed with prejudice" conversation where the usual suspects had no idea what that meant).

"Parody" in terms of intellectual property law and specifically fair use doesn't just mean "this is a funny thing that makes fun of a thing".

Real basic search I did here, but this seems like a great starting point for some of y'all to read and click through:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/parody
:: [| 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
jjgp1112
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 7478
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: Crooklyn

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by jjgp1112 » Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:37 am

dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:44 am
MasenkoHA wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:26 pm
dva_raza wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm
I 100% regarded Abridged as a parody because a parody exaggerates aspects about the original work for comedic effect and it seems to me they do exactly that.
I'm not sure what is a "legal" definition of a term, I googled it but it's unclear lol. Is the legal definition different from this?:
"A parody takes a piece of creative work and imitates it in an exaggerated, comedic fashion, often serving as a criticism or commentary on the original work or the artist."
Regarding the criticism that's conveyed through a parody, maybe I'm wrong but I thought it referred to the pointing at something bad or ridiculous about the work itself or the writer’s style, (or even an acknowledgment of it’s merits), not that it needed to make a critical analysis of it.
It’s a parody that uses the anime’s actual footage. That’s the key thing. It’s not “two dudes dress up as Dragon Ball Z characters and make a parody video “
Well that's just a different kind of parody but one that uses original material, even extensively, is still permitted if it's for a parody

Put it this way, in the grand scheme of things how is that any different than what FUNimation did with Dragon Ball Z back when they produced the show for syndication? They cut scenes and re arranged scenes around to suit their purposes and dubbed over the footage and punched up the script with “jokes” and even used their own original music they had Saban produce for them!

Unless there are other aspects that I don’t know about that should be taken into account, I would think the differences are:
That Abridged is not just cuts and re arranged scenes, there is heavy editing, the dialogue is not just punched (which is always done in localization anyway), it’s a new creation. Done cleverly to fit the concept of a parody and that is what makes the 3rd difference: the purpose. Maybe it’s sutil, but even if both are meant for entertainment, the new dialogue designed to mock ridiculous aspects about the original is what diverts the purpose to “critisism” and that should be enough to make it a parody, I don’t see how could it not. There is no way Abridged could pass as the original
Regarding the songs, for Youtube, I thought it was allowed to use unlicensed stuff for background, you just can’t monetize, and if they went to court probably it's problematic although I heard that even then, again, the it being a parody allows usage of unlicensed music but this I'm not sure.

Either way I just discovered Abridged few months ago so I don’t actually know their situation or what they have said on the matter when that happened, but have they actually LOST a dispute on Youtube?
Uh...just because they're doing something different with the footage doesn't mean they still aren't making a property entirely out of unlicensed footage and likenesses, breh.
Yamcha: Do you remember the spell to release him - do you know all the words?
Bulma: Of course! I'm not gonna pull a Frieza and screw it up!
Master Roshi: Bulma, I think Frieza failed because he wore too many clothes!
Cold World (Fanfic)
"It ain't never too late to stop bein' a bitch." - Chad Lamont Butler

User avatar
MasenkoHA
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6191
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by MasenkoHA » Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:05 pm

dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:44 am Well that's just a different kind of parody but one that uses original material, even extensively, is still permitted if it's for a parody
No, it’s not and I don’t know why you think it is

That Abridged is not just cuts and re arranged scenes, there is heavy editing, the dialogue is not just punched (which is always done in localization anyway), it’s a new creation. Done cleverly to fit the concept of a parody and that is what makes the 3rd difference: the purpose. Maybe it’s sutil, but even if both are meant for entertainment, the new dialogue designed to mock ridiculous aspects about the original is what diverts the purpose to “critisism” and that should be enough to make it a parody, I don’t see how could it not.
And if an English dub of a show mocked the original (which isn’t unheard of) it still wouldn’t be protected under “well it’s a parody” that’s not how any of that works.

There is no way Abridged could pass as the original
It doesn’t matter. It still uses unlicensed footage, songs, etc to create entertainment.
Regarding the songs, for Youtube, I thought it was allowed to use unlicensed stuff for background, you just can’t monetize, and if they went to court probably it's problematic although I heard that even then, again, the it being a parody allows usage of unlicensed music but this I'm not sure.
No, even for non-profit you can’t use unlicensed music.

Also, I’m not sure why you think “well it’s a parody” would ever give them free range to just use actual songs.

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:21 pm

VegettoEX wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:19 am None of what you're describing is accurate / based in actual intellectual property law. It's so far off base that I'm not sure I can even figure out where to begin.

Let me again preface this by saying that I'm not a lawyer, I'm not offering legal advice, and I too am not fully educated on every little aspect of this, but:

Have you actually read any legal documentation on this stuff? Or are you just assuming things? Words have actual meaning, and their strict legal definitions don't always reconcile with how you use those same words in everyday conversation (think back to the "dismissed with prejudice" conversation where the usual suspects had no idea what that meant).

"Parody" in terms of intellectual property law and specifically fair use doesn't just mean "this is a funny thing that makes fun of a thing".

Real basic search I did here, but this seems like a great starting point for some of y'all to read and click through:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/parody
No no, I swear, I wasn’t speaking out of assumptions, I take everything I said from having searched not random information but legal articles and commentaries from people who supposedly know about this specific subject, along with a previous idea that I had on this based off people who had to get educated on this after having to deal with a simliar situation on Youtube.
I of course understand though, that it’s a subject that just has way to many nuances to determine one thing or another without there being an actual trial that would begin an analysis of this situation. I'm was just trying to be specific whith the points for which I believed this was a parody up until the conversation about Mark arose and those points I am basing off the definition of the term parody, along with what I've read on this matter specifically.
This gives the definition that I was using.
"A parody takes a piece of creative work and imitates it in an exaggerated, comedic fashion, often serving as a criticism or commentary on the original work or the artist."

I'll give every source of what gave me the understanding that Abridged can be classified as a parody, that original material can be used for a parody, and that a parody is protected under "fair use"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parody#Copyright_issues
Copyright issues[edit]
Although a parody can be considered a derivative work of a pre-existing, copyrighted work, some countries have ruled that parodies can fall under copyright limitations such as fair dealing, or otherwise have fair dealing laws that include parody in their scope.

Copyright limitations:
Limitations and exceptions to copyright are provisions, in local copyright law or Berne Convention, which allow for copyrighted works to be used without a license from the copyright owner.


https://copyrightalliance.org/faqs/paro ... he%20work.
Section 107 of the Copyright Act is the section that provides for fair use, a doctrine which allows certain actions which otherwise would amount to copyright infringement. The Section lists several examples of fair use, including uses of copyrighted works “for purposes such as criticism [or] comment.”
Both parody and satire employ humor in commentary and criticism, but the key distinction, and the reason that parodies are more likely to be considered fair use than satires, is the purpose each serves. Satire is defined as “the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.” Compare that to the definition of a parody: “a literary or musical work in which the style of an author or work is closely imitated for comic effect or in ridicule.”
As the Supreme Court explained in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., “Parody needs to mimic an original to make its point, and so has some claim to use the creation of its victim’s (or collective victims’) imagination, whereas satire can stand on its own two feet and so requires justification for the very act of borrowing.”

https://www.marksgray.com/copyright-fai ... d-satire/
Parody is considered fair use because, like commentary and criticism, it is using the copyright-protected work to discuss that work. There would be no other way to mock the work without using the work itself in a way that would otherwise be considered infringement. The original work is the means and the end.
There are many nuances of the law to be considered in determining whether your intended use is “fair use” or infringement.
Although a parody falls under “use of a copyrighted work for the purpose of criticism or comment” as provided under 17 USC §107, the determination of whether the work qualifies as a parody depends on the current case law.

https://smallbusinessbodyguard.com/parody/
First of all, as we know, fair use refers to, “any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner,” as put so eloquently by the folks at Stanford University
Parody is protected by the First Amendment as a “distorted imitation” of the original work. The purpose of parody is to comment on the original work by means of humor, irony, or satire.
(Stanford University, I'm not American, so I didn't know, but on Wikipedia it says that it's "ranked among the best universities in the world". So I assumed I could take their assesment seriously.)


Again, I know it's very complicated and of course there might be information that must be taken into account that is not included there, or that I'm maybe not understanding something correctly. I was actually trying to find out more from this discussion and to do that I need to share my reasons for believing DBZA fits under the concept of a parody, and that parody is protected under fair use, but again, I know that's not black and white, I only wanted to have more clarity on the subject

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:31 pm

jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:37 am Uh...just because they're doing something different with the footage doesn't mean they still aren't making a property entirely out of unlicensed footage and likenesses, breh.
I didn't say it was because they were doing something different with the footage. I said it's because they are doing a parody and that according to what I read, allows the use of unlicensed footage.

User avatar
PerhapsTheOtherOne
I Live Here
Posts: 2657
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 5:55 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by PerhapsTheOtherOne » Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:48 pm

I do hope Mark's case will open up the doors for discussion on worldwide legislation on copyright matters to re-examine how they're implemented and intended to function, and whether or not the changing media landscape is compatible with them in their current forms or not.

It's clear with Toei and YouTube's dispute on the matter that things aren't exactly working how everybody wants it; conflicting standards and interpretations of said standards have resulted in a lot of people being hurt, and nobody ending up exactly fully satisfied by the end result even after a resolution is reached.

User avatar
jjgp1112
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 7478
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: Crooklyn

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by jjgp1112 » Mon Jan 31, 2022 6:53 pm

dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:31 pm
jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:37 am Uh...just because they're doing something different with the footage doesn't mean they still aren't making a property entirely out of unlicensed footage and likenesses, breh.
I didn't say it was because they were doing something different with the footage. I said it's because they are doing a parody and that according to what I read, allows the use of unlicensed footage.
But again, one of the key things they look for is the extent to which the footage is used - and Abridged not only makes extensive use of DBZ's footage, it's 99.9% Dragon Ball Z footage and music!

Again: fundamentally, what's the difference between what TFS did and what Funi for the Saban dub besides the crucial fact that one was licensed to do so and the other wasn't?

This isn't a skit composed of live action or original drawings/animation that pokes fun at Dragon Ball (Ie, the Robot Chicken sketch), or a sketch with the occasional DB clip. TFS is just a straight up comedic recut of Dragon Ball.
Yamcha: Do you remember the spell to release him - do you know all the words?
Bulma: Of course! I'm not gonna pull a Frieza and screw it up!
Master Roshi: Bulma, I think Frieza failed because he wore too many clothes!
Cold World (Fanfic)
"It ain't never too late to stop bein' a bitch." - Chad Lamont Butler

User avatar
Skar
I Live Here
Posts: 2206
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 11:04 pm
Location: US

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by Skar » Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:06 pm

dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:21 pmAgain, I know it's very complicated and of course there might be information that must be taken into account that is not included there, or that I'm maybe not understanding something correctly. I was actually trying to find out more from this discussion and to do that I need to share my reasons for believing DBZA fits under the concept of a parody, and that parody is protected under fair use, but again, I know that's not black and white, I only wanted to have more clarity on the subject
I could wrong but I think those definitions of parody refer to something like Airplane or Scary Movie that recreate or reference scenes from other works to parody them but not reusing existing footage. There are some parodies like Kung Pow and Kung Faux that voice-over old martial arts movies but I assume they had to obtain a license.

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Mon Jan 31, 2022 8:05 pm

jjgp1112
I have kinda adressed your first 2 points already
jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 6:53 pm But again, one of the key things they look for is the extent to which the footage is used - and Abridged not only makes extensive use of DBZ's footage, it's 99.9% Dragon Ball Z footage and music!
I said here:
dva_raza wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm I don’t believe this factor (the fourth factor) establishes an absolute parameter that needs to be met by the defendant. It’s just something that is analysed along with the other 3 factors to see the whole picture in a situation, but there have been circumstances in which the court found the use of the entire original material to be fair use, while other cases in which the use of just a small portion of the material didn’t qualify as fair use.
The idea of that (whether I understood it correctly or not) I took from here:

" Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Under this factor, courts look at both the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work. "

https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html


jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 6:53 pm Again: fundamentally, what's the difference between what TFS did and what Funi for the Saban dub besides the crucial fact that one was licensed to do so and the other wasn't?
The answer to this would be in my reply to Masenko:
dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:44 am Unless there are other aspects that I don’t know about that should be taken into account, I would think the differences are:
That Abridged is not just cuts and re arranged scenes, there is heavy editing, the dialogue is not just punched (which is always done in localization anyway), it’s a new creation. Done cleverly to fit the concept of a parody and that is what makes the 3rd difference: the purpose. Maybe it’s sutil, but even if both are meant for entertainment, the new dialogue designed to mock ridiculous aspects about the original is what diverts the purpose to “critisism” and that should be enough to make it a parody, I don’t see how could it not. There is no way Abridged could pass as the original

Regarding the songs, for Youtube, I thought it was allowed to use unlicensed stuff for background, you just can’t monetize, and if they went to court probably it's problematic although I heard that even then, again, the it being a parody allows usage of unlicensed music but this I'm not sure.

jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 6:53 pm This isn't a skit composed of live action or original drawings/animation that pokes fun at Dragon Ball (Ie, the Robot Chicken sketch), or a sketch with the occasional DB clip. TFS is just a straight up comedic recut of Dragon Ball.
I took the idea that original material can literally be used for a parody (not just the idea of it) from here:

"In fact, parody enjoys broad protection under U.S. copyright law, which permits extensive use of original material without permission for the purpose of parody."

https://www.plagiarism.org/blog/2018/07 ... %20parody.

(Again, unless I actually totally interpreted that wrong)
Skar wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:06 pm I could wrong but I think those definitions of parody refer to something like Airplane or Scary Movie that recreate or reference scenes from other works to parody them but not reusing existing footage. There are some parodies like Kung Pow and Kung Faux that voice-over old martial arts movies but I assume they had to obtain a license.
That's good point I'll look into that

User avatar
jjgp1112
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 7478
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: Crooklyn

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by jjgp1112 » Mon Jan 31, 2022 8:52 pm

dva_raza wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 8:05 pm I took the idea that original material can literally be used for a parody (not just the idea of it) from here:

"In fact, parody enjoys broad protection under U.S. copyright law, which permits extensive use of original material without permission for the purpose of parody."

https://www.plagiarism.org/blog/2018/07 ... %20parody.

(Again, unless I actually totally interpreted that wrong)
The issue here is the direct use of footage. Going off of that article, "material" doesn't refer to the exact work, but rather the ideas, likenesses, and concepts, hence why Scary Movie is cited. It features scenes, images and plots lifted straight from Scream among other movies but is its own original take. They didn't just mash up footage of Scream and I Know What You Did Last Summer and dub over it. It's the difference between a cover song and the genuine article.

https://copyrightalliance.org/is-my-parody-fair-use/
  • “Parody needs to mimic an original to make its point, and so has some claim to use the creation of its victim’s (or collective victims’) imagination, whereas satire can stand on its own two feet and so requires justification for the very act of borrowing.”

    Not every attempt at parody is created equal and must still undergo the four-factor fair use analysis.
A parody can imitate the original work as much as it wants, but can only use so much of the actual product before its infringement. Again, Abridged would fail one of the four criteria with flying colors.
Yamcha: Do you remember the spell to release him - do you know all the words?
Bulma: Of course! I'm not gonna pull a Frieza and screw it up!
Master Roshi: Bulma, I think Frieza failed because he wore too many clothes!
Cold World (Fanfic)
"It ain't never too late to stop bein' a bitch." - Chad Lamont Butler

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Mon Jan 31, 2022 9:39 pm

jjgp1112 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 8:52 pm The issue here is the direct use of footage. Going off of that article, "material" doesn't refer to the exact work, but rather the ideas, likenesses, and concepts, hence why Scary Movie is cited. It features scenes, images and plots lifted straight from Scream among other movies but is its own original take. They didn't just mash up footage of Scream and I Know What You Did Last Summer and dub over it. It's the difference between a cover song and the genuine article.
"Material" at least in latin america we actually do use it to refer to tangible audiovisual material (see I don't even know which word to use instead of that lol)
So taking into account the 4th point of the "4 factors to consider when looking a defense under fair use" , when they say: "Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole...", considering the term "portion" is usually referred to an "amount" of something tangible, not just the "idea" of something, I thought then that an actual literal copyrighted work was included

User avatar
dva_raza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 410
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:46 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by dva_raza » Tue Feb 01, 2022 12:01 am

*Ugh sorry when I said 4th factor, I meant the 3rd one . I mixed them and I can't edit the post for some reason.

User avatar
FoolsGil
I Live Here
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 10:37 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by FoolsGil » Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:22 am

Found out something that could lead to Toei's rebuttal - Anime reviewer Mother's Basement put out this message on yt yesterday, when a smaller anime reviewer got taken down:
Heads up guys, this is important! Pokemon rights holders Sho-Pro have used a Japanese legal loophole to circumvent Fair use protections and take down Suede's entire channel. Basically, they sued and fined this 20k sub creator in a japanese small claims court (where fair use doesn't exist) then sent the legal letter to YouTube so they'd take the videos down with no recourse besides fighting the suit in Japan.

This could completely change anime YouTube, and they're testing the waters by hitting someone small first.
Followed by a link from Suede talking about this issue - https://youtu.be/v6uH71BdMBA

So not out of the woods yet.

User avatar
JulieYBM
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 16491
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 10:25 pm

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by JulieYBM » Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:50 am

I hope Sho Pro falls flat on their fucking faces. :D
She/Her💕 💜 💙
progesterone princess, estradiol empress
Lucifer's bimbo daughter

User avatar
PurestEvil
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1945
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2020 2:34 pm
Location: Constantinopolee!

Re: Why are so many DB creators becoming subject to Toei's wrath?

Post by PurestEvil » Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:55 am

FoolsGil wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:22 am Found out something that could lead to Toei's rebuttal - Anime reviewer Mother's Basement put out this message on yt yesterday, when a smaller anime reviewer got taken down:
Heads up guys, this is important! Pokemon rights holders Sho-Pro have used a Japanese legal loophole to circumvent Fair use protections and take down Suede's entire channel. Basically, they sued and fined this 20k sub creator in a japanese small claims court (where fair use doesn't exist) then sent the legal letter to YouTube so they'd take the videos down with no recourse besides fighting the suit in Japan.

This could completely change anime YouTube, and they're testing the waters by hitting someone small first.
Followed by a link from Suede talking about this issue - https://youtu.be/v6uH71BdMBA

So not out of the woods yet.
Bastards
This post was brought to you by 魔族

Rest in Peace, Toriyama-san

Post Reply