"Incarnate" by Nick Simmons: Copying/Tracing Hellsing, Bleach, ?

[The Xenos]

There's a new comic out from Radical called incarnate. I read it and I keep seeing the main character as an Alucard knock off. Have I read too much Hellsing and am just seeing this character I like, or is there some really rip off going on here? The hair, the eyes, the eyes popping out of pure black silhouette, and even the poses and action seem familiar. Am I overly sensitive or is this a genuine case of a knock off?

http://comicbookresources.com/?page=preview&id=3147&disp=table
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=user_review&id=1267

[Alan2099]

That's not enough for me to call it a rip-off, but I do see some strong similiarities.

[FistofIron]

You can really see some Hellsing influence but I'll read the series before I call the character a rip-off.

[Inkthinker]

Looks like a blend of Tite Kubo and Kouta Hirano with just a touch of Jamie Hewlitt. Which seems approprtiate, as the preview feels like a combination of Bleach and Hellsing with a taste of Gorillaz.

Nothing wrong per se with wearing your infuences on your sleeve, though it's a little close to the bone for a vampire character with those teeth shots and the full silhouette with the eyes... not far enough removed from the source.

Hopefully Simmons will expand beyond that, as long as he's got a drive to grow it's practically inevitable. Am I right in that Nate Simmons is also drawing it?

[Ghost]

They're pretty similar, though I'm not sure about rip-off. The eye motif was a bit much, but at least he's not wearing the hat and sunglasses. And I liked that he appeared physically younger then Alucard. Basically what we'd call an "expy," I guess.

Incidentally, that Ripley character looks an awful lot like Bleach's Hirako Shinji:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_q9udStMOfSU/SfCkkV0w6zI/AAAAAAAAASM/9YPQx1S-fJE/s400/280px_shinji_hirako.jpg

So, yeah. Perhaps the character design could use a bit of tweaking.

[Kevin M.]

They're pretty similar, though I'm not sure about rip-off. The eye motif was a bit much, but at least he's not wearing the hat and sunglasses. And I liked that he appeared physically younger then Alucard. Basically what we'd call an "expy," I guess.

Incidentally, that Ripley character looks an awful lot like Bleach's Hirako Shinji:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_q9udStMOfSU/SfCkkV0w6zI/AAAAAAAAASM/9YPQx1S-fJE/s400/280px_shinji_hirako.jpg

So, yeah. Perhaps the character design could use a bit of tweaking.


I though I was the only one who though he looked like Shinji.

[Wally_West]

They're pretty similar, though I'm not sure about rip-off. The eye motif was a bit much, but at least he's not wearing the hat and sunglasses. And I liked that he appeared physically younger then Alucard. Basically what we'd call an "expy," I guess.

Incidentally, that Ripley character looks an awful lot like Bleach's Hirako Shinji:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_q9udStMOfSU/SfCkkV0w6zI/AAAAAAAAASM/9YPQx1S-fJE/s400/280px_shinji_hirako.jpg

So, yeah. Perhaps the character design could use a bit of tweaking.

not to feed the argument...but is that ripley or shinji? cuz those eyes dont look much like shinji's.

[The Xenos]

I was thinking Bleach too. Though I didn't know the characters enough. Is there also a character with a -|- shaped scar on his face with a schythe with a skull in Bleach? Or is that just a generic anime cliche Simmons drew on one of these characters. Really so far this looks like someone's TokyoPop's Rising Stars of Manga Entries, and maybe not one of the winners.

Really, you can't help but think if the kid wasn't Gene Simmon's son and met Todd MacFarline and wasn't on a TV show, he'd be like the hundreds of others out there who haven't been published.

[Inkthinker]

Oh, I dunno... he's showing a certain amount of skill, unless someone nails him as a swipe artist, and I seriously doubt that will be the case. He's just early in the process, and his surface influences are clear.

The fact that he's doing comics at all, given their work-intensive nature, indicates that he's got some drive. If he sticks with it, no reason he can't rise.

[MKTerra]

... Yeah, that seriously looks like Alucard to me.

[Crimson King]

lol Alucard and Shinji

[Vidocq]

There's a new comic out from Radical called incarnate. I read it and I keep seeing the main character as an Alucard knock off. Have I read too much Hellsing and am just seeing this character I like, or is there some really rip off going on here? The hair, the eyes, the eyes popping out of pure black silhouette, and even the poses and action seem familiar. Am I overly sensitive or is this a genuine case of a knock off?

http://comicbookresources.com/?page=preview&id=3147&disp=table
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=user_review&id=1267 It seems heavily influenced by Hellsing, but from that preview and from the plot (as it's described in the article) storywise is too different to Hellsing to be called a ripoff. Simmons should cool it down with the homages though or else he might as well call it the American Hellsing.


Really, you can't help but think if the kid wasn't Gene Simmon's son and met Todd MacFarline and wasn't on a TV show, he'd be like the hundreds of others out there who haven't been published.
Of course this is the case but at the very least he seems to have some talent.

[The Xenos]

I gotta say his style looks particularly like Bleach or a number of shonen books. This is disapointing because so many new artists are jumping on this bandwagon. There's this whole 'Amerimanga' mentality I can't stand which is mostly just a sterotype than an actual study of artists. To me, there's a good variety of Japanese artists and no one style in particular. There are a number of other mangaka with various styles I'd rather see get popular. For example, in my avatar, Tsutomu Nihei. Or even Hellsing's Hirano himself who has this odd and distinct style that pops right out to me.

[Hitokiri]

You want Alucard looking characters? In Kuroshijutsi there's a guy who looks like Alucard as a butler.

[Inkthinker]

There are a number of other mangaka with various styles I'd rather see get popular. For example, in my avatar, Tsutomu Nihei.

Well, if it makes you feel any better I'm still a Nihei fanboy. Totally psyched that Biomega has been licensed, I think it's much better than BLAME!.

But I don't (I think) tend to wear my influences so clearly, possibly because I've been at this for so long. Simmons will get there in time, and probably be a bit embarrassed about his older work, but that's pretty normal.

Hell, at least he won't want to hide from it. Ripoff or not, it doesn't look bad.

[Kage Kisaragi]

originality in comics is something that is few and far between, better to just write it off as a homage like thing. in retrospect everyone looks like someone from Bleach, Connor = Ichigo, and the guy who shot him with Shotgun = Shinji

[Libaax]

He looks too much like Alucard and the hand with the mouth thing is clearly Vampire Hunter D.

Sure you dont have bee original these days but copiying looks of characters is too nice to call it an influence.

Doeasnt matter what the story is if you copy the looks of famous characters.

[burninganimefan357]

This (http://community.livejournal.com/bleachness/446299.html)
article has the images for comparison.

My thoughts: Usually I don't mind when an artist uses a similar character designs or themes as more prominent artists but this is just copying and pasting almost the exact panels with just some minor differences ( I'm looking at you silver-haired Kenpachi ). Would it be within grounds for him to be sued for copyright infringement?

[GrampaGen]

Wow...WOW.

That's really scummy. Right down to page layouts, too 0o;

Granted, I can't say about the plot since those pages might be taken out of context, but holy crap.

I think Viz can get on their asses for this, if not the Japanese Jump publication itself. This goes above and beyond stylistic homage.

[Young Avenger]

Some of those is downright tracing. It's terrible that Nick Simmons steals someone's work but he steals most of it from a single source. He's an idiot. Hope Jump sues his ass

[FistofIron]

I hope Radical doesn't suffer too much because of this bullshit.

[The Xenos]

Seems that Radical is playing it pretty smart. I sent this to Rich at Bleeding Cool and they already replied.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/02/25/swipe-file-nick-simmons-vs-bleach-radical-comics-respond/

I remember catching the Hellsing similarities and posting a thread on it a while back. Someone else noticed a character similar to one in Bleach.
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=281392

Only today did I see that livejournal collection. Good catch by the Bleach fans.

[master of read]

its one thing to draw insparation from someone else's work. its a whole other thing to out right copy it.

[The Xenos]

why did I double post that? Derp.

[MKTerra]

Well, it's been a few months, but things finally blew up over the last 24 hours or so:
http://community.livejournal.com/bleachness/446299.html

Some pretty serious tracing on exhibit in that link. I'll just post one.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/2383/4ih1s2jpg.th.png (http://img64.imageshack.us/i/4ih1s2jpg.png/)

GameFAQs picked up on it, then it spread to LiveJournal, then Sankaku Complex and 4chan. The publisher's put the title on hold, Viz is looking into it, and the guy's DeviantArt page (http://letsleepinggodslie.deviantart.com/) has been massacred by hate mail. Even Kubo's aware of it now. Apparently he Twitters (http://twitter.com/tite_kubo):
Between last night and this morning, I've been getting a lot of messages from overseas fans along the lines of "There's an American comic ripping off Bleach!". I'm not that good at English, but I looked at the site and it seems it's a comic by Nick Simmons, the son of Gene Simmons.

To be honest, I'm more bothered by the fact that Gene Simmon's son is a comic artist than whether or not it's a rip-off.
Incidentally, when did the forum's search function get so worthless? Was trying to dig up this thread earlier today, and "alucard" turned up zero matches for this board, which should be bloody impossible. Couldn't find it till someone at 4chan linked it, gosh knows how he found it. Next time I'll try Google.

[Inkthinker]

Yeah, Rich Johnston featured this in his latest Swipe File column:

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/02/25/swipe-file-nick-simmons-vs-bleach-radical-comics-respond/

And while I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt back when we discussed this last July, I got nothin' sympathetic left to say after seeing these recent comparisons, especially that Kenpachi. It's not a straight trace, but it's damn close. Too close.

Sorry Nick, you went too far. Waaay too far.

Also, how awesome is it that Tite Kubo has a sense of humour about it? Man just earned double-points from me.

How did he possibly think this would pass muster? Bleach is incredibly popular... someone was bound to start comparing panels, and your only defense in that case is to not have committed the offense in the first place.

I still think it's fine to wear your influences on your sleeve, but you can't outright copy another artist's compositions like that. It's just not acceptable to publishers, consumers, or the rest of the professional industry out there that you presumably wish to join.

[mgs]

WOT a dick! :mad:

I already had my say on this on the main CBR page article on this swiping a-hole!

http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2010/02/radical-halts-nick-simmons-incarnate-amid-claims-of-plagiarism/#more-36394

[Inkthinker]

So apparently the latest (sorry I'm not C&P or linking quotes, but you can find 'em if you look) is that Nick is saying on Facebook and such that he's never heard of Bleach, and this is just a coincidence, and haters gonna hate.

Digging the hole deeper is not the strategy I would have chosen.

Hey, can a Mod merge this thread with the one that Xenos created back in July (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=281392) ?

[Vaiyt]

It's just coincidence that he made characters that are clones of Shinji, Kenpachi and Orihime, plus an emo Ichigo.

It's just coincidence that Not!Kenpachi's coat is a blatant copy of the one worn by a Hellsing character.

It's just coincidence that some of his similar-to-Bleach-but-just-coincidence-really characters sometimes start looking like OTHER Bleach characters, like the Orihime-analogue looking like Momo.

It's just coincidence that the panels that don't seem traced are so bad they're almost Liefeldian.

Yeah.

[Len Ikari145]

This (http://community.livejournal.com/bleachness/446299.html)
article has the images for comparison.

My thoughts: Usually I don't mind when an artist uses a similar character designs or themes as more prominent artists but this is just copying and pasting almost the exact panels with just some minor differences ( I'm looking at you silver-haired Kenpachi ). Would it be within grounds for him to be sued for copyright infringement?

Must..resist...urge...cannot...quote...corny...cat chphrase!

Oh, to hell with it. It's too applicable not to say it.

"With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails." *shot*

[DarkBlade]

Merged--thanks for the link Inkthinker!

[The Xenos]

Damn.. looking at his Deviant Art page... I just realized we share three favorite manga artists. "Favourite artist: Kentarō Miura / Tsutomu Nihei / Yoshiyuki Sadamoto" Funny he doesn't mention Kubo.

[Farealmer]

Also, how awesome is it that Tite Kubo has a sense of humour about it? Man just earned double-points from me.

Of course manga/anime artists just seem less anal about that sort of thing than in the west.

So apparently the latest (sorry I'm not C&P or linking quotes, but you can find 'em if you look) is that Nick is saying on Facebook and such that he's never heard of Bleach, and this is just a coincidence, and haters gonna hate.

Sounds like those guys from Chris Hansen's to catch a predator shows. They get caught red handed and still deny it. One rip off is a coincidence, several isn't.

[Inkthinker]

I'm actually subscribing to the theory now that these Facebook profiles are fakes, trollers looking to fan the flames for fun.

Either that, or this kid really is an unbelievable douchebag.

At any rate, I don't think Simmons can be sued in court for this, and even if he could they probably won't... the returns wouldn't be worth the investment. In the end, justice is served because the kid's career as a comics artist has been shot right between the eyes. If he wants to rebuild his reputation, he'll have to work so much harder now... he'd have to dig himself out of this hole just to start from scratch.

If comics are his passion, as they are for so many of us who choose this goofy goddamn profession, then it's not inconcievable that he could start over, work his ass off, learn to illustrate properly, and come back again in three or four years. But man, he's made it SO much harder than it already is, and believe me... it ain't easy.

He already had the advantage of being a rich man's kid, with media connections to push him past the rest of us ground-pounders. But that won't help him now, because if there's one thing media people hate, it's being burned like this.

[Paploo the Ewok]

At any rate, I don't think Simmons can be sued in court for this, and even if he could they probably won't... the returns wouldn't be worth the investment. In the end, justice is served because the kid's career as a comics artist has been shot right between the eyes. If he wants to rebuild his reputation, he'll have to work so much harder now... he'd have to dig himself out of this hole just to start from scratch.


Stuff like this has gone into court in the past, but usually only when the person/company responsible for the plagirism denies it outright and tries to cover things up. In something as fan-based as Comics, this tends to be a really bad idea, so it's more common that companies just take the work out of circulation, don't hire the artist again for a good long while, and apologize publically to the original artist, sometimes working things out privately in terms of payments/settlements. http://www.comicsbeat.com/2010/02/26/the-swipist-2-vera-brosgol-and-hot-topic/ Tshirt companies seem to be responsible for a lot of copying, though with the internet, people tend to get caught pretty quickly.

http://www.youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/ This is a great blog to read just to see the numerous insidious forms of copyright infringement

And yeah, he totally screwed himself over, but like many kids, he doesn't seem to be aware of the shame associated with plagirism. Copying stuff is so prolific on the internet, nad people have little respect for other people's intellectual property, which is a shame. It's a culture that leads to lot of ignorance regarding laws and such, so you tend to see a lot of people who get rather angry when you tell them that NO, the artwork they obviously copied from a DVD cover [a DVD which staff happened to have on hand by coincidence] CANNOT be entered into the convention Art Contest [and no, crying and getting your Mom into things won't make us change the rules]. There's a grown up world out there where you will be questioned for your actions, and held accountable if caught.

Also, I hope everyone complaining about Nick stealing Tite Kubo's work will take stuff like this into consideration when they steal Tite Kubo's work. I'm finding it strange how so many people who steal his work on a regular basis are getting angry about Gene Simmons son doing so. On ComicsWorthReading (http://comicsworthreading.com/2010/02/25/plagiarism-scanlations-and-copies-nick-simmons-incarnate-rips-off-bleach/) it's been pointed out that Nick copied from Chapters that haven't been released in english yet, so scanlations are part of the bad stuff going on. Disrespecting an artist's rights is a pretty crappy thing to do in any form.

Far From Realmer- I think it's moreso because the publisher in question [Radical] is doing things the right way, and Kubo has VIZ's legal team to take care of things for him in the meantime. It's actually common to see Japanese artists actually get mad about this kind of stuff, and when someone is caught it can have severe consequences, like the Flowers of Eden incident, or that yaoi manga artist who copied from fashion magazines. In both cases, they were forced to stop working, apologize publically, and in Flower of Eden's case, have all existing products pulled from the market along with translated editions [Tokyopop had licensed it at the time]. Or when people are given prison terms for selling bootleg dvd's or uploading anime to networks [which has happened in Japan]

[Ghost]

Also, I hope everyone complaining about Nick stealing Tite Kubo's work will take stuff like this into consideration when they steal Tite Kubo's work. I'm finding it strange how so many people who steal his work on a regular basis are getting angry about Gene Simmons son doing so. On ComicsWorthReading (http://comicsworthreading.com/2010/02/25/plagiarism-scanlations-and-copies-nick-simmons-incarnate-rips-off-bleach/) it's been pointed out that Nick copied from Chapters that haven't been released in english yet, so scanlations are part of the bad stuff going on. Disrespecting an artist's rights is a pretty crappy thing to do in any form.

Be that as it may, I think reading scanlations for free is quite a different thing from tracing another artist's designs and then trying to sell them as your own work, even if both are intrusions on copyright.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Be that as it may, I think reading scanlations for free is quite a different thing from tracing another artist's designs and then trying to sell them as your own work, even if both are intrusions on copyright.

It's a different thing, but it's rooted in the same issue- taking an artists work without their permission and manipulating it into something they have no control over, and presenting it as a legitimate when it isn't. Interfering with someones income, providing presentation of their work without their involvement, and distributing it without compensating them are things both share in common.

One might make you more mad then the other personally, but both affect the artist in the same, negative fashion. It's all rooted in the same culture, the more corrupt side of anime fandom.

And let's face it, there's a VERY large number of websites out there making big bucks off scanlations, mostly because they don't have to pay for the content at all. Tite Kubo probably has more beef with that kind of stuff then some guy copying his artwork, which is far easier to deal with legally, and less likely to be mistaken for a legal, authorized product [stuff like Narutofan probably looks very official to a 12 year old, who probably has no idea their subscription fee is running a criminal organization].

It's also one of the things that cause plagirism- teaching kids that stealing comics online is AOK and good to do also teaches them that copyright is unimportant, so it's not that big of a jump from stealing it online to tracing it and selling it at an artist's alley. I imagine if Nick were more aware of copyright issues, he probably wouldn't of traced other peoples artwork.

[OverMaster]

I see it's time for that personal favorite crusade again...

[Paploo the Ewok]

I see it's time for that personal favorite crusade again...

OverMaster, last time I checked it's not against the rules to remind people not to steal other peoples work. If you don't like it, maybe reflect upon why I keep saying all this stuff. I'm certainly not going to keep saying it, and anytime I've brought it up, it's been related to the topic in some form. I'm not the only one on the internet who thinks stealing comics online is a bad thing. If you have any problems with me personally, I'm sorry, but I'm never going to change my beliefs, and this happened to be a valid topic in which to address the issue.

I'm generally a pretty genial person, and was at one time voted among the friendliest posters on CBR on the Corries [no really, it was awhile ago, but it's true]. I don't have any issues with anyone personally on the forums, my only issue is that I don't like bootlegging, and I for one think Nick Simmons deserves whatever ire fandom gives him, and then some. I just find it funny people get mad about this stuff but have such a casual opinion in regards to something that has an equally negative affect on an artists livelihood.

And it's not like I'm the only person in the mangasphere who thinks so. http://twitter.com/MangaCur/status/9639797610 and http://twitter.com/debaoki/status/9655268316 are also bringing up this issue in relation to this topic, so it looks like Nick Simmons actions are creating a lot of conversation about manga, copyright, and fandom's treatment of both.

[Farealmer]

Be that as it may, I think reading scanlations for free is quite a different thing from tracing another artist's designs and then trying to sell them as your own work, even if both are intrusions on copyright.
Seconded.

I see it's time for that personal favorite crusade again...
Yeah, how did we get from b to a?

[mgs]

Whether or not legal action should be taken against him is the decision of others, but he should be a pariah in the comic book community, unless and until he learns his lesson, which is not guaranteed.

[Oblivion87]

Looks like this whole thing has stared a holiday of sorts: Bleach Protection Day.
http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Bleach_Protection_Day


Also a line from Nick's first ever dA Journal entry:

"If you steal my artwork, you will pay. In cash."
http://letsleepinggodslie.deviantart.com/journal/19856340/

oh the irony.:biggrin:

[Paploo the Ewok]

Looks like this whole thing has stared a holiday of sorts: Bleach Protection Day.
http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Bleach_Protection_Day

There's something really questionable about a bunch of fans organizing to protect an artists work when they're probably going to be downloading it the very next day. You have to admit that.
Sorry folks, I just have to say that. I find it depressing that when I get mad about people ripping off artists, it's totally annoying/uncalledfor/unwanted, but this sort of thing is suddenly some kind of epic fan movement. Sorry folks, but I find it very hypocritical.

[Dark Soul # 7]

Simmons obvious tracing is facepalm worthy and deplorable. His denial is just pathetic. We can all agree on that.

I'm actually interested in the discussion regarding reading manga online and whether it's plagerism or not.

I will admit that I read manga online, A LOT. I do this because I don't feel financially secure enough to buy manga at the rather expensive prices, or maybe they're not that expensive I'll have to do some calcs, from the local SciFi-store and I don't have any friends that do buy manga that I can read. I do however frequently buy the swedish One Piece translations, because they're freaking awesome, and the odd volume of lots of other manga that I enjoy.

To keep up with the discussions on the forums and avoid spoilers. I read manga online.

But I do see how doing so could affect the mangaka's income negatively and now I'm sort of feeling bad about it. At the same time however, is it really such a big problem? Loads of people still buy the volumes, probably more than read the stuff online and don't buy the volumes.

[Oblivion87]

But I do see how doing so could affect the mangaka's income negatively and now I'm sort of feeling bad about it. At the same time however, is it really such a big problem? Loads of people still buy the volumes, probably more than read the stuff online and don't buy the volumes.


From what I know, even thought a lot of people read it online Bleach volumes still sell very well. Plus even if people read it online and don't buy the volumes, they might still buy other merchandise(t-shirts, video games, toys, etc.)

[blackphoenix]

y'know, back in the '40's, artists used to do "swipes" of other artist's stuff all the time! Batman's first appearance is lifted almost scene for scene from another book(I can't remember which). I could understand if he was straight ripping off Bleach, et al, but that doesn't seem to be the case. He may have "borrowed" a few poses, but it's an original story. I think this whole thing is just going to translate to bigger sales when people want to check it out an see what it's all about...

Where can I order this?? It looks cool.

[Inkthinker]

I'm not defending the scanslation practice, but I'll make the argument that sales from manga don't seem to be hurting sales of those scanned books much, any more than music piracy has really damaged the music or movie industries (which continue to post record profits every year).

Piracy =/= lost sales in a 1:1 correlation. It does damage, but to what extent and where is not clear. Many people who read scans of books also buy those books once they are published.

That's not a clear defense, Paploo, before you get up in arms, I'm not arguing that you're wrong, at least not entirely. The Death of a Thousand Cuts may still kill us all, yet. But I think you're using one act of wrongdoing to steer the conversation towards another.

[Siriel]

Piracy =/= lost sales in a 1:1 correlation. It does damage, but to what extent and where is not clear. Many people who read scans of books also buy those books once they are published.

There's also quite a few sales gained from it, which make up for part of the losses. Some people become fans of a manga from reading it online before it's officially translated, and then buy it once it comes out where they live.

[RubberLotus]

Must..resist...urge...cannot...quote...corny...cat chphrase!

Oh, to hell with it. It's too applicable not to say it.

"With a keen eye for details, one truth prevails." *shot*

Hooray! Another DC fan at last!

I was beginning to think they were extinct on this board...

[RubberLotus]

There's also quite a few sales gained from it, which make up for part of the losses. Some people become fans of a manga from reading it online before it's officially translated, and then buy it once it comes out where they live.

Yupyup.

In fact, I think that a few scantalators INTENTIONALLY pepper their manga scans with poor grammar and punctuation so that professionally translated manga (once they come out) will be preferred by the readers.

[OverMaster]

That's not a clear defense, Paploo, before you get up in arms, I'm not arguing that you're wrong, at least not entirely. The Death of a Thousand Cuts may still kill us all, yet. But I think you're using one act of wrongdoing to steer the conversation towards another.

I'd suggest to try and stay on topic instead of engaging into the exact same argument we always have with Paploo. There is another thread especifically for that.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I'd suggest to try and stay on topic instead of engaging into the exact same argument we always have with Paploo. There is another thread especifically for that.

Overmaster, I wouldn't of brought up the topic if it hadn't been part of the overall discussion on the plagirism- a large number of manga bloggers and news site are bringing up this point. Noted blogger and Beguiling manager Chris Butcher brings up these issues in one recent post, http://comics212.net/2010/02/26/oh-nick-simmons/
[Tangent- he also touches upon the issues relating to fanart/dojinshi that fans sometimes overlook- personally, I've only ever sold fanart as pieces of original artwork or sketches, and sell items with my own characters for prints/comics/massproduced items. I've never really been comfortable with how some people make expensive prints of it. Fanart's less of an issue to me, but Chris does bring up some valid points, and I kind of wonder if many artists are stiffling their personal works by going for a quick buck]

I don't think much can be gained by ignoring part of the discussion that this controversy has brought up, nor by addressing me in an offputting manner.

Arguably, Nick Simmons isn't hurting Bleach's sales either, but he's still paying a disrespect to Tite Kubo, and the fans who are defending or ignorning the wrong his practices are also entering a questionable moral area. While it's difficult to tell how much scanlations affect sales, they center on the same disrespect of an artist's creation Simmons committed against Kubo. I really think that fans should take all these things into consideration the next time they go to a non-legitimate venue to obtain his works.

Ripping off another artist by copying his work is lazy, stupid and corrupt. Stealing an artists work by downloading it is lazy, stupid and corrupt.

[Paploo the Ewok]

http://manga.about.com/b/2010/02/26/nick-simmons-bleach-manga-plagarism-scandal-rocks-the-comics-twitterverse.htm Just thought I'd share a link to cartoonist/manga reviewer Deb Aoki's roundup of her discussion on twitter regarding the Incarnate incident. Deb's the one who really got the discussion about fan's habits and the hypocrisy of them getting made over someone plagirising Kubo, so it's an inciteful and interesting read.

[The Xenos]

Eh. I think the scanlation argument doesn't really seem realated. Well, save that some of these traces were from volumes of Bleach only published in Japan so far.

Though I will say something more related is the fan art you see in artist alley. Some people have brought that up. That's more related, but I say it's a whole different issue with its own set of different problems. The trouble with Simmons is that he tried to pass another's work off as his own original work and characters. There's a deception there that fan artists promoting their work as based off a popular series don't have.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Eh. I think the scanlation argument doesn't really seem realated. Well, save that some of these traces were from volumes of Bleach only published in Japan so far.

Though I will say something more related is the fan art you see in artist alley. Some people have brought that up. That's more related, but I say it's a whole different issue with its own set of different problems. The trouble with Simmons is that he tried to pass another's work off as his own original work and characters. There's a deception there that fan artists promoting their work as based off a popular series don't have.

The fact that it's cropping up in most online discussions on major news websites like The Beat, About's Manga review section and ComicsWorthReading says to me that it's a valid part of the discussion, and not just all in my head.

That, and it also says a lot about how lazy l fans have gotten regarding the artists they supposedly love. The fact that it matters so little to most posters here says a lot about the poor quality of anime fans we have now.

I also find the fanart discussion interesting- are AA'ers creating a culture that has no creativity and only profits off other peoples work? It's something to consider. I know I sometimes find people selling 20 dollar glossy Sailor Moon prints questionable. We've had issues with on vendor selling "Fanart" merchandise that was basically fanart of numerous characters printed offset/silkscreened/professionally on mugs, tote bags and buttons, and we decided not to invite them back for subsequent cons.

[Inkthinker]

...so it's an inciteful and interesting read.

... I"m trying to decide if that's a spelling mistake or clever wordplay. :biggrin:

[Paploo the Ewok]

... I"m trying to decide if that's a spelling mistake or clever wordplay. :biggrin:


Apparently it's both! Though really, Deb's post gets you thinking about a lot of issues. Simon Jones [of Icarus Comics, and generally nice guy- he sent Animaritime a nice support package last year] has also posted some discussion on his blog about all this stuff, and as an industry insider he has a lot of good viewpoints, though not sure if I can link to that since his blog is nsfw.

[TwinPistols]

I will admit that I read manga online, A LOT. I do this because I don't feel financially secure enough to buy manga at the rather expensive prices, ...But I do see how doing so could affect the mangaka's income negatively and now I'm sort of feeling bad about it. At the same time however, is it really such a big problem? Loads of people still buy the volumes, probably more than read the stuff online and don't buy the volumes.

From what I know, even thought a lot of people read it online Bleach volumes still sell very well. Plus even if people read it online and don't buy the volumes, they might still buy other merchandise(t-shirts, video games, toys, etc.)

Before I make a few points here I think should say hello. So, "Hello!" :biggrin: I'm TwinPistols. I haven't been down to chat with you guys because though I enjoy Manga, and Anime, I'm not as big of a fan of those types of entertainment as I am American Comics.

Anyway, in my opinion, reading unofficial/illegal scans of Manga or comics online is relevant to the discussion. Theft of an artist's work is theft, regardless of the kind of theft. And to jump on Nick Simmons for stealing artwork that you're reading illicit copies of online is very hypocritical.

And the justifications that I'm reading, "it still sells very well", "it might promote merchandise", etc. Those things really don't matter. Look, the companies publishing the Manga know how to market their merchandise, and they don't need any "help" from things that will detract from Manga sales.

It may be, that despite people reading Bleach online for free, it still sells well. It may also be, that if people didn't read Bleach from those sites, it'd sell even more. And that is money that Kubo & Company has earned. Each and every single-penny-nickle & dime. And you cheat them by not paying for it, period.

Even if all the scans stopped, and all those sites were shut down, and miraculously Manga sales aren't affected at all, it will still mean that people aren't gaining access to material for free, when they should be paying for it.

If you can't afford it, don't buy it. Make some decisions about what you will pay for, and stick with those titles. If you can't take part in some discussions, because you don't have the money to pay for every manga there is, don't click on the links. You'll live....I promise. I believe that if you're feeling bad about reading Manga online it's because you already know you shouldn't be doing it, you just need to get past the weak justifications for doing so...and they are weak, if you think about them.

Are Manga scans and tracing an artist's work different things? Yes. But, they're both theft. And IMHO, as far as negatively affecting artist's income, online scans are a lot, lot worse. Avoid them.

The fan Art thing I don't see. Unless I'm not understanding what you mean by them. People pay for commissions all the time from artists who aren't drawing characters they own. But people pay for the artist's personal rendition of the character they're drawing. Correct me if I'm wrong someone, but as long as someone doesn't do a fan manga, and tries to sell that, single illustations of those characters can be sold legally. It happens at every con, as far as I know.

[OverMaster]

And IMHO, as far as negatively affecting artist's income, online scans are a lot, lot worse. Avoid them.


Pretty much everyone who won't buy the actual manga after reading the scanlations WOULDN'T buy the manga either if the scanlations weren't available. They'd just find another source of cheap entertainment. While the actual fan who checks the scans will later buy the actual books because of completism, love for the actual work, and the desire for holding the story in actual, ownable book format.

Deluding oneself to think people will buy the manga by the bucketloads without scans is living at a fool's paradise IMO. If anything, it'd only make the actual fanbase smaller in the long run.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I don't think that the single illustrations are an issue- what Butcher was talking about was mostly people who sell prints of the illustrations for high prices. It's a grey area, though I've mostly only seen legal action taken when it's something that might present a negative image of a given character/company, or when it surpasses from "person selling a handful of prints at an AA table" to "person mass producing merchandise using fanart and selling it at all kinds of outlets for big profit".

Thanks for adding to the discussion TwinPistols :)

[Paploo the Ewok]

Deluding oneself to think people will buy the manga by the bucketloads without scans is living at a fool's paradise IMO. If anything, it'd only make the actual fanbase smaller in the long run.

Then why is it that manga sales are down? Why is it that companies like Aurora and Dr.Master have more or less closed up shop? Why is it that anime companies have had so many problems lately? It's not the only factor, but you do have to admit it is indeed one of the major ones. While scanlations fans might dominate some forums, I don't think they make up the majority of the buyers- they may make up a portion, but they don't really fuel the markets. In Otaku USA, I think the article about Kenichi the Mightiest Disciple makes a great point about the growing disconnect between what fans who buy like and what fans who download like- it's become easier for companies to go by what sells vs. what's popular on forums, with Kenichi being a major hit for Funimation (allowing them to license more) while D.Grayman was apparently less of a hit despite a massive online fervor for it not too long ago, and has had it's release suspended after putting out what they'd picked up so far.

I buy manga by the epic bucketloads, and I don't read scanlations. Since everyonelse likes to justify by what they do ["I read scans, and buy the books I care to buy, so everything's OKAY!"], I guess that's a valid argument. The majority of sales in bookstores and comic shops are by people exposed to the material for the first time by buying it [after looking at the book instore] from my experiences.

[TwinPistols]

Pretty much everyone who won't buy the actual manga after reading the scanlations WOULDN'T buy the manga either if the scanlations weren't available. They'd just find another source of cheap entertainment. While the actual fan who checks the scans will later buy the actual books because of completism, love for the actual work, and the desire for holding the story in actual, ownable book format.

Deluding oneself to think people will buy the manga by the bucketloads without scans is living at a fool's paradise IMO. If anything, it'd only make the actual fanbase smaller in the long run.

I don't think that people will buy bucketloads of manga if they didn't read scanlations. Yes, I do agree that a lot of people would just forget the book. But some, maybe will enjoy the book enough to actually purchase it if they can't get it for free anymore. That's more money, regardless of how much.

"the actual fan who checks the scans will later buy the actual books because of completism, love for the actual work, and the desire for holding the story in actual, ownable book format"

This, IMHO is the delusion. Most people aren't going to pay for something once they can get it for free. If they have to buy a few volumes they can't get online to keep up, they'll do so, but that doesn't actually mean they'll buy the rest for "completism". That's not going to happen.

Do people pay for albums when they get a free copy? Uh-uh.

Paploo: Thanx for that clarification.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I'd say people who work hard, take the trouble to track down stuff legally and make an effort to buy books and support artists are moreso actual fans then people who just download stuff because it's something to do. Seriously, it's just not the same thing.

Spending years watching for a used copy of an anime you've always wanted and then finding it (hello there, copy of BAOH OVA), or waiting for a manga company to license that title from your favorite author that's eluded getting picked up (c'mon rest of Urusei Yatsura manga!) isn't really the same thing as just scooting online and getting whatever you want for free. It's a different kind of dedication.

Just like how it's a different kind of dedication to spend years working on building your art skills, and someonelse just tracing over Bleach and adding some colours to it. One of those things has a certain air of deception, and ill repute to it, however you try to justify it. Giving excuses for downloading stuff is just like Nick Simmons poorly trying to hide his shame on Facebook. You're fooling no one but yourself.

[OverMaster]

This, IMHO is the delusion. Most people aren't going to pay for something once they can get it for free. If they have to buy a few volumes to they can't get online to keep up, they'll do so, but that doesn;t actually mean they'll buy the rest for "completism". That's not going to happen.


Funny, because I've done just that. Repeated, several times. As well as many people I've met both online and in the 'real world'.

That's kinda akin to saying people won't buy the anime of a series after reading the manga, or you won't buy the DVD of a movie after watching it at the theater once, or you won't buy a poster after having the same image in a postcard. Hell, fans often BUY THE VOLUMES/TANKOUBONS AFTER BUYING THE UNCOLLECTED EDITIONS at magazines like Shonen Jump. It's the most common thing at Japan, too.

You are taking these things at too much of a face value without contemplating the finer aspects of the issue. Your zeal for seeing the whole affair in black and white is making you to think in a straight line without looking at the full mindset of fandom, divided mostly between the actual fans who keep the business running often with multiple buyings (like movies greatly depend on multiple viewings at the cinema) and the leechers who will check the free stuff only, and won't check manga at all otherwise, so it's not a gain for the publishers either way.

[Paploo the Ewok]

But they don't get to keep those things. When you take a book out of a library, you have to return it. When you see a movie. When japanese people toss their manga anthologies into the recycling bin [seriously, I have an issue of Kodansha's Shonen Magazine, and it's nowhere near as hardy interms of paper or binding as domestic Shonen Jump. Most japanese readers toss these cheap, big magaziens into the garbage].

When you download a scanlation or an anime, you've created a permanent copy of it. People burn these to CD. Or they bookmark the sites when they want to go back to them. It's not really the same thing.

Also, you're paying for all these things- by your taxes for the library (who have to buy those books, which'll only be taken out about 5 times a year on average. Worldwide, many libraries have lots of systems in place to compensate publishers alongside this), by buying amovie ticket, by your cable bill, by paying for the anthology magazine a series is published in. People don't pay for scanlations You've made a poor argument with that Overmaster.

[TwinPistols]

Most people aren't going to pay for something once they can get it for free.

Funny, because I've done just that.
Repeated, several times. As well as many people I've met both online and in the 'real world'.

Note, my use of the word "most" above, not "all". This is my opinion on the nature of people, fans and non-fans alike. if you don't agree with me we can agree to disagree there.

divided mostly between the actual fans who keep the business running often with multiple buyings (like movies greatly depend on multiple viewings at the cinema) and the leechers who will check the free stuff only, and won't check manga at all otherwise, so it's not a gain for the publishers either way.

That's an assumption. Unless we can actually stop all scanlations we won't know for sure whether sales would be affected or not. But correct me if I'm wrong, scanning and downloading scanlations is illegal. And IMHO, it's morally wrong regardless of the outcome.

[OverMaster]

That's an assumption. Unless we can actually stop all scanlations we won't know for sure whether sales would be affected or not.

'Hey, let's gamble one of the biggest incomes of new readers to the fold, and the key point where we can separate those who only leech from those who will be continued followers of the product, so we can prove a point with a largely reduced fanbase! What's the worst that could happen?'.

[Vaiyt]

You guys over at US and Europe may take manga releases for granted, but I'm glad scanlations exist, or else I wouldn't be able to read much manga at all. It's difficult to find (if it's not Naruto, that is), and damn expensive.

*looks at incomplete Buddha and Vagabond collections*

._.

[OverMaster]

You guys over at US and Europe may take manga releases for granted, but I'm glad scanlations exist, or else I wouldn't be able to read much manga at all. It's difficult to find (if it's not Naruto, that is), and damn expensive.

*looks at incomplete Buddha and Vagabond collections*

._.

Tell me about it. And before the old 'Buy over the Internet' argument is parroted, not only international delivery times are damn slow here, but it's much more expensive due to the differences between USA currencies and our own.

And yet, I still do it whenever I can.

Then again, I guess it's my own fault for living here, right?

[TwinPistols]

'Hey, let's gamble one of the biggest incomes of new readers to the fold

Seems like another big assumption to me. :biggrin: Do you have any proof of that one?

You guys over at US and Europe may take manga releases for granted, but I'm glad scanlations exist, or else I wouldn't be able to read much manga at all. It's difficult to find (if it's not Naruto, that is), and damn expensive.

*looks at incomplete Buddha and Vagabond collections*

._.

Well, only read what you can pay for. If that means not reading much manga, don't read much manga. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

[OverMaster]

Seems like another big assumption to me. :biggrin: Do you have any proof of that one?


Do you have any proof on the contrary?

Well, only read what you can pay for. If that means not reading much manga, don't read much manga. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Well, sure, it's very easy to say 'don't read much', when you can afford yourself much.

[TwinPistols]

Do you have any proof on the contrary?


I knew you were going there. If you're going to state something as a fact, you need to back it up. If scanlations are a major source of income, by introducing new readers to the material that will eventually buy (yeah, right), then there must be some proof of that, right?

The burden of proof is on you, not me. And if you don't have proof that scanlations result in more sales, then what you have there is opinion and assumption, nothing more.


Well, sure, it's very easy to say 'don't read much', when you can afford yourself much.

I can't afford everything myself. I don't read Bleach because I buy a lot of American comic books (+ Dragonball and Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle). I can't afford to buy it all. I can't even afford all the American comics I want.

You should adjust what you read to what you can afford. I didn't say it'd be easy. It's just the right thing to do. Morally and Legally.

The only real choice you have is whether you're going to do the right thing or not.

[OverMaster]

The burden of proof is on you, not me. And if you don't have proof that scanlations result in more sales, then what you have there is opinion and assumption, nothing more.

Just like yours in any case. Not enough to gamble the future of fandom on it on any case and in either direction like you suggested.

It's just the right thing to do. Morally and Legally.

The only real choice you have is whether you're going to do the right thing or not

As a Mod already stated, this is not the place for anyone to jump into a pulpit to start preaching moral viewpoints and issuing judgements on the matter. So cut it out and you won't have to endure rebuttals either. Others comment their recent events freely, and there are no links posted in exchange. That's all we are asking for without any need for the eternal discussion Paploo restarted this time without any actual need.

[Paploo the Ewok]

As a Mod already stated, this is not the place for anyone to jump into a pulpit to start preaching moral viewpoints and issuing judgements on the matter. So cut it out and you won't have to endure rebuttals either. Others comment their recent events freely, and there are no links posted in exchange. That's all we are asking for without any need for the eternal discussion Paploo restarted this time without any actual need.

I'm not really sure where a Mod said that. I don't think they prohibited discussing the issue, moreso just not to make it too heated [unless I missed a post, if so please let me know]. Could you provide a link? I'm not really aware that Twin Pistols has said anything derogatory.

I think the fact that policies regarding bootlegs have been reinforced on this forum says something about the issue.

[Brandon Hanvey]

As a Mod already stated, this is not the place for anyone to jump into a pulpit to start preaching moral viewpoints and issuing judgements on the matter. So cut it out and you won't have to endure rebuttals either. Others comment their recent events freely, and there are no links posted in exchange. That's all we are asking for without any need for the eternal discussion Paploo restarted this time without any actual need.

I know I didn't say anything like that. I just asked people to cool down and act civil.

People can discuss the issue to illegal scans if they want. It is a part of the manga industry.

[MKTerra]

Computers and the internet have made digital copying and distribution simple, cheap, and ubiquitous. I don't see this as a bad thing for humanity, any more so than the printing press or the replicator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicator_(Star_Trek)). "Intellectual property," on the other hand, is bloating to the point of choking its original purpose (http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2451/).

For all its moral dubiousness, piracy has demonstrated it's technically perfectly possible to translate and distribute a work globally overnight. It exposes regional restrictions and months-long delays as the inefficiencies they are, and spurs legal distribution like nothing else to up its game (e.g. legit downloads, simulcasts, free/paid streams). In this sense it's been useful (albeit illegal) leverage for impatient/neglected would-be customers, who previously had little recourse.

Also see my sig.

[Paploo the Ewok]

For all its moral dubiousness, piracy has demonstrated it's technically perfectly possible to translate and distribute a work globally overnight. It exposes regional restrictions and months-long delays as the inefficiencies they are, and spurs legal distribution like nothing else to up its game (e.g. legit downloads, simulcasts, free/paid streams). In this sense it's been useful (albeit illegal) leverage for impatient/neglected would-be customers, who previously had little recourse.

I don't see how impatience is a valid argument for stealing.

You're overlooking things like the time it takes to negociate a contract for a license, the time it takes to have things approved by the domestic publisher/editorial team, the original artist, and the japanese publisher, the time to have a professional translator translate it (which may take more time and care than sometime aiming to get it done ASAP), the time to have a professional letter retouch sound effects and other elements in a print resolution (which is more time consuming than doing it at the low resolutions scanlators use), the time it takes to have all that formatted for printing, have a graphic designer modify the cover to suit domestic audience tastes (it would look wierd if you had the Hana to Yume generic cover design appearing on VIZ, CMX, and Tokyopop books), the time it takes to pay for the license, the time it takes to solicit it to a retailer, the time it takes to negociate for electronic rights so they can post a preview on their website or the time it takes to authorize a preview in a magazine, the time it takes to print it all and ship it to retailers, and the time it takes for you to save up the money to buy an 9 or 10 dollar book (somtimes less, like if you preorder it online at a discount, or go to a comic shop with a discount. That 10% can go a long way for savings)

Basically, your concept involves ignoring quality, ignoring the print market (where do webcomics make their money? In print. Really, I make money quicker selling minicomics at a con then I do from ads. Reader charity is a questionable means of support too, given beliefs like yours), and ignoring the rights of the people who made the comic for you, and the publishers who gave them the chance and the ability to make comics (having a publisher is so important- it lets you work on a comic full time, not just on nights or weekends. Stuff like weekly 20 page comics and the ability to hire a few assistants to keep up that pace can really only exist because of publishers).

You also ignore the time it takes the artist to make a comic- a volume of comics can take anywhere from 5 months to a year or more to make. It kind of sucks for the artist that some impatient fan on the internet can make all that work pointless overnight.


Where there are free, legal streams it's because someone took the trouble to pay for it, license it, and authorize it. Taking matters into your own hands isn't a way to spur on advancement, it's just a way to screw over artists, take away their control, and probably make them question putting anything online after seeing how their work is treated, and how trivial their opinions are towards you.

It's not so much that it's easy/cheap/free that makes it an issue for people, it's that it involves not compensating the original creator, and not involving them in the process in any form. Not having permission (which is what licensing is) to distribute it is the issue.

You make a poor argument that is only built on your personal greed/impatience.. as you said " In this sense it's been useful (albeit illegal) leverage for impatient/neglected would-be customers"

It's all like saying just because a light table makes it faster/easier/cheaper to draw comics that it's totally okay that Simmons traced Kubo's drawings, to relate things back to the topic.

[Rud]

Not that i disagree with anything you say or anything, but:
You also ignore the time it takes the artist to make a comic- a volume of comics can take anywhere from 5 months to a year or more to make.
If were talking manga, a week (in Kubo's case), and volumes of the weekly's usually have like 10 or 11 chapters in them, so how in the world does it take an artist 5 months to a year to make a volumes worth?, more like 2 to 3 months.
It's all like saying just because a light table makes it faster/easier/cheaper to draw comics that it's totally okay that Simmons traced Kubo's drawings, to relate things back to the topic.Nick Simmons is claiming Kubo's art as his own and selling it for money, reading manga for free on the internet or whatever (which is wrong, yeah) and that are two completely different things.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Not that i disagree with anything you say or anything, but:

If were talking manga, a week (in Kubo's case), and volumes of the weekly's usually have like 10 or 11 chapters in them, so how in the world does it take an artist 5 months to a year to make a volumes worth?, more like 2 to 3 months.Nick Simmons is claiming Kubo's art as his own and selling it for money, reading manga for free on the internet or whatever (which is wrong, yeah) and that are two completely different things.

Most manga and comic artists work on a monthly basis, so about 6 monthly installments in a volume means collected editions come out twice a year. If they're working in a bimonthly or quarterly magazine, that that's annual. In France, you have artists working at a pace of 2 or 3 pages a week or 8 pages a month in some magazines, or publishing just one or two 50 page albums a year. And worldwide, that's all if they're lucky enough to be working in comics full time, and don't have to work a parttime or fulltime job alongside their comics/manga/bd work.

[and before anyone says "But that's in France!"- Do manga artists deserve worse treatment from fans domestically because they're japanese? ]

[For that matter, does one artist deserve to be punished more by fans because he works at faster pace?]

Even then in weekly magazines, working on a book for 3 months is still a lot of time, and you have to work pretty much the entire time you are awake, and pay for numerous assistants, a studio space, art supplies, food, etc. so it's something that really depends on selling a lot of books around the world.

I'd say that both Simmons and scanalatgor fans share in the same basic crime- providing an illegitimate offering of Kubo's work, whether lying to fans about the origins of his work, or fans stealing his work online without paying for it. They have all this in common- Both rip him off.

[Hazard]

Most manga and comic artists work on a monthly basis, so about 6 monthly installments in a volume means collected editions come out twice a year.

Most comic books come out monthly true. Most manga however come out weekly.

Really, I fail to see what reading online manga has to do with plagiarism or why you keep pushing the subject so fervently.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Most comic books come out monthly true. Most manga however come out weekly.

Really, I fail to see what reading online manga has to do with plagiarism or why you keep pushing the subject so fervently.

Both are stealing from an artist. Both take advantage of him. And it's hypocritical for fans to find fault with one, yet ferociously defend another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_manga_magazines
And you need to do your homework, so check this out.
You have to scroll more then 1/2 way down the page to get to the 10 or so weekly mags [not all of which are still around], and I imagine Wiki might be missing some more obscure magazines.... weekly magazines are only a part of the output in Japan, and not the majority, and pretty much only consist of Shonen Manga, so you have 1/2 of the manga market that subsists on monthly magazines like Nakayoshi or Margaret

Also, as I mentioned before, the discussion of Incarnate has involved a lot of commentary from bloggers, reviewers and news sites regarding the hypocrisy of these fans getting up in arms when many of them read scanlations http://manga.about.com/b/2010/02/26/nick-simmons-bleach-manga-plagarism-scandal-rocks-the-comics-twitterverse.htm
This is a part of the overall discussion on this topic, and it does everyone a disservice not to discuss it.

[Hazard]

Both are stealing from an artist. Both take advantage of him. And it's hypocritical for fans to find fault with one, yet ferociously defend another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_manga_magazines
And you need to do your homework, so check this out.
You have to scroll more then 1/2 way down the page to get to the 10 or so weekly mags [not all of which are still around], and I imagine Wiki might be missing some more obscure magazines.... weekly magazines are only a part of the output in Japan, and not the majority, and pretty much only consist of Shonen Manga, so you have 1/2 of the manga market that subsists on monthly magazines like Nakayoshi or Margaret

Also, as I mentioned before, the discussion of Incarnate has involved a lot of commentary from bloggers, reviewers and news sites regarding the hypocrisy of these fans getting up in arms when many of them read scanlations http://manga.about.com/b/2010/02/26/nick-simmons-bleach-manga-plagarism-scandal-rocks-the-comics-twitterverse.htm
This is a part of the overall discussion on this topic, and it does everyone a disservice not to discuss it.

Well, imagine that there are lot of monthly manga magazines. You learn something new every day. Still I am pretty sure most tittles scanned are weeklies., or maybe it is just the stuff I read.

Yeah, I know you mentioned before. I reject it being hypocrisy and once again add that the way you keep pushing your point on every thread has gone way past annoying.

Seriously, I get your point. The way you are going on about it is just unpleasant.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Well, imagine that there are lot of monthly manga magazines. You learn something new every day. Still I am pretty sure most tittles scanned are weeklies., or maybe it is just the stuff I read.

I'd say it's just stuff you read. There's a lot of shojo manga being bootlegged out there as well, a lot of it licensed and available here.... I think I mentioned it before, but GoComi had issues with one scanlation aggregator putting up the entirety of their series After School Nightmare [a shojo manga from a monthly magazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_(magazine)) ]. This was after they had finished publishing the series, and it took several emails and cease and desist letters to have it taken down.

I'm simply pointing out errors in your logic- you and other have constantly brought up excuses for this kind of behaviour that have nothing to do with it's legality or morality [ie- "I have no money", "I'm impatient", "It's not fast enough"], or given reasons that can be easily disproved or discredited such as the above.

By pointing out errors in your argument, and correcting you to errors you might find with mine [such as the supposed lack of monthly magazines]. I underline how faulty the nature of it is, and hope to help you realize the errors, or at least let others reading the thread see the errors in your argument to help them better come to their own conclusions.

Finding my comments annoying do not change the validity of my argument, or the fact that we are allowed to discuss such things on this forum. I am not attacking anyone personally, I'm simply pointing out that doing something like stealing manga online is very similar to Simmon's actioins, and explaining the reason why it might be. People who defend one while condemning another are guilty of hypocrisy. It's your choice to do such things, and something I have no direct control over, and probably doesn't reflect your overall persona, but it is something that many regard as a problem and issue that needs to be discussed and dealth with.

I don't think that majority rules is a good way to promote discussion, and given the amount of activity against forum rules that was going on here, I think it's very valid to discuss these things given recent events.

[Hazard]

I'd say it's just stuff you read. There's a lot of shojo manga being bootlegged out there as well, a lot of it licensed and available here.... I think I mentioned it before, but GoComi had issues with one scanlation aggregator putting up the entirety of their series After School Nightmare [a shojo manga from a monthly magazine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_(magazine)) ]. This was after they had finished publishing the series, and it took several emails and cease and desist letters to have it taken down.

I'm simply pointing out errors in your logic- you and other have constantly brought up excuses for this kind of behaviour that have nothing to do with it's legality or morality [ie- "I have no money", "I'm impatient", "It's not fast enough"], or given reasons that can be easily disproved or discredited such as the above.

By pointing out errors in your argument, and correcting you to errors you might find with mine [such as the supposed lack of monthly magazines]. I underline how faulty the nature of it is, and hope to help you realize the errors, or at least let others reading the thread see the errors in your argument to help them better come to their own conclusions.

Finding my comments annoying do not change the validity of my argument, or the fact that we are allowed to discuss such things on this forum. I am not attacking anyone personally, I'm simply pointing out that doing something like stealing manga online is very similar to Simmon's actioins, and explaining the reason why it might be. People who defend one while condemning another are guilty of hypocrisy. It's your choice to do such things, and something I have no direct control over, and probably doesn't reflect your overall persona, but it is something that many regard as a problem and issue that needs to be discussed and dealth with.

I don't think that majority rules is a good way to promote discussion, and given the amount of activity against forum rules that was going on here, I think it's very valid to discuss these things given recent events.

Here is the thing. Nick Simmons is making money by stealing Kubo's work as fans of the guy naturally we get offended by that sort of thing. You say it is hypocrital of us fans to get angry because we read the manga online even though many of us still buy the volumes when it gets to our respective countries, not to mention we make no money of reading scanlations?

Yeah, I disagree with that on every single level.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Here is the thing. Nick Simmons is making money by stealing Kubo's work as fans of the guy naturally we get offended by that sort of thing. You say it is hypocrital of us fans to get angry because we read the manga online even though many of us still buy the volumes when it gets to our respective countries, not to mention we make no money of reading scanlations?

Yeah, I disagree with that on every single level.


And back to the cyclical argument- is every person reading scans online buying the books? You can't prove that, and even if they were, VIZ would certainly be selling a LOT more based on what I've seen of some of these websites membership numbers.

I am also well aware of the numerous manga publishers in Singapore, France, Germany, Italy, the UK, Australia, Canada, China, Korea (where scans of manga and manwha have become a major problem for the artistic industry), Spain, and some in South America, so it's not like people in other countries don't have options. Scanlations undermine a global market, and the ones your dealing with are in English, so in that case, you have every english-speaking country having a large number of titles available at retail or for import [which might cost a little more, but is not impossible]

Both instances affect his income (moreso bootlegging), affect his work, and affect the integrity of his copyrights.

And scanlation websites ARE making money off you guys- they have advertisements that show up everytime you click on hundreds and hundreds of pages. These websites can afford massive marketing schemes, and I see ads for them on numerous sites, so it's clear they're treating it all as a business. Your actions do have consequences.

Everything question you're asking of me has already been answered. If you are unable to connect the two, and it gives you that much cognitive dissonance, then it just shows this aspect of fandom is more troubling then I suspected, and that I shouldn't abandon discussing this issue whenever it demands attention.

Naturally, I get offended by this stuff, just as offended as I get from Simmons actions. Many people are offended when an artists rights and ability to make an income are impaired.

PS-- just looked around the YABS forums, and I think Gail brings up some really good points on the matter as a professional comics creator who has experienced piracy
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=10437814&postcount=1

PS---- I also think people should check out this post. Erika Friedman [of ALC Publishing/YuriCon] made this wonderful essay I just remembered about Fan Delusion, in all it's sinister forms.

http://okazu.blogspot.com/2009/03/fandom-fan-delusion-and-what-fans.html

Everyone should enjoy a Fan Delusion Pony

[OverMaster]

Here is the thing. Nick Simmons is making money by stealing Kubo's work as fans of the guy naturally we get offended by that sort of thing. You say it is hypocrital of us fans to get angry because we read the manga online even though many of us still buy the volumes when it gets to our respective countries, not to mention we make no money of reading scanlations?

Yeah, I disagree with that on every single level.

Hazard, please, just let it go. At this point, it's clear no one is going to convince anyone else to change their views here, so all we're doing is running in circles. If you think he's being nagging or patronizing, just put him in Ignore.

[Hazard]

Very well, I had no intentions of continuing arguing anyway.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Setting me to ignore means you might miss out on some valuable information in other threads, and it doesn't really change any of the issues I brought up. Still, if you wish to do so, that's your choice. I hope that everyone takes these issues into consideration, and works to be better fans in the future. I also hope that all this discussion will help others who come across it as they sort out their opinions on these issues.

PS- For the curious, Xenos has posted another thread on the YABS forum that has more comparison shots. Wow, epic light table abuse.

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=310130

EDIT--- Reading through the comments on about.com, Manga Editor William Flannigan [Negima] elaborates the reasons behind why I discuss these issues in a very concise way. I hope you guys can understand why I talk about these issues-

http://manga.about.com/b/2010/02/26/nick-simmons-bleach-manga-plagarism-scandal-rocks-the-comics-twitterverse.htm#comment-64

"@Melinda @Deb
Your purpose in arguing with the serial downloaders is not to try to convince THEM that their piracy hurts the creators. They are not open to changing their minds It’s to talk past them to those who may be on the fence to convince them that the pirates arguments are simply rationalizations to justify not paying money for a product that *should* be worth paying for.

To those who think Deb said that all readers of Bleach are downloading it, she didn’t. You inferred it — just like some of you are accusing others of doing to your words.

To those who think that piracy does or can help the creator or industry, the reality doesn’t bear this out. There are some who would never have bought the item, and some who will buy the item after reading it for free online. But the focus of anti-piracy is not on either one of these two groups. It’s on the third group that would have bought the item except that they were able to read it for free online. This is by no means a small group of people. This group murdered the anime industry and is murdering the manga industry as well.

Am I saying that the companies should *only* fight piracy? No. But fighting piracy as part of the business strategy is both morally and economically the right thing for the creators and companies to do."

[The Xenos]

Funny little note about scanlations. So a number of these copied panels from from volumes of Bleach that are not in the US yet. So if Simmons was copying these images, he must have downloaded them illegally as scanlations.

So, jump to his dad's Wikipedia page and there's this comment.
In June 2008, in an interview with AOL News, Simmons blamed those who upload and download copyrighted music for the hard times that the music industry is experiencing. Simmons was quoted as saying: "The record industry is dead. It's six feet underground and unfortunately the fans have done this. They've decided to download and file share. There is no record industry around so we're going to wait until everybody settles down and becomes civilized. As soon as the record industry pops its head up we'll record new material." This is not the first time that Simmons has blamed those who upload and download copyrighted music for the falling fortunes of the music industry. In a November 2007 interview, he is quoted as saying that "Every little college kid, every freshly-scrubbed little kid's face should have been sued off the face of the earth."[14]
Wonder how dad's gonna feel that his own kid's not only illegally downloading comics, but also copying images and lines from them.

[MKTerra]

You're overlooking things like the time it takes to negociate a contract for a license, the time it takes to have things approved by the domestic publisher/editorial team, the original artist, and the japanese publisher, the time to have a professional translator translate it (which may take more time and care than sometime aiming to get it done ASAP), the time to have a professional letter retouch sound effects and other elements in a print resolution (which is more time consuming than doing it at the low resolutions scanlators use), the time it takes to have all that formatted for printing, have a graphic designer modify the cover to suit domestic audience tastes (it would look wierd if you had the Hana to Yume generic cover design appearing on VIZ, CMX, and Tokyopop books), the time it takes to pay for the license, the time it takes to solicit it to a retailer, the time it takes to negociate for electronic rights so they can post a preview on their website or the time it takes to authorize a preview in a magazine, the time it takes to print it all and ship it to retailers, and the time it takes for you to save up the money to buy an 9 or 10 dollar book (somtimes less, like if you preorder it online at a discount, or go to a comic shop with a discount. That 10% can go a long way for savings)No, I'm aware of all those. I'm also aware of legit arrangements (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-11-17/tv-tokyo-to-also-stream-naruto-through-crunchyroll) like Crunchyroll which stream subtitled anime within an hour of its airing in Japan; some free, some for subscription. There's no reason the same couldn't be done with manga: do a quick scanslator-quality digital release for chapters, then take the time to refine it for the paper volume releases.

Where there are free, legal streams it's because someone took the trouble to pay for it, license it, and authorize it. Taking matters into your own hands isn't a way to spur on advancement ...Did you know Crunchyroll was illegit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crunchyroll) before it went legit? I think it's a prime example of piracy spurring legit distribution to evolve.

It's all like saying just because a light table makes it faster/easier/cheaper to draw comics that it's totally okay that Simmons traced Kubo's drawings, to relate things back to the topic.Except Simmons does not credit Kubo, and sold Incarnate for money. For all the talk of "intellectual property theft," people intuitively grasp that plagiarism is the act most akin to "intellectual theft," because it takes credit.

Edit: Or rather, taking credit is most akin to intellectual theft.

[Paploo the Ewok]

No, I'm aware of all those. I'm also aware of legit arrangements (http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-11-17/tv-tokyo-to-also-stream-naruto-through-crunchyroll) like Crunchyroll which stream subtitled anime within an hour of its airing in Japan; some free, some for subscription. There's no reason the same couldn't be done with manga: do a quick scanslator-quality digital release for chapters, then take the time to refine it for the paper volume releases.

Did you know Crunchyroll was illegit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crunchyroll) before it went legit? I think it's a prime example of piracy spurring legit distribution to evolve.

Except Simmons does not credit Kubo, and sold Incarnate for money. For all the talk of "intellectual property theft," people intuitively grasp that plagiarism is the act most akin to "intellectual theft," because it takes credit.

As I've pointed out, scanlation sites make money off of the translations scanlators pop out, so saying "scans don't make money" isn't a valid argument.

I'm well aware of Crunchy Roll's status- as I mentioned in the Aficando's thread when I brought them up, I don't care for their past, and in fact I was very much so not a fan when they were a bootlegging site, and not at all please when they got that massive venture capital deal.

But having seen the end results, including the complete removal of illegal content as they had promised, the numerous deals they struck in favour of the industry, I gave them a little bit more respect for that. I still find it a bit troubling, but I'll give them credit for pulling themselves out of the gutter, and finding a way to provide a similar service while doing so in a fair fashion. I have no problems with someone trying to see if these kinds of businesses can work, just as long as they do so in a fair fashion.


Lots of legal anime streaming sites like Sputnik7 [who used to offer Manga Ent and CPM catalogue titles in really low resolution streams- I remember Manga streaming X/1999 as a promotional event], Toonami Jetstream, and afew mothers have gone the way of the dodo, so good luck to them.

As such, I can't really accept your outrage at me using them as an example of legit streams.


As for manga being offered that way, some have tried with one website offering digital versions of older manga titles for a fee and asking translators to post their own scanlated editions on the site, which could then be purchased for an additional fee [don't have the link, but ANN had posted news about it], but that site seems to have closed a good while ago.

Erika Friedman makes a good point on why that is less likely to happen here-
http://manga.about.com/b/2010/02/26/nick-simmons-bleach-manga-plagarism-scandal-rocks-the-comics-twitterverse.htm#comment-80

"I’m a publisher and in the course of discussing licenses with several Japanese artists, they have unanimously stated that they loathe digital distribution. They don’t want their books read online, they dislike people who distribute their books digitally and in at least a few cases, demand that there is no electronic equivalent for the book. Because they know that once a thing is digitally available, someone will crack the device and steal the work.

One artist said to me, “I draw this story to be read on paper.”

Another told me that they put every line in place so that when people read it, it has a visual impact. Digital reproduction does not do that.È

There are already artists offering their work online for free or for a fee for you to read- it's called webcomics. Most manga artists create their work for print. I know when I create minicomics for print, I wouldn't appreciate someone scanning it and putting it all over the internet- I make them to sell at cons, as something special for my AA tables . It's made for that format, like my webcomics are made for the internet. It should be my choice, just as it should be japanese creators. DC's CMX line is partly comprised of webcomics from Flex, a japanese webcomics publisher, but those creators are compensated for their work when it appears online, and have agreed to place it online- for other works, they might prefer it be kept in print. Taking away the creators ability to control their work is one of the many issues I have against scanlations.

Scanlators and fans certainly aren't promoting an environment that's friendly to creators, so it will be hard to do so.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Funny little note about scanlations. So a number of these copied panels from from volumes of Bleach that are not in the US yet. So if Simmons was copying these images, he must have downloaded them illegally as scanlations.

So, jump to his dad's Wikipedia page and there's this comment.

Wonder how dad's gonna feel that his own kid's not only illegally downloading comics, but also copying images and lines from them.


Nice find Xenos, you kind of wonder what his parents will think about the issue.

[TwinPistols]

At this point, it's clear no one is going to convince anyone else to change their views here, so all we're doing is running in circles...

Which is really a shame if you look at it. You'd think that if someone had a view, and was presented with enough evidence, or logical discussion, leading a reasonable person to change that view, they'd have enough sense to do so. But that's not how this is working out.

You all are into scanlations for personal benefit whether it's because "they're just too expensive", or "I'm just looking until I can buy it later" you have a personal interest in continuing to do what you do. And if that means that an artist or publishers will loose money, or that those loses will cause the publishers to raise the prices on the rest of the honest paying customers, who are willing to wait until the work is translated, and shipped to the country, you don't care.

And even when your weak arguments and justifications are knocked down and defeated, one by one, you don't care. Frankly, if there wasn't the anonimity of the internet, I doubt any of you would have the stones to walk around saying you download manga illegally.

Just visiting a lot of those sites, and creating hits for them makes them money. And you're a part of that process??

I was done with this thread yesterday. I'm done with it today. I was going to return to the debate, but I'm not going to bother. I will say, that though I like Manga/Anime, part of me wished earlier that I'd kept more up to date with it, so I could come down here and chat with you guys. Now, I'm glad I didn't, because it's obvious from reading this thread that a lot of you aren't paying customers, whether you claim to be or not.

To me, the idea that some folks can call themselves "fans" and view illegally scanned comics is a sick joke. And it makes me want to vomit, frankly.


-Pistols :mad:

[Paploo the Ewok]

Thanks Twin Pistols, I appreciated your comments and that I wasn't the only one saying these things. And yes, there isn't much more to say one the issue.... I do find it interesting how different the opinions were between the Anime/Manga forum and a less niche board like the YABS forum http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=305922 It appears in general most CBR members and professionals aren't for copyright infringement, and it's a shame that the anime/manga forum has shut out a lot of posters by maintaining such opinions. I think it's becoming more clear what a good thing it's been to institute these changes, and wish I had take on the issue sooner than later.

I hope you do stop by again in the future Twin, as I've seen some other posters who haven't minded the changes, and we should work to encourage discussions for everyone on this forum, and make it a more welcoming place for the rest of CBR.

I'm pretty open about my opinions at conventions regarding bootlegs, in person and live, so there's some stones. I know when we had an avoid bootlegs which we purposely titled "How to Get Anime/Manga" panel I helped run, there was hardly a peep from anyone when I talked about how evil scanlations are, and the one person who complained about how he needed to do it to get Sports anime was pretty quiet after I provided him with an extensive list of sports anime and manga that's been translated and released on dvd [what would we do without you, Princess Nine? Champion Joe? Fighting Spirit?]. People tend to be reasonable when they're not hiding under a username.

[OverMaster]

And even when your weak arguments and justifications are knocked down and defeated, one by one, you don't care. Frankly, if there wasn't the anonimity of the internet, I doubt any of you would have the stones to walk around saying you download manga illegally.


Whatever. If you are willing to let this get you that personally, over the actions of a bunch of people you don't know and over the benefits of a bunch of another people you'll never know either (and who already make a lot of money regardless, often at the expense of people like underpaid and exploited Korean animators, might I say, plus our arguments on them not being hit that much if at all anyway already having been made in any case) then I foresee you having a hard time pretty much anywhere else in the Internet regardless. Or in real life, even. Good luck with your future endeavors in other boards all the same.

[Paploo the Ewok]

http://mangabookshelf.com/2010/02/28/confessions-of-a-former-scan-junkie/ Here's an interesting read from blogger Melissa Beasi, in reaction to comments on the About.com blog.

An excerpt, though Melissa covers a lot of bases, so be sure to read it all-
"In the end, the pro-scanlation crowd had turned me against them to the point where I not only could no longer see any merit in what they were saying, but was frankly disgusted by the idea of being part of the same fan community."

Why is she disgusted? Here's part of a twitter, one of many she posted in her essay-
" I’m not sure about you, but I for one hold artists to a different standard. IMO, true artists care more about spreading their art/ideas, rather than making money"

Now do you see why I might get kind of peeved off at fans of this sort? You can probably guess any artists reaction to that, and you could probably never repeat it on this forum.

It looks like there's still a lot of conversation about this scandal and it's related elements, also popping up at AnimeVice
http://www.animevice.com/news/required-reading-plagiarism-fanart-and-scanlations/3875/

[Len Ikari145]

SO ANYWAY, any further update regarding the original topic?

[Paploo the Ewok]

SO ANYWAY, any further update regarding the original topic?

Len, with the Incarnate issues leading Deb Aoki to make her comments regarding scanlations, which lead me linking and discussing those aspects here, it's become a valid part of the ongoing discussion of this subject.

A large amount of online discsussion is occuring about these issues due to Incarnate's controversy, so I think it'd be ignorant of us to overlook this aspect. It's all part of the original topic, even if it might seem not to be for some posters. I think it would do the community as a whole a disservice not to talk about them. I'm saying all this throug a nasty cold, so please bear with me....

Here's some more updates to the discussion-

http://www.mangablog.net/?p=7230 Mangablog has posted a roundup of links, including some I hadn't encountered before....
like this link from Scott VonSchilling relating to his past research into fansubs....
http://www.rocketbomber.com/2010/02/27/showing-up-late-to-the-great-mangaanimescanfansubp2p-debate

[Kevin M.]

SO ANYWAY, any further update regarding the original topic?


Nothing new on the original matter as of yet. Nick Simmons hasn't issued anything new on the matter.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Nothing new on the original matter as of yet. Nick Simmons hasn't issued anything new on the matter.

Again just because you think it's irrelevant doesn't mean I shouldn't post it. But anyhoo-

Tidbits I'm not sure we've commented on that have surfaced, which were in some of the links I've posted, and are also on the Robot6 article here on CBR-
-he used an a studio of artists as "assistants" so it appears he may not of drawn anything at all, and might just of made the mistake of hiring the wrong people [and of crediting himself as the artist when he didn't draw anything, which'll still leave a bad taste in everyones mouths].

I think the fact that the facebook account might of been a sockpuppet of someonelse pretending to be him has been mentioned.

[Paploo the Ewok]

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2010-03-01/incarnate-simmons-addresses-alleged-bleach-copying

Looks like Simmons put out what can best be termed a non-reply to the issues. No admitting wrongdoing. Curious to see what he does next.

[Ragnorok64]

Good lord, I practically had to skip the last 4 pages of this thread to find anything relevant to the original topic.

I couldn't view the links to the comparisons at work but now that I'm at home, I gotta say, how long did he think he could make it before anyone noticed?

[Paploo the Ewok]

Good lord, I practically had to skip the last 4 pages of this thread to find anything relevant to the original topic.

I couldn't view the links to the comparisons at work but now that I'm at home, I gotta say, how long did he think he could make it before anyone noticed?

Apparently ComicsWorthReading got the word first. CWR initially linked to it because of all the scanlations talk at other blogs, so there's somethign to tie some relevance on for you.

http://comicsworthreading.com/2010/03/01/nick-simmons-releases-statement-takes-no-responsibility/comment-page-1/#comment-109455

The more I read it, it contains no actual admitting of wrong doing, talk about how big of a fan he is, and talks of how the stealing was only "percieved".

Which is kind of how scanlation fans describe/defend downloading manga, so there you go.

Anyhoo, it's not something that fans are going to swallow easily, and I'm surprised he hadn't been more clear one way or the other. Radical's certainly handled it well, so kudos to them, hope they find better deals in the future.

[The Xenos]

So if I pay homage to Kiss by doing a recording of some of their songs and give no credit to them at all and say that I created “God Gave Rock & Roll to Me” myself, Nick’s dad won’t mind? I mean it’s just a homage. Oh and I never bought the Kiss album, just downloaded it on a torrent and then sampled it into my own version of the song.

Also if you download my stuff and steal my songs I expect you to pay. In cash. Spank you very much.

[shanejayell]

The mods might want to split off the whole 'scanlation' discussion. Up to them, of course.


I think someone needs to explain to Nick that 'homage' and 'copy' are not the same thing. I hope Radical (that's the company, right?) doesn't keep publishing this tripe.

[mgs]

I hope Radical (that's the company, right?) doesn't keep publishing this tripe.
apparently, they stopped asap.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I too am glad Radical stopped publishing, and gives them a bit of class. They're probably staying as far away from anything Nick says as possible.

The mods might want to split off the whole 'scanlation' discussion. Up to them, of course.



People can discuss the issue to illegal scans if they want. It is a part of the manga industry.

Xenos also made reference to how he would feel if people stole his songs online, tying it into discussing how Simmons would likely feel about people stealing his stuff either through plagirism or downloads.

What some people do by stealing comics online is pretty similar to someboy misappopriating a given work and using it without the creators permission like Nick does. When you guys say you're doing nothing wrong, and shouldn't be called out for it, you make the same statement as Nick Simmons just made- and it's something that tends to piss off fans of a creators work they see being abused. By your policies, we should all just pat Simmons on the back and tell it's Aok.

I wonder how much more cost is added to manga/comicbooks based on paying for the legal work required to combat bootlegging and illegal downloads compared to having to combat plagirism?

[Wildbird]

I don't know if anyone's linked to the topic that started all of this, so I will:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/genmessage.php?board=206&topic=53603878

[MKTerra]

Wikipedia elaborates:
Plagiarism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism) is not the same as copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship.There's an intuitive distinction in what is being taken, which is why people can smell the fish when you go around trying to equate the two. It's not a winning tack for changing minds.

[Len Ikari145]

Well, here's Nick's official statement on the issue:http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2010/03/incarnate-creator-nick-simmons-responds-to-plagiarism-allegations/

Rob Liefeld would be proud.-_-

[Ze Shoopuf]

I admit, I didn't read the whole thread but I have read about this incident and I just wanted to come tell my views about it.

I think this thing has been blown out of proportion. Sure, it's wrong to trace and plagiarize but a lot of people are bitching about Simmons using same compositions as some other comics and making characters too similar to other characters (I think the guy with the glasses has been compared to at least three other characters, from Hellsing, FMA and One Piece - if the character is so similar to all these characters that it's plagiarizing, doesn't it mean that the manga artists of Hellsing, FMA and One Piece have also plagiarized each other?). Someone also said that Mot is like a copy of L but their only similarities are pale skin, being thin (yeah, this is reeeeally rare in manga) and having messy black hair. Meaning that if I create a a big-breasted redheaded character, I'm plagiarizing Bleach?

And the thing with using the same compositions, I mean, what the hell? Of course it's not plagiarism to use a similar composition as in some other comic. It's called taking influences. If you read a comic and see a picture that works really well because of its composition and then create a picture with a similar composition, it's far from copying. No artist owns the copyright just for a type of image ("Yeah, I own the copyright for a guy standing with his feet widely apart, looking up and pointing at the stars with the angle being from the upwards!").

Sure, some of the image are quite clearly traced and that I do not accept, but I even saw someone accusing him of plagiarizing Hellsing because he had a close-up of a vampire-styled eye, like Hellsing, and that is too much. Someone also accused him of copying Neon Genesis Evangelion because he had an upward shot of a girl (the Orihime copy) leaning on her arms and crying, as did NGE. Someone even lined up the images and said that Simmons had traced the picture even though the lines didn't match at all.

I think people just want to accuse him more because he has a rich daddy and got published and they're jealous. Sure, he's done wrong and he should admit it, but people are really overreacting and trying to find faults in all of his images, not just the one he cearly copied.

[Kevin M.]

Well, here's Nick's official statement on the issue:http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2010/03/incarnate-creator-nick-simmons-responds-to-plagiarism-allegations/

Rob Liefeld would be proud.-_-


So, he went from "I didn't know Bleach existed" to "I was just honoring my favorite Mangaka"?

[Inkthinker]

It seems apparent that the Livejournal postings were faked by someone trolling in an active attempt to blow this up a little further. I mean..."magma"? C'mon.

Simmons himself was probably told by his lawyers/handlers to clam up. I expect even the statement released was carefully prepared, rather than a genuine statement by the person in question.

[Sound Silence]

It's one thing to make a homage to a character. (see M. Bison and Yasunori Kato).
It's even one thing to totally rip off a character, as long as you do your own thing with it (see: various Superman clones).
It's also one thing to make a homage to certain image using the same poses (i.e. homage/parodies of famous comic book covers and such).
It's one thing to use a given image for a reference for your own drawing. (artists have done that since times immemorial).

But using near-identical character designs, in near identical panels, that TOTALLY look traced, and calling it your own?

Yeah. That's something else.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Wikipedia elaborates:
There's an intuitive distinction in what is being taken, which is why people can smell the fish when you go around trying to equate the two. It's not a winning tack for changing minds.

Let's ask someone OTHER than Wikipedia, which is a nonauthorative source given anyone can write it. Wiki constantly changes, so from all you know some 8 year old wrote that.

Let's ask someone authorative, like say, a University.

http://www.lib.uconn.edu/copyright/plagiarismVsCopyright.html

"It is possible to plagiarize without violating copyright, and it is possible to infringe on another's copyright without plagiarizing. It is also possible to both plagiarize and violate copyright at the same time. "


Going over the definitions, I'd say that Nick is guilty of both plagirism and copyright infringement. He didn't attribute the author, and he also stole ideas, borrowing large chunks of Bleach to create his comic, then distributed it to the masses without the author's permission, which is illegal, even when the author is credited.

Ergo, this is a case that is both plagirism and copyright infringement, so when you download scanlations, you do some but not all of the same stuff to Kubo as Simmons has. So you're not as guilty, buy still pretty guilty.

[Lightsnake]

By your logic, reading it in the bookstore and deciding not to buy it is just as bad. Kindly spare us.

[OverMaster]

By your logic, reading it in the bookstore and deciding not to buy it is just as bad. Kindly spare us.

Well, if you believe the store owners... Yowsa.

A fairer comparison, to some degree, would be those 'manga libraries' they often have in conventions. It allows you a through reading to see if you are interested on buying without directly harming anyone else's sellings.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Well, if you believe the store owners... Yowsa.

A fairer comparison, to some degree, would be those 'manga libraries' they often have in conventions. It allows you a through reading to see if you are interested on buying without directly harming anyone else's sellings.

Reading an entire book in a store is rude, and is probably something that will get you kicked out. Downloading it is more akin to shoplifting it though.

Bringing libraries into the debate is unfair- they purchased that copy of the book that can only be read by one person at a time, and in some countries everytime it's checked out the author gets royalties. It's not like they can keep it forever. Scanning a book is making unlimited copies of that book. Those manga conventions pay for those books, and it's only a limited portion of a series being offered....it's also a legitimate way to offer a book. You are lending a copy the author has been compensated for.

NOT creating/downloading a new one they haven't been compensated for. I wouldn't try that dicussion on Kurt Busiek if I were you.

You're just muddling the discussion and dodging the issues since you can't argue against Simmon's doings not being a form of copyright infringement.

[The Xenos]

Well, CBR asked an actual legal professional about the case here:
http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=25053

By your logic, reading it in the bookstore and deciding not to buy it is just as bad. Kindly spare us.Actually, having seen some of the brats that clog up aisles in bookstores sitting down as if it was their private library? Hmm.. I think it is worse than downloading. At least there you keep your lazy autistic ass at home while mooching instead of clogging up a bookstore's aisle. I thought people were joking until I started looking at these book chains and sure enough there they were, the flotsam and jetsam of the manga aisle. No wonder I stick to comic shops for manga.

Anyway, I still think the whole scanlation issue is tangential to this. If anything someone could bring up fan art at cons more relevantly than scanlations in this debate over what Simmons did.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Anyway, I still think the whole scanlation issue is tangential to this. If anything someone could bring up fan art at cons more relevantly than scanlations in this debate over what Simmons did.

I find they are related, but a lot of what's fueling the discussion, and bothering me, is how enraged a group of fans is about one, while not caring about the other, when both affect the artist in a negative fashion. That's what it all boils down to for me.

They're both important issues in artists rights, so why be so overreactive about one while flaunting your total lack of care for another? The issue would never of common up if copyright infringement weren't such a problem in anime fandom. It's part of an overall lack of caring about these issue on the internet that enables people like Nick Simmons to feel free to do things like swipe artwork. If no one cares about the writers copyright, will they care much if we steal their artwork and put it on a tshirt? This is the crux of the issue to me, and what outright disturbs me.

edit - thanks for the link Xenos, this is fascinating stuff. I think the point about how most cartoonists can't afford to take on plagirists and infringers is a noteable one- i'm curious if we'll ever see this result in legal action since VIZ should be able to, though I imagine Radical's doing what they can to avoid that.

[Lightsnake]

Reading an entire book in a store is rude, and is probably something that will get you kicked out. Downloading it is more akin to shoplifting it though.
No, it really isn't. It's akin to borrowing. If I borrow a copy of Blade of the Immortal 21 from a friend and then decide not to buy it myself, have I stolen it?
With scans, the physical scanned copy has generally been bought and pain for. There is nothing to shoplift because there is no trangible item to remove.

Bringing libraries into the debate is unfair- they purchased that copy of the book that can only be read by one person at a time, and in some countries everytime it's checked out the author gets royalties. It's not like they can keep it forever. Scanning a book is making unlimited copies of that book. Those manga conventions pay for those books, and it's only a limited portion of a series being offered....it's also a legitimate way to offer a book. You are lending a copy the author has been compensated for.
'In some countries,' and you're aware a good deal of libraries now have digital material as well, leading to 'unlimited' copies, right? Some authors allow downloads of their books under a caveat of not to resell them for profit-and I know no scanner who tries to make money off what they do.
But that aside, If I read a chapter in WSJ and decide not to buy it, by your logic, I've stolen it. If I borrow it from a friend, read it and give it back, it's been stolen.
Another issue you overlook is scanned copies do not magically appear. The copy that was scanned? It was bought.


NOT creating/downloading a new one they haven't been compensated for. I wouldn't try that dicussion on Kurt Busiek if I were you.
....relevance?

[Paploo the Ewok]

.... you are aware that libraries are paying licenses and royalties for that digital material, which will sometimes include DRM (often you can't print PDF's or convert them to word files if the author excercises that right).

Everytime you access an article on a database that library is paying for, or download an ebook they're offering, the author is compensated, and it's an act being done so with the authors permission.The amount libraries pay for some databases is more then some peoples entire annual income.
While it's free to you at a public library, it's not for the library, and it's coming out of your taxes. And for academic libraries, it's part of your college tuition, so if you're a student, use it, you're paying for it.

(I'm the last person you should try to bring the "but libraries..." argument up to)


I'm not saying downloading is a bad thing- if it's legal, the number of times you can copy it are determined by the author (ie- never, 5 times, forever etc) and you compensate the author for it and it's all done with their permission, it's GOLDEN.

If it's unliminited, illicit, and without their permission, like say scanlations, in that case it's horrible, awful, and corrupt.

[Lightsnake]

.... you are aware that libraries are paying licenses and royalties for that digital material, which will sometimes include DRM (often you can't print PDF's or convert them to word files if the author excercises that right).
You are aware that doesn't change my point? Your point was partially how they can only be read by one person at a time. That's not only demonstratively false when online copies are introduces and misses a good deal of the rest of my points


Everytime you access an article on a database that library is paying for, or download an ebook they're offering, the author is compensated, and it's an act being done so with the authors permission.The amount libraries pay for some databases is more then some peoples entire annual income.
While it's free to you at a public library, it's not for the library, and it's coming out of your taxes. And for academic libraries, it's part of your college tuition, so if you're a student, use it, you're paying for it.

and none of this changes the tiny fact that I myself can easily choose not to pay for it, which is another loss to their profits, or I can just borrow it from a friend.


(I'm the last person you should try to bring the "but libraries..." argument up to)
Presumably because you don't realize the abject hypocrisy of your own arguments. I understand that completely


I'm not saying downloading is a bad thing- if it's legal, the number of times you can copy it are determined by the author (ie- never, 5 times, forever etc) and you compensate the author for it and it's all done with their permission, it's GOLDEN.

And when it comes to material I'd rather check out on my first before deciding to buy it, that's not available in English save for being subbed or scanned...


If it's unliminited, illicit, and without their permission, like say scanlations, in that case it's horrible, awful, and corrupt.

Get over yourself, thanks. Again, by your inane logic, reading a few pages in the bookstore is just as corrupt. Or lending it to a friend.

Of course your argument completely ignores that the scanner is simply lending it out to as many people as they choose with what they do with a copy they have legally obtained, though I'm sure you'd side with with the RIAA's similar stance of "transferring a CD's songs you own to your computer is corrupt."

[Paploo the Ewok]

You are aware that doesn't change my point? Your point was partially how they can only be read by one person at a time. That's not only demonstratively false when online copies are introduces and misses a good deal of the rest of my points

and none of this changes the tiny fact that I myself can easily choose not to pay for it, which is another loss to their profits, or I can just borrow it from a friend.

And when it comes to material I'd rather check out on my first before deciding to buy it, that's not available in English save for being subbed or scanned...

Again, by your inane logic, reading a few pages in the bookstore is just as corrupt. Or lending it to a friend.

What I said wasn't that you multiple people couldn't read an Ebook. Multiple can read that electronic resource. It's just that everytime a person reads it, it's compensated for.

When a library has an ebook or an electronic article on a database, everytime that item is accessed, it is treated as a new copy, and the author is compensated with royalties.
They pay an annual fee for this service, which is used to compensate the authors and pay for the infrastructure involved.

This is completely different from scanlations, where the author is never compensated when the material is accessed, and the material can be made into new copies an infinite number of times.

I didn't say reading a few pages of a book in a bookstore was bad- I said reading the entirety of it in a bookstore is rude. In a library, it would also be somewhat rude (though not as much of a deal), as it's better to check it out first, which will boost the library's circulation statistics, and increase the amount of their funding they choose to dedicate to similar books- everytime you checkout manga from a library, it results in them buying more manga.

These are all perfectly fair systems authors and publishers agree too, support and profit directly on, while illegal scans of their works are not.

You lending a copy of your book to a friend is perfectly fine- you or the person who gave it to you paid for it, and obtained it in a fair fashion. At some point, the author was compensated for that specific copy.

They are not compensated with a scan of their work, which is a brand new copy that they are not compensated for.

[MKTerra]

Sure, some of the image are quite clearly traced and that I do not accept, but I even saw someone accusing him of plagiarizing Hellsing because he had a close-up of a vampire-styled eye, like Hellsing, and that is too much. Someone also accused him of copying Neon Genesis Evangelion because he had an upward shot of a girl (the Orihime copy) leaning on her arms and crying, as did NGE. Someone even lined up the images and said that Simmons had traced the picture even though the lines didn't match at all.

I think people just want to accuse him more because he has a rich daddy and got published and they're jealous. Sure, he's done wrong and he should admit it, but people are really overreacting and trying to find faults in all of his images, not just the one he cearly copied.I do agree that people really started scraping the bottom of the barrel after all the good examples were weeded out. With the sheer abundance of blatant ones to pick from, there really wasn't a need to dilute the case with dumber, stretchier accusations.

[Lightsnake]

What I said wasn't that you multiple people couldn't read an Ebook. Multiple can read that electronic resource. It's just that everytime a person reads it, it's compensated for.

According to...? And if I decide to download a copy of Dracula on my own without compensating Modern Library?


When a library has an ebook or an electronic article on a database, everytime that item is accessed, it is treated as a new copy, and the author is compensated with royalties.
They pay an annual fee for this service, which is used to compensate the authors and pay for the infrastructure involved.
And that downloaded copy cam be taken, pasted elsewhere- and quite a few times is. There also isn't much by way of that in regards to scholarly journal articles.


This is completely different from scanlations, where the author is never compensated when the material is accessed, and the material can be made into new copies an infinite number of times.

And again you ignore the tiny detail the original buyer of the material has paid for it. As far as I'm concerned, they can do with it as they will


I didn't say reading a few pages of a book in a bookstore was bad- I said reading the entirety of it in a bookstore is rude.
According to whom, precisely?


In a library, it would also be somewhat rude (though not as much of a deal), as it's better to check it out first, which will boost the library's circulation statistics, and increase the amount of their funding they choose to dedicate to similar books- everytime you checkout manga from a library, it results in them buying more manga.
Hence why I use libraries, great. And with scanlations, reading more of them results in the scanners buying more manga and more people getting involved in a series and possibly buying more themselves. The people who don't buy at all aren't the type to buy if it wasn't online anyways


These are all perfectly fair systems authors and publishers agree too, support and profit directly on, while illegal scans of their works are not.
That is where we differ, given you seem to have a serious aversion to recognizing any flaw or disconnect in your argument


You lending a copy of your book to a friend is perfectly fine- you or the person who gave it to you paid for it, and obtained it in a fair fashion. At some point, the author was compensated for that specific copy.
Just like with scans! Or do you think the scanners are so nefarious they steal into the author's home in the dead of night, kick their dog and perhaps frighten their children for good measure before absconding with their precious manuscripts?
Or do they scan what they buy?


They are not compensated with a scan of their work, which is a brand new copy that they are not compensated for.

Actually, it's a replication of an item that was compensated for. Scanned items? They're bought and paid for.

And again, is there a reason this holy attitude applies to items I am incapable of buying to read?

[Paploo the Ewok]

I'm pretty sure Dracula is public domain, so there's lots of free copies of it out there. Bram Stoker is long dead, so there's nothing wrong with that.

Obviously you can paste it into your papers, but did you know everytime you cite an article, the author is compensated for it?
http://www.accesscopyright.ca/Default.aspx?id=18

And of course, "scholarly journal articles" are the primary content of the databases I've been talking about.

http://schoolgirlmilkycrisis.com/blog/?p=992 Jonathan Clements of School Girl Milky Crisis, a longtime author and translator, gives us some anime themed examples of this compensation, this time with the British library/academic system

"On my ALCS statement this February, for example, I see that someone in Australia has been teaching lessons with the aid of photocopies from my children’s book Chinese Life. Bits of Schoolgirl Milky Crisis and articles from Newtype USA and NEO are turning up in lectures all around the world, and when they are photocopied, I often get a modest stipend."

Even if you're quoting from a print edition, the article's author is still compensated. Not citing the quote is plagirism, and an attempt not to acknowledge/compensate the author, and why you can be expelled if you plagirise (to tie things back to Incarnate's theme).

The buyer of the original scanlation paid for the copy they used to create the copy yes. But they did not pay for the new copy they created by scanning it, or the subsequent copies in uploading, distributing, and others downloading it.

Reading an entire book in a bookstore is rude according to booksellers, and the people trying to climb over you so they can buy the book next to your butt. There's even a deragatory term for it in manga's case- Manga Cows.


When a library system notices that Naruto Vol.1 is popular, and often checked out (on a 3 week basis, up to 17 times a year, if no one renews or is late) , they order more copies..... of Naruto Vol.1, alongside subsequent volumes. They put more copies into circulation.

When a scanlation of Naruto Vol.1 is downloaded one million times, that scanlation resulted in the creator of the scan buying..... 1 copy.
Not quite the same thing.

And a tangent-
Saying "but then it made people buy a print version" isn't valid, as with a library you'd still see more copies bought per capita (people who read it buying their own copy, plus the library buying more copies due to it's popularity)
With scanlations, they can just keep the copy of the scanlation- they don't have to buy their own copy if they want to have a copy of their own. If they just kept checking out the librarie's copy (or in a worse case scenario, stole it from the library to keep forever), it would still probably result in the library buying more copies.
The core point is libraries/universities compensate for each and every copy.
Illegal downloads don't.

[Lightsnake]

I'm pretty sure Dracula is public domain, so there's lots of free copies of it out there. Bram Stoker is long dead, so there's nothing wrong with that.
So it's okay to download material from dead authors then? So I should feel free to download anything by Jack Kirby of course?


Obviously you can paste it into your papers, but did you know everytime you cite an article, the author is compensated for it?
http://www.accesscopyright.ca/Default.aspx?id=18

Everytime you CITE an article? I think you should chekc up on that...


And of course, "scholarly journal articles" are the primary content of the databases I've been talking about.
Yeah, and they aren't always compensated nearly as much as you claim


http://schoolgirlmilkycrisis.com/blog/?p=992 Jonathan Clements of School Girl Milky Crisis, a longtime author and translator, gives us some anime themed examples of this compensation, this time with the British library/academic system

"On my ALCS statement this February, for example, I see that someone in Australia has been teaching lessons with the aid of photocopies from my children’s book Chinese Life. Bits of Schoolgirl Milky Crisis and articles from Newtype USA and NEO are turning up in lectures all around the world, and when they are photocopied, I often get a modest stipend."

Even if you're quoting from a print edition, the article's author is still compensated. Not citing the quote is plagirism, and an attempt not to acknowledge/compensate the author, and why you can be expelled if you plagirise (to tie things back to Incarnate's theme).
Photocopies doesn't equate to quoting...and again,l just ties back in to the tiny detail that scanners bought the books


The buyer of the original scanlation paid for the copy they used to create the copy yes. But they did not pay for the new copy they created by scanning it, or the subsequent copies in uploading, distributing, and others downloading it.
Sure they did. They own the copy they have purchased, they choose to scan it in. Such a replica is not an exact, tangible copy and thus can be distributed at their leisure with the author already compensated for the initial copy.


Reading an entire book in a bookstore is rude according to booksellers, and the people trying to climb over you so they can buy the book next to your butt. There's even a deragatory term for it in manga's case- Manga Cows.
And I should care about the booksellers' feelings why in that case? They are putting the product out, it's my choice to decide what to do with it.


When a library system notices that Naruto Vol.1 is popular, and often checked out (on a 3 week basis, up to 17 times a year, if no one renews or is late) , they order more copies..... of Naruto Vol.1, alongside subsequent volumes. They put more copies into circulation.
likewise with scanning, which also gets more people tor ead and almost invariably encourages them to buy


When a scanlation of Naruto Vol.1 is downloaded one million times, that scanlation resulted in the creator of the scan buying..... 1 copy.
Not quite the same thing.
Same principle behind it. Of course, your standards change depending on the minor details.
Not only is 'one million times' hideous hyperbole, but a good deal of the people who read it could very well be inspired to check out official releases.
Your claims the author is not compensated is purely false, given scanners have to buy it. Heck, you'd probably find mos tpeople get into series first via scans and those who just read the scans and buy nothing wouldn't buy it anyways.


And a tangent-
Saying "but then it made people buy a print version" isn't valid, as with a library you'd still see more copies bought per capita (people who read it buying their own copy, plus the library buying more copies due to it's popularity)
And hey, not everyone has the same copies in the library. Again, does it come down to morla principle or to numbers, because you claim the former, but your argument relies on the latter


With scanlations, they can just keep the copy of the scanlation- they don't have to buy their own copy if they want to have a copy of their own. If they just kept checking out the librarie's copy (or in a worse case scenario, stole it from the library to keep forever), it would still probably result in the library buying more copies.
The core point is libraries/universities compensate for each and every copy.
Illegal downloads don't.
Except they do, because everything that was scanlated was bought and paid for.
Thought about you while reading the new Negima, by the by.
And yes, they keep the scanlation. Of course you ignore it's far more rewarding to read it in print and many people will prefer reading the print version to support the industry to make sure they get more. Because, if you haven't noticed, the English manga are behind- unless you also think reading spoilers is wrong and evil.

And you keep evading the point that a huge portion of manga are only available in English because of scans. Unless your response to anyone wanting to read Vinland Saga would be "Screw you, learn Japanese and import it..."

[Paploo the Ewok]

"So it's okay to download material from dead authors then? So I should feel free to download anything by Jack Kirby of course?

Jack's may be dead, but his family is guaranteed any of the income that would of gone to him for a certain number of years after his death [75 years? I think it may be longer now].
So don't download his stuff. They will probably sue you. And in the case of his Marvel creations, being owned by Marvel, they will stay copyrighted as long as Marvel is in business and continues using those characters (though at some point, like Betty Boop cartoons, Fantastic Four #1 may become public domain. Though probably not until after we're all long, long dead], with compensation past copyright date depending on how future government legislation,legal litigation between Marvel and Kirby's family, and contracts go.

Bran Stoker has been dead for centuries, so go to town. Shakespeare is good to go too. Just make sure you're downloading a public domain edition-- illustrations and complimentary texts may still be copyrighted. Like say, the Jill Thompson painted cover of IDW's new edition of Alice in Wonderland. Alice is public domain, but Jill's drawing of her isn't.



"Everytime you CITE an article? I think you should chekc up on that..."

No it's true- why do you think you're asked to cite it? It's one of the reasons they ask to do so. The quote I listed above from Clements is an example of this in action. Universities use works cited, document delivery requests, and database statistics to keep track of what's been copied.


"Yeah, and they aren't always compensated nearly as much as you claim"

They're compensated something. Which is better than nothing. The money I get from my webcomic publisher for adrates based on the number of hits I have [a similar phenomenon to this- basically, I get paid an eeeesssy bit everytime someone clicks on a page of my comic] pays for my art supplies, which enable me to make the comic. Which is a good feeling.


"Photocopies doesn't equate to quoting...and again,l just ties back in to the tiny detail that scanners bought the books"

But they are a new copy. Which is what a scan is. A brand new copy of the book, just an edition in digital format, which is something publishers and authors still have to be compensated for, hence why having a scholarly article database is expensive, and something they pay for annually to continue paying for new "copies" with each new access.


"Sure they did. They own the copy they have purchased, they choose to scan it in. Such a replica is not an exact, tangible copy and thus can be distributed at their leisure with the author already compensated for the initial copy."

It is an exact, tangible copy. One composed of electronic information on your computer. Which is created over and over as a new copy each time it is accessed online.


"And I should care about the booksellers' feelings why in that case? They are putting the product out, it's my choice to decide what to do with it. "

Because they provide you a service, and by sitting there taking up space you are causing other customers who might buy books to be uncomfortable and not browse that section. Be polite, it never hurts. It's also their choice to boot you off your premises, with security guards for extra embarassment, or take a photo of you and put it up in their employee lounge so they can keep an eye on you. It happens a lot in retail.


"likewise with scanning, which also gets more people tor ead and almost invariably encourages them to buy"

No it doesn't. They might buy sometimes, but they aren't compensating the author for the copy they read, and are free not to not buy if they don't want to. Which a lot of people do- apparently they feel like donating their money to scanlation hosting sites is a better option then putting that money towards a book.


"Not only is 'one million times' hideous hyperbole, but a good deal of the people who read it could very well be inspired to check out official releases. "

How many members does a well known scanlation site named after a certain orange ninja have? About one million. Won't post a link to it, or name it, because that's against forum policy, but yeah, it's scary to think that.

It's also common to see popular torrents listed as being accessed- just look at the hits an episode of Naruto gets on YouTube before it gets taken down, all accesses the authors aren't compensated for.


"Your claims the author is not compensated is purely false, given scanners have to buy it. Heck, you'd probably find mos tpeople get into series first via scans and those who just read the scans and buy nothing wouldn't buy it anyways."

They buy it, then make a new copy. Said new copy is not compensated for.


"And hey, not everyone has the same copies in the library. Again, does it come down to morla principle or to numbers, because you claim the former, but your argument relies on the latter"

Then in that case, they can do the fair thing and buy the book. Or give interbranch loans a try first.


"Of course you ignore it's far more rewarding to read it in print and many people will prefer reading the print version to support the industry to make sure they get more."

No I don't. That's what I keep telling people to do.

"Because, if you haven't noticed, the English manga are behind- unless you also think reading spoilers is wrong and evil."

How is impatience a justification? It doesn't make a wrong act right. It's like saying I was too impatient to wait for the store to open, so I broke a window and stole some Pop and Chips. You'll still get busted.

I don't think reading spoilers is evil. Reading a review isn't reading a copy of a book. It's reading someone's thoughts on it [incidentally, a review is copyrighted to it's writer]

"And you keep evading the point that a huge portion of manga are only available in English because of scans. Unless your response to anyone wanting to read Vinland Saga would be "Screw you, learn Japanese and import it..."

It's called "wait for the manga to be available in an authorized english edition".

It's not like it's a right to be able to read a given work.

Incidentally, I've studied Japanese at an academic level. It's pretty interesting to do, and hey, I have some imported japanese manga I can sort of read :) It's the gift of knowledge that keeps on giving, in mounds of japanese edition manga. I need to practice more though, since I only took it for a year. Toshyokan wa asoko dewa arimasen. Toshyokan wa koko desu. Ikimashyo!

[Brandon Hanvey]

I thought this was a interesting take on things referencing Yukito Kishiro's "homage" of Frank Miller's Elektra in Battle Angel Alita.

http://www.gottsu-iiyan.ca/gib/index.php/2010/03/02/double-standard

[Hazard]

I thought this was a interesting take on things referencing Yukito Kishiro's "homage" of Frank Miller's Elektra in Battle Angel Alita.

http://www.gottsu-iiyan.ca/gib/index.php/2010/03/02/double-standard

That was interesting. In my opinion though the Battle Angel Alita scene is different enough to allow it. The last ninja has a different weapon and a completely different position.

The positions are similar but the art is different, the clothes are different, and it was obviously not traced.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I thought this was a interesting take on things referencing Yukito Kishiro's "homage" of Frank Miller's Elektra in Battle Angel Alita.

http://www.gottsu-iiyan.ca/gib/index.php/2010/03/02/double-standard

Yeah, I just saw that on MangaBlog. Pretty damning, as Japan has lots of Rob Liefelds of it's own. I love Alita a lot, but that sort of thing does bother me, and saddens me. Makes my recent recommendation on another thread feel a bit less warranted. I would hope that he'd replace it in future editions, though I imagine it's been pointed out before.

As for tracing- he could of saved himself a lot of trouble by changing the perspective/poses so it was a similar drawing, not one with obvious sections that are copied from the original. The fact that the perspective and poses match up on the upper half shows laziness on his part.

While not as egregrious as Simmons, it does show how common and often overlooked this stuff is.

[Lightsnake]

"So it's okay to download material from dead authors then? So I should feel free to download anything by Jack Kirby of course?

Jack's may be dead, but his family is guaranteed any of the income that would of gone to him for a certain number of years after his death [75 years? I think it may be longer now].
So don't download his stuff. They will probably sue you. And in the case of his Marvel creations, being owned by Marvel, they will stay copyrighted as long as Marvel is in business and continues using those characters (though at some point, like Betty Boop cartoons, Fantastic Four #1 may become public domain. Though probably not until after we're all long, long dead], with compensation past copyright date depending on how future government legislation,legal litigation between Marvel and Kirby's family, and contracts go.
Further proof of hypocrisy, it seems.
It's okay to place an arbitrary limit on how long they're dead for now? So, cool


Bran Stoker has been dead for centuries, so go to town. Shakespeare is good to go too. Just make sure you're downloading a public domain edition-- illustrations and complimentary texts may still be copyrighted. Like say, the Jill Thompson painted cover of IDW's new edition of Alice in Wonderland. Alice is public domain, but Jill's drawing of her isn't.
So...centuries versus decades? When does it become okay?



"Everytime you CITE an article? I think you should chekc up on that..."

No it's true- why do you think you're asked to cite it? It's one of the reasons they ask to do so. The quote I listed above from Clements is an example of this in action. Universities use works cited, document delivery requests, and database statistics to keep track of what's been copied.
It's one instance in an academic source...most time, it's to give proper credit and avert plagiarism.


"Yeah, and they aren't always compensated nearly as much as you claim"

They're compensated something. Which is better than nothing. The money I get from my webcomic publisher for adrates based on the number of hits I have [a similar phenomenon to this- basically, I get paid an eeeesssy bit everytime someone clicks on a page of my comic] pays for my art supplies, which enable me to make the comic. Which is a good feeling.

Most don't paid period. And? So, a pittance makes it okay in other cases



"Photocopies doesn't equate to quoting...and again,l just ties back in to the tiny detail that scanners bought the books"

But they are a new copy. Which is what a scan is. A brand new copy of the book, just an edition in digital format, which is something publishers and authors still have to be compensated for, hence why having a scholarly article database is expensive, and something they pay for annually to continue paying for new "copies" with each new access.
No, they really aren't. They're a replication, but they aren't a book. The scanner bought the book. What to do with it is the scanner's domain


"Sure they did. They own the copy they have purchased, they choose to scan it in. Such a replica is not an exact, tangible copy and thus can be distributed at their leisure with the author already compensated for the initial copy."

It is an exact, tangible copy. One composed of electronic information on your computer. Which is created over and over as a new copy each time it is accessed online.
Show me a single new, physical product you can hold in your hands from a scan that has vanished due to the scan


"And I should care about the booksellers' feelings why in that case? They are putting the product out, it's my choice to decide what to do with it. "

Because they provide you a service, and by sitting there taking up space you are causing other customers who might buy books to be uncomfortable and not browse that section. Be polite, it never hurts. It's also their choice to boot you off your premises, with security guards for extra embarassment, or take a photo of you and put it up in their employee lounge so they can keep an eye on you. It happens a lot in retail.
Tough. I'm a customer too, so my comfort matters just as much. They provide the service, it's up to me how to take it.
And they can feel free to try to boot someone off for sitting down with no cause. It'll drive off customers and screw them over worse, but sure


"likewise with scanning, which also gets more people tor ead and almost invariably encourages them to buy"

No it doesn't. They might buy sometimes, but they aren't compensating the author for the copy they read, and are free not to not buy if they don't want to. Which a lot of people do- apparently they feel like donating their money to scanlation hosting sites is a better option then putting that money towards a book.
Thing about 'try before you buy' is you don't buy, unless you feel obligated to buy a full meal whenever you try a samples.
And yes, because scanlating sites make a lot of manga more freely available that isn't coming out any other way.
And yes, they certainly do buy


"Not only is 'one million times' hideous hyperbole, but a good deal of the people who read it could very well be inspired to check out official releases. "

How many members does a well known scanlation site named after a certain orange ninja have? About one million. Won't post a link to it, or name it, because that's against forum policy, but yeah, it's scary to think that.[/Quote[
Because members of a messageboard are all known scanlators of course and aren't members anywhere else.
It's only scary if you're a fearmongering hypocrite to boot

[Quote]
It's also common to see popular torrents listed as being accessed- just look at the hits an episode of Naruto gets on YouTube before it gets taken down, all accesses the authors aren't compensated for.
And as they were compensated before for the product, which is now in the consumer's hands, tough.


"Your claims the author is not compensated is purely false, given scanners have to buy it. Heck, you'd probably find mos tpeople get into series first via scans and those who just read the scans and buy nothing wouldn't buy it anyways."

They buy it, then make a new copy. Said new copy is not compensated for.
I'm sorry, I missed the scanning printing press...


"And hey, not everyone has the same copies in the library. Again, does it come down to morla principle or to numbers, because you claim the former, but your argument relies on the latter"

Then in that case, they can do the fair thing and buy the book. Or give interbranch loans a try first.
Because every library has interlibrary loan and everything is easily and freely available


"Of course you ignore it's far more rewarding to read it in print and many people will prefer reading the print version to support the industry to make sure they get more."

No I don't. That's what I keep telling people to do.
And plenty people do it and don't need your smug condescension involved in it


"Because, if you haven't noticed, the English manga are behind- unless you also think reading spoilers is wrong and evil."

How is impatience a justification? It doesn't make a wrong act right. It's like saying I was too impatient to wait for the store to open, so I broke a window and stole some Pop and Chips. You'll still get busted.
It isn't available in the US? They can't read it? Again: Is reading a spoiler suimmary wrong now?
And reading a scan does ZERO tangible harm like shatterong a window. Bad analogy

I don't think reading spoilers is evil. Reading a review isn't reading a copy of a book. It's reading someone's thoughts on it [incidentally, a review is copyrighted to it's writer]
A direct spoiler summary that might discourage you to buy the book.
How inconsistent your views are


"And you keep evading the point that a huge portion of manga are only available in English because of scans. Unless your response to anyone wanting to read Vinland Saga would be "Screw you, learn Japanese and import it..."

It's called "wait for the manga to be available in an authorized english edition".
Because that ALWAYS happens! I mean, Cutey Honey was just scanned...after decades of no exports and no interest shown
So perhaps you're unaware of it, but there are many, many titles that aren't scanned and likely never will be


It's not like it's a right to be able to read a given work.
No, it's a privilege we're indulging in. Your basic state of mind is "Screw you for daring to be born there!"


Incidentally, I've studied Japanese at an academic level. It's pretty interesting to do, and hey, I have some imported japanese manga I can sort of read :) It's the gift of knowledge that keeps on giving, in mounds of japanese edition manga. I need to practice more though, since I only took it for a year. Toshyokan wa asoko dewa arimasen. Toshyokan wa koko desu. Ikimashyo!

Good for you, most of us would rather not have to study an entirely new language to read something and spend lots of money importing it

[Paploo the Ewok]

Light, you have a lot of things wrong with that that I will fix at a later date. Many, many things. It seems you know less about how copyright works then I thought. But I have other things to do at the moment- rest assured though, there are answers to every question you seek, though some are ones you overlooked in the posts I've made [namely a digital copy is still a copy, and must be compensated for- keep asking me this a million times, but it's still true.]. If you don't like the answers, then perhaps you should reexamine your views and activities given the facts I've provided you with.

The term of copyright after an authors death is determined by law, so you should ask your local senator or a lawyer about the reasons for that. The law is the law, so you can't really budge it much on that. It's a pretty concrete fact. From my understaning, the times stated in the law were put in to help out the families or heirs (if they have no family) of dead artists by giving them the rights to their works, and allowing them to protect them for a certain number of years after that. Then to keep things fair, after that date, the works would become public domain. Though if a character is still being used, only older works may fall into public domain, and the character itself will remain property of the company (right, Mickey Mouse?). If you want to know these reasons, I'd suggest researching it (and not just on wikipedia) or asking an expert.

I own (all in english) Cutie Honey live action on DVD from Bandai, New Cutey Honey OVA from ADV Films on VHS [also out on dvd], and own issues of Cutey Honey 90' the manga from Studio Ironcat [not in print like the other two, but a legal edition is out there, and pretty cheap to track down]. So bad choice there.

Go Nagai manga/anime are awesome, so lots of his anime has been translated :) Though not as much of his manga [though still a fair amount- I want to get the completed Devilman bilingual edition someday]

[Lightsnake]

Here's a deal: show me the original Cutey Honey in English. Find any? (Since that was what I cited specifically) Or how about Violence Jack? Mazinger Z? Or perhaps Vinland Saga. Or Naoki Urasawa's Happy. Or Shin Angyo Onshi. Be glad to buy it if it was out.

Oh, and I find the whole "There's so much WRONG" with you thing you just pulled to be rude, arrogant and downright pompous. I'm sorry your ridiculous holier than thou standards aren't shared by everyone around you and I realize how much that upsets you, but in a word? Tough.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Here's a deal: show me the original Cutey Honey in English. Find any? (Since that was what I cited specifically) Or how about Violence Jack? Mazinger Z? Or perhaps Vinland Saga. Or Naoki Urasawa's Happy. Or Shin Angyo Onshi. Be glad to buy it if it was out.

Oh, and I find the whole "There's so much WRONG" with you thing you just pulled to be rude, arrogant and downright pompous. I'm sorry your ridiculous holier than thou standards aren't shared by everyone around you and I realize how much that upsets you, but in a word? Tough.

You asked for Cutie Honey, I gave you Cutie Honey. Awesome, multiple flavors of Cutie Honey [Kekko Kamen live action is out from Media Blasters btw, all the movies in singles and a boxset, and the OVA is out from ADV Films on DVD]

I own Violence Jack on VHS from Manga Entertainment (....and is so messed up), ADV and Funimation have both released Shin Angyo as Blade of the Phantom Master on dvd [repriced at 9.99 next month! April 27th!], ADV has released some Mazinger Z OVA's on DVD [currently in a 2pack with Star Demon OVA.. forget the exact title, but I have a preview disc sold with Newtype USA] and was dubbed in the 80's as Tranzor Z with some episodes on VHS if you look around Ebay, along with a Mazinger Z comic Nagai selfpublished here in the 90's.

VIZ is publishing much of Urusawa's library, so I imagine they'll get around to it someday if it continus to sell well. Animeigo just released the first Yawara boxset, so we're getting lots of his stuff right now.

Vinland Saga isn't out here yet, but Del Rey did reissue Parasyte, so hopefully it'll be here someday. I can wait. There's oodles of other good manga to read in the meantime.

I'm not being rude. I'm just pointing out the truth, and providing facts, which is generally a helpful thing.
Please don't insult me personally. I'm simply trying to help you out.

Night. More later.

[Lightsnake]

You asked for Cutie Honey, I gave you Cutie Honey. Awesome, multiple flavors of Cutie Honey [Kekko Kamen live action is out from Media Blasters btw, all the movies in singles and a boxset, and the OVA is out from ADV Films on DVD]
asked for the ORIGINAL Cutey Honey, give me that. I don't care about the rest.

I own Violence Jack on VHS from Manga Entertainment (....and is so messed up),
Don't care about that. Manga, please.

ADV and Funimation have both released Shin Angyo as Blade of the Phantom Master on dvd [repriced at 9.99 next month! April 27th!],
I don't really care about a the bastardized voice. Manhwa please

ADV has released some Mazinger Z OVA's on DVD [currently in a 2pack with Star Demon OVA.. forget the exact title, but I have a preview disc sold with Newtype USA] and was dubbed in the 80's as Tranzor Z with some episodes on VHS if you look around Ebay, along with a Mazinger Z comic Nagai selfpublished here in the 90's.
Manga, please. And Yeah, Tranzor Z, that's Mazinger Z! I mean, the plot is totally altered and it's stripped down to a shell of its former slf! Like "Sure we changed everything, but still! You can get it!"


VIZ is publishing much of Urusawa's library, so I imagine they'll get around to it someday if it continus to sell well. Animeigo just released the first Yawara boxset, so we're getting lots of his stuff right now.
Viz is publishing his three most popular. They publish Happy! I'll buy it. Until then, it isn't available and isn't likely going to be.


Vinland Saga isn't out here yet, but Del Rey did reissue Parasyte, so hopefully it'll be here someday. I can wait. There's oodles of other good manga to read in the meantime.

Great. Vinland saga's one of my favorites and there's no indication it'll be released. Problem? SHove off.

I'm not being rude. I'm just pointing out the truth, and providing facts, which is generally a helpful thing.
Please don't insult me personally. I'm simply trying to help you out.

Night. More later.

No, you aren't. You're being smug, condescending and holier than thou against those who've done more for the industry than you.

[The Xenos]

Sure, some of the image are quite clearly traced and that I do not accept, but I even saw someone accusing him of plagiarizing Hellsing because he had a close-up of a vampire-styled eye, like Hellsing, and that is too much. Someone also accused him of copying Neon Genesis Evangelion because he had an upward shot of a girl (the Orihime copy) leaning on her arms and crying, as did NGE. Someone even lined up the images and said that Simmons had traced the picture even though the lines didn't match at all.I do agree that people really started scraping the bottom of the barrel after all the good examples were weeded out. With the sheer abundance of blatant ones to pick from, there really wasn't a need to dilute the case with dumber, stretchier accusations.
Well said. Some fans do take a little too much glee and go on a bit of a witch hunt. There are some very big stretches. I think it's best to focus on the definite traces and cases where the character design is spot on save for a jacket or hair color. Even the Hellsing comparison is a bit of a stretch compared to the undeniable Bleach swipes. If it wasn't for those I don't think we could really single him out.
No, it really isn't. It's akin to borrowing. If I borrow a copy of Blade of the Immortal 21 from a friend and then decide not to buy it myself, have I stolen it?
With scans, the physical scanned copy has generally been bought and pain for. There is nothing to shoplift because there is no trangible item to remove.
You know what? You're right. It is akin to just borrowing a book... that is if the person was able to buy one copy and loan it out to thousands upon thousands of friends throughout the world almost instantly and at the same time. Really, you can't compare digital copying to actual borrowing. It exponentially copies the book due to its digital nature. Really, the result is the same as bootlegging. The original company sells one copy and thousands upon thousands of people see it for free without getting a single cent. Sure it's borrowing.. but due to the digital nature it's thousands of times more devastating. To not notice that and insist it's the same as loaning a physical copy to one friend is delusional. Though I guess anything to make oneself seem guiltless, eh?
When a scanlation of Naruto Vol.1 is downloaded one million times, that scanlation resulted in the creator of the scan buying..... 1 copy.
Not quite the same thing. Yeah. Pretty much. Anyone arguing on the borrowing analogy clearly misses the massive scope of it. Hell, I was thinking thousands, but I guess it's millions in some cases.

Meanwhile, I again say that the scanlation issue is somewhat tangential. Though certainly it is interesting that this seems to be the first time any comic artist has been caught tracing from online bootlegs. That to me is interesting in itself, leaving the scanlation debate aside.

[Lightsnake]

Well said. Some fans do take a little too much glee and go on a bit of a witch hunt. There are some very big stretches. I think it's best to focus on the definite traces and cases where the character design is spot on save for a jacket or hair color. Even the Hellsing comparison is a bit of a stretch compared to the undeniable Bleach swipes. If it wasn't for those I don't think we could really single him out.
You know what? You're right. It is akin to just borrowing a book... that is if the person was able to buy one copy and loan it out to thousands upon thousands of friends throughout the world almost instantly and at the same time. Really, you can't compare digital copying to actual borrowing. It exponentially copies the book due to its digital nature. Really, the result is the same as bootlegging. The original company sells one copy and thousands upon thousands of people see it for free without getting a single cent. Sure it's borrowing.. but due to the digital nature it's thousands of times more devastating. To not notice that and insist it's the same as loaning a physical copy to one friend is delusional. Though I guess anything to make oneself seem guiltless, eh?
Yeah. Pretty much. Anyone arguing on the borrowing analogy clearly misses the massive scope of it. Hell, I was thinking thousands, but I guess it's millions in some cases.

Do numbers make it wrong or is the principle of the matter itself? Because there's little difference between that and ripping a song to a CD for a friend.

[Sound Silence]

Do numbers make it wrong or is the principle of the matter itself? Because there's little difference between that and ripping a song to a CD for a friend.

Numbers don't make it wrong, they just bring attention to it.

If I scanned all those pages, printed them out, stapled them together, and gave it to a friend, no one would know or care, even though that's blatant copyright violation.

Of course, doing that is insane and takes too much time and effort, so it doesn't happen.

Now that the digital age let's you make copies of anything and distribute it to millions in a blink, it's now a problem. Because now information isn't as hard to reproduce and distribute, meaning that "intellectual property" is becoming more an more slippery, since now anyone can copy an image or piece of text or any kind of information, and send it to someone else with little effort.

That whole "making mixtapes for friends" was just as bad, it's just no one thought about it, since it really wasn't that difference than loaning something to a friend, so as long as you didn't talk about it, no one knew. That's not the case anymore.

[Lightsnake]

Numbers don't make it wrong, they just bring attention to it.

If I scanned all those pages, printed them out, stapled them together, and gave it to a friend, no one would know or care, even though that's blatant copyright violation.

Of course, doing that is insane and takes too much time and effort, so it doesn't happen.

Now that the digital age let's you make copies of anything and distribute it to millions in a blink, it's now a problem. Because now information isn't as hard to reproduce and distribute, meaning that "intellectual property" is becoming more an more slippery, since now anyone can copy an image or piece of text or any kind of information, and send it to someone else with little effort.

That whole "making mixtapes for friends" was just as bad, it's just no one thought about it, since it really wasn't that difference than loaning something to a friend, so as long as you didn't talk about it, no one knew. That's not the case anymore.

Exactly. There's a lack of consistency on the matter, though.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I don't really care about a the bastardized voice. Manhwa please

Manga, please. And Yeah, Tranzor Z, that's Mazinger Z! I mean, the plot is totally altered and it's stripped down to a shell of its former slf! Like "Sure we changed everything, but still! You can get it!"

1- You do realize dvd's tend to be bilingual, right?

2- I told you, Go Nagai did publish a Mazinger Z manga in english. you might also want to track down VIZ'S Venger Robo [Getter Robo manga spinoff]


Also posts like these-
"Great. Vinland saga's one of my favorites and there's no indication it'll be released. Problem? SHove off."

"No, you aren't. You're being smug, condescending and holier than thou against those who've done more for the industry than you."

Don't really provide answers so much as attack me personally. I've done lots of the industry, I've bought over 1000 dvd's, and tons of manga. I've been helping to organize a con for the past 7 years. I tell people not to download stuff online. That's all stuff the industry tends to like more than stealing their stuff.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Do numbers make it wrong or is the principle of the matter itself? Because there's little difference between that and ripping a song to a CD for a friend.


I think another aspect is that it's the difference between private use [burning one copy to CD for an acquaintance] and public use [putting it up on the internet is a pretty darn public]. One is private, one is putting it out there on a massive scale and distributing it worldwide. The distribution aspect is the key to why it's illegal and more immoral.

[Inkthinker]

I thought this was a interesting take on things referencing Yukito Kishiro's "homage" of Frank Miller's Elektra in Battle Angel Alita.

http://www.gottsu-iiyan.ca/gib/index.php/2010/03/02/double-standard

That reads more as a legitimate homage. Ideally, by American industry standards, he should have a little note in the corner that says "after Miller" or "with apologies to Miller", but I don't know if the Japanese have a similar tradition. I don't think he's ever made a secret of being a rabid Frank Millar fanboy, just check out Ashen Victor, which he made right after the first Battle Angel, and which was an outright attempt to emulate Miller's chiaroscuro style into his own aesthetic.

The difference between Yukito Kishiro and Nick Simmons is that Kishiro, by that point, had already drawn about 1600 pages of beautifully illustrated content, and here we've found one potential swipe (or homage, depending on your point of view), which given the mass of other illustrations he'd done I think we could agree, he did not need to swipe Miller to do his job. He chose to emulate a Miller layout. I can't think of a reason he would do that except to make homage.

Simmons drew 66 pages(?), and has well over a dozen overt swipes, and there's no evidence at all that he could have drawn his comic just as well without them. He apparently needed to rip off another artist just to get by.

Hence, outrage at Nick Simmons, and a pass for Yukito Kishiro.

[The Xenos]

Yeah, the Alita swipe certainly is a whole other animal. Kishiro's said he's a fan of Miller and this was two panels of Alita fighting Hand ninjas. Meanwhile simmons has a whole book of art and design and maybe even character swipes and never mentions Bleach. Plus it was just cool to see Alita fight the Hand as a Miller fan. One Miller nerd nod amongst in one later volume in a whole original book series is a whole other animal from what Simmons did in his first comic.
Do numbers make it wrong or is the principle of the matter itself? Because there's little difference between that and ripping a song to a CD for a friend.Well, when the numbers alter the end result and make the principle of the matter entirely different then, yes, yes they do make it wrong. If you can't see how fundamentally different digital copying is due to is nature and the end result of a million fold more people getting it instead of just even a dozen people, then you really are delusional on this topic and really should not be arguing. If you are making a moral argument while ignoring the drastically different results that differ from five unsold copies to millions of unsold copies, then the argument is moot. This conversation cannot continue until you face a little thing we like to call.. [lewis black cry of desperation] REALITY! [/lewis black cry of desperation]

[Holy Spirit]

Also, I hope everyone complaining about Nick stealing Tite Kubo's work will take stuff like this into consideration when they steal Tite Kubo's work. I'm finding it strange how so many people who steal his work on a regular basis are getting angry about Gene Simmons son doing so. On ComicsWorthReading (http://comicsworthreading.com/2010/02/25/plagiarism-scanlations-and-copies-nick-simmons-incarnate-rips-off-bleach/) it's been pointed out that Nick copied from Chapters that haven't been released in english yet, so scanlations are part of the bad stuff going on. Disrespecting an artist's rights is a pretty crappy thing to do in any form.

*Sigh* You just couldn't help yourself could you? :tongue:

[Paploo the Ewok]

*Sigh* You just couldn't help yourself could you? :tongue:

If you're referring to my comments at CWR, well sorry, I speak my mind when I see issues like this pop up. Johanna and I engaged in a conversation and discussed the issue (I'm no stranger to posting on her CWR discussions), and I like hearing her points, even if I don't agree with everything she says. Because you know, people are capable of discussion, even if it's sometimes spritied. It's a good thing to do. I don't see how adding a mocking tone to it proves any points.

Xenos--- Thanks for pointing out the whole disconnect with reality thing. I would seriously love to see Lewis Black host a bootlegging panel :)

[Holy Spirit]

I don't see how adding a mocking tone to it proves any points.
Hmmm..... perhaps I should have gone with the :wink: instead of the :tongue:, ah well! :cool:

[mgs]

Michael Lovitz is a GREAT attorney with knowledge on this sort of thing. Even being in a comic himself. I mean, he's mainly dealt with US comics, but I think with some more study, he could be as familiar with manga as anything produced here. But I love the info he provided in this CBR article.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=25053

[OverMaster]

Hmmm..... perhaps I should have gone with the :wink: instead of the :tongue:, ah well! :cool:

I don't think you have anything to apologize about.

[Paploo the Ewok]

It looks like the Nick Simmons issue continues to serve as fodder for manga journalists and bloggers, with this interesting article from MangaWidget, which relates Simmons public statement to issues with entitlement in Anime fandom in reaction to a recent article on AnimeVice from a user defending piracy [which AnimeVice has apparently made a statement about thsemsleves, though their website is down at the moment and the link to that appears broken, so I can't really comment on how they dealt with the post yet- I did read the original article, and it did contain a lot of errors in how the author defended it, including thinking that Case Closed was a Shonen Jump title, and poorly defending himself against a professional manga translator who works for Dark Horse regarding translation accuracy].

http://mangawidget.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/entitlement-simmons/

EDIT--- Okay, the site's back up-
http://www.animevice.com/news/scanlations-the-pirates-life-for-me/3904/

Oh, and here's Gia's (who runs AnimeVice's) article about the whole Nick Simmons/Scanlations/brouhaha http://www.animevice.com/news/the-truth-about-the-manga-blogger-conspiracy/3910/ which I'm guessing will be a good read, so off to read that

Here's another reaction to the original AnimeVice article http://www.4thletter.net/2010/03/scanlations-and-piracy-cry-for-justification/ which again all roots out of the discussion coming out of the Simmons stuff.

[pariah-1972]

I have to wonder that if he was actually japanese people might have looked the other way or not cared as much about this, But since Nick is white and privileged it becomes almost like a Vanilla Ice thing were someone who is not very talented tries to borrow liberally from a a certain cultures music or art style.

[Yun Lao]

I have to wonder that if he was actually japanese people might have looked the other way or not cared as much about this, But since Nick is white and privileged it becomes almost like a Vanilla Ice thing were someone who is not very talented tries to borrow liberally from a a certain cultures music or art style.

Actually, there was a lesser known artist a while back who was caught tracing panels from Death Note, although I can't remember who the artist was.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I have to wonder that if he was actually japanese people might have looked the other way or not cared as much about this, But since Nick is white and privileged it becomes almost like a Vanilla Ice thing were someone who is not very talented tries to borrow liberally from a a certain cultures music or art style.


http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-10-19/yuki-suetsugu-copies-art-from-other-manga I'd have to say they'd be pretty mad.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-10-19/kodansha-and-suetsugu-apologies

The end result of this example was Suegetsu leaving the industry for awhile, and her works being pulled, including an already licensed english edition from Tokyopop that was cancelled before any was printed.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-07-16/youka-nitta-to-quit-manga-work-back-catalog-pulled Also see Youka Nitta more recently. It's not just fans here who get upset about these things. I think Simmons celebrity just helped the issue be discussed more and reach a wider audience than anime geeks- it's being discussed on a lot of comic news websites too [there's also a thread in the You'll All Be Sorry forum on this site for that matter]

It was less of an issue of him doing a manga-style comic (a generally accepted, and usually awesome thing to do), as him swiping from another comic artist, which is the main issue- a lot of artists have had careers slowed or finished because of swiping, or other controversies involving an abuse of other artists rights [fandom still hasn't forgotten how Pat Lee and Dreamwave treated artists, or Pat Lee's penchance for hiring other artists and publishing the work with his name without their knowledge].

[pariah-1972]

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-10-19/yuki-suetsugu-copies-art-from-other-manga I'd have to say they'd be pretty mad.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-10-19/kodansha-and-suetsugu-apologies

The end result of this example was Suegetsu leaving the industry for awhile, and her works being pulled, including an already licensed english edition from Tokyopop that was cancelled before any was printed.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2008-07-16/youka-nitta-to-quit-manga-work-back-catalog-pulled Also see Youka Nitta more recently. It's not just fans here who get upset about these things. I think Simmons celebrity just helped the issue be discussed more and reach a wider audience than anime geeks- it's being discussed on a lot of comic news websites too [there's also a thread in the You'll All Be Sorry forum on this site for that matter]

It was less of an issue of him doing a manga-style comic (a generally accepted, and usually awesome thing to do), as him swiping from another comic artist, which is the main issue- a lot of artists have had careers slowed or finished because of swiping, or other controversies involving an abuse of other artists rights [fandom still hasn't forgotten how Pat Lee and Dreamwave treated artists, or Pat Lee's penchance for hiring other artists and publishing the work with his name without their knowledge].But Greg Land swipes from other artists and porn and himself and everything in between but only the fan's seem to care and Marvel hasn't done jack about it.

Also never even seen him comment on the show (Gene Simmons Family Jewels) about his love for manga and anime which is a little strange since the show is almost as focused on him as it is Gene.

Also find it strange that he completely disses The Batman on his deviant Art blog since the style of that cartoon had a very American Anime influence.

[Paploo the Ewok]

But Greg Land swipes from other artists and porn and himself and everything in between but only the fan's seem to care and Marvel hasn't done jack about it.

Also never even seen him comment on the show (Gene Simmons Family Jewels) about his love for manga and anime which is a little strange since the show is almost as focused on him as it is Gene.

Also find it strange that he completely disses The Batman on his deviant Art blog since the style of that cartoon had a very American Anime influence.

I wasn't defending Simmons. Not sure how you got that out of it, just meant him doing a manga style comic isn't a bad thing, but him swiping from manga artists is. I think he's pretty scummy overall, and the things you point out are good tidbits against him (especially the The Batman one), as it's clear that he's done little to show he has much respect for artists.

The Greg Land thing is a thorny thing for many fans, and I'm still mystified with how long Marvel's given him the spotlight. I wonder what their new owners'll think if his porn tracing pops up in big media someday (though much of I've seen lately is just him swiping himself, so maybe he's hired models or something, like Alex Ross does- hiring models is a perfectly acceptable artistic practice. Though those swipes couild just be him swiping the old porn stuff so who knows....). I'm glad that Radical is handling this a bit better then Marvel's simple shrugging.

[pariah-1972]

I wasn't defending Simmons. Not sure how you got that out of it, just meant him doing a manga style comic isn't a bad thing, but him swiping from manga artists is. I think he's pretty scummy overall, and the things you point out are good tidbits against him (especially the The Batman one), as it's clear that he's done little to show he has much respect for artists.

The Greg Land thing is a thorny thing for many fans, and I'm still mystified with how long Marvel's given him the spotlight. I wonder what their new owners'll think if his porn tracing pops up in big media someday.Maybe the difference is Marvel can afford to go to court to defend a popular artist when he is sued for plagarism but a small like the one Nick was on can't afford to get sued by the makers of Bleach which is why they are doing the things they are.

[Red Jack]

Actually, Paploo's been right on every point. He understands how copyright works.

RE: ELEKTRA/BATTLE ANGEL ALETA: the composition of the shot and the pose of the ninja in the air are clearly taken from the earlier work. However, it is not a trace-lift and the overall art is original. NONE of the rest of the ninjas are in the same poses, nor is the hero character. You can't copyright composition so, without that, this counts as an homage, not a lift.

RE: Entitlement: You're not entitled to read anything. Period. Desiring something doesn't entitle you to have it. If somebody puts something up for sale and you read it without paying, you're stealing it. A book is a delivery system for a type of information which is transferred to your brain via reading. If you take that information without paying for the right to have it, you've stolen it. Simple.

If you go to a friend's house and read a book she's bought for herself, you are not stealing because your friend purchased the right to allow that when she bought the book. She did not purchase the right to publish it, even for free, which is what scanning is.

If I'm first in line for the final HARRY POTTER BOOK, read it, then scan the pages and post them on the web without charge, I have stolen it and republished it. This will produce a net loss of revenue for the publisher and, most important, the AUTHOR whose livelihoods depend on sales.

While scanning and illegal downloading are here to stay (people will always take something for free if they know they can't be punished for it) there is absolutely no moral or, frankly, legal justification for the behavior.

The only reason people do it, on either side, is because they know they can't be punished.

[The Xenos]

Ugh. Pat Lee. I used to love Pat Lee's work. Then I started to watch more anime. I finally saw classics Ghost in the Shell. And Akira. And heard about Lodoss War. Never have I wanted to burn a comic book so much as when i discovered how liberally he lifted ideas from those series. I also got a bunch of his Transformers comics and even a giant poster back in the day. Now I can't even look at them without feeling disgusted.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Ugh. Pat Lee. I used to love Pat Lee's work. Then I started to watch more anime. I finally saw classics Ghost in the Shell. And Akira. And heard about Lodoss War. Never have I wanted to burn a comic book so much as when i discovered how liberally he lifted ideas from those series. I also got a bunch of his Transformers comics and even a giant poster back in the day. Now I can't even look at them without feeling disgusted.

Apparently he's somewhere in Hong Kong trying to get comics made but otherwise living in obscurity while the people he ripped off in Canada like Udon are still around
and kicking butt and taking names, so in that case the industry seems to have abandoned him. Hopefully companies will see fit to hire more talented and moral artists in his place in the future.
He built a sizeable company and had some success, but some of his practices were pretty corrupt.

[Inkthinker]

It's possible that Greg Land gets a pass (of sorts) because he transcribes photographs into illustrated linework, rather than copying another man's linework as his own. There's a degree of separation that doesn't exist in Simmons's work.

Tracing photographs effectively, making a photgraphed model fit into an illustrated panel in such a way that it's not immediately obvious, is A)a lot harder than it looks and 2)an actual practice that's been carried on in commercial illustration for as long as the light table has been in existence.

There's quite a few Japanese artists who trace photographs in order to create illustrated backgrounds or mechanical objects like cars and guns. It's especially useful when you have to depict something that matches its real-world counterpart exactly. And I have to wonder how many of those artists get their photographs through entirely proper channels, and how many just keep a morgue file of photoreferences like the rest of us, and don't give a lot of thought to application when the job is on the line.

Copying another artists linework is a different beast than transcribing photographs, but it's still risky business. Especially these days, when photos get around so much more easily than they used to.

[Hazard]

It's possible that Greg Land gets a pass (of sorts) because he transcribes photographs into illustrated linework, rather than copying another man's linework as his own. There's a degree of separation that doesn't exist in Simmons's work.

Possible, still the fact that the man is actually hired to draw by a big company like marvel annoys me. I am pretty sure there are dozens of artists better than him.

Not to mention his smiling faces.:mad:

[Inkthinker]

RE: Entitlement: You're not entitled to read anything. Period. Desiring something doesn't entitle you to have it. If somebody puts something up for sale and you read it without paying, you're stealing it. A book is a delivery system for a type of information which is transferred to your brain via reading. If you take that information without paying for the right to have it, you've stolen it. Simple.

I think you're right, with a couple caveats:

She did not purchase the right to publish it, even for free, which is what scanning is.


Actually, the act of scanning the book is illegal duplication. The act of putting it online is the publishing/distribution. The crime here is, and has always been, "bootlegging", not "theft". It's the illegal duplication and distribution of copyrighted material.

It gets a little grey because no money changes hands between the consumer of the bootlegged material and the producers of it, which is how it differs from the guys who sell DVDs of Asian cinema and anime at convention tables.


The only reason people do it, on either side, is because they know they can't be punished.

Here I would also disagree... I think you're grossly oversimplifying motivation. People do it because they want something, and they think they can get it. Avoidance of punishment is part of the reason the practice keeps happening, but it's not at the root of the motivation. They don't just do it "because they can get away with it"... that implies there's no reasoning other than some ephemeral thrill.

Scanners and uploaders (presumably) receive rewards in the form of access to other data (also likely pirated) and peer groups. Downloaders receive a reward in the form of entertainment content at minimal (effectively zero) cost. There IS a reward system that goes on here, but it's fascinatingly separate from the traditional exchange of money, goods or services.

[Ghost]

Actually, the act of scanning the book is illegal duplication. The act of putting it online is the publishing/distribution. The crime here is, and has always been, "bootlegging", not "theft". It's the illegal duplication and distribution of copyrighted material.

Thank you. I was beginning to fear I was the only one who understood this.

Both of these acts are criminal, but they are acts of copyright infringement, thus called because they infringe on the right to make copies of a given work. I have yet to see any definiton that refers to this crime as a form of theft.

[Inkthinker]

Indeed. I don't think that the anti-piracy cause is helped at all by the continued use of the term "theft". I think publishers and copyright holders would make a stronger argument that downloads and pirated copies aren't stolen, per se (I think one reason this argument fails to hold water is that even laymen can see that it isn't "theft" as traditionally conceived, i.e. I take something from you, now you don't have it and I do, HAha), but rather that you're getting a cheap knockoff copy from a third party. It's bootlegging.

Problem there being that "cheap knockoffs" are harder to shine the flame of holy indignation upon than "theft". There's no Biblical Commandment that says, "thou shalt not make shitty copies that bugger up the profit margins of creative endeavours". It's easier for people to be self-righteous when the crime described is simpler to define.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Thanks for the comments Red Jack.

Thank you. I was beginning to fear I was the only one who understood this.

Both of these acts are criminal, but they are acts of copyright infringement, thus called because they infringe on the right to make copies of a given work. I have yet to see any definiton that refers to this crime as a form of theft.

...... you guys do realize that the legal term for bootlegging is Intellectual Property Theft, right?

Basic gist via a consulting firm
http://www.jbm.net/pages.asp?pgidx=45

Here's an academic site about it
http://students.ed.uiuc.edu/dieken/eps313/theft.htm

And digging a bit more on google [geez google, this should come up sooner]
The UN's World Intellectual Property Organization
http://www.wipo.int/ip-outreach/en/tools/practice/details.jsp?id=329

Handy pdf from that site - http://www.allianceagainstiptheft.co.uk/downloads/pdf/Intellectual%20Property%20Theft.pdf
Note that this covers a broad range of IP theft, from digital downloading of copyrighted materials, to the illicit sharing by employees of company secrets and IP to competitors, to plagirism.
Legally speaking, world wide Intellectual Property Theft is a term commonly used. It is indeed a form of theft.

Let's ask the Police in Kent in good old England....
http://www.kent.police.uk/About%20Kent%20Police/policies/n/n036.html It's what the police will charge you with. You will be a theif, of intellectual property, if you are convicted of bootlegging.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/iplaws.html And some good old States stuff for you Yanks. Looks like the US Governement defines digital file sharing as "electronic theft"

[Inkthinker]

Your Google-Fu is strong.

It's a fair point, but the acts described in most of those statutes are based on counterfiet law. Of course, one might equate the distribution of comics scans as counterfiet copies of the comics themselves... again, sort of like bootleg DVD sales.

Does the party which sells a counterfeit item for profit, representing it as original (or "as good as"), commit the same act as one which essentially gives it away and often encourages their consumer base to push money towards the sale of authentic content through proper channels?

I think, from a legal perspective, they probably do. Certainly, something is being taken without recompense. I still think the argument needs to be more nuanced than it often is.

[Paploo the Ewok]

Your Google-Fu is strong.

I could probably dig up better stuff if I put my full research skills to use.

As the PDF pointed out, it's a fairly broad area, and downloads are covered in IP theft [which seems to be a broad term that covers a number of kinds of IP infringements], somethign also mentioned in the justice.gov link I posted. I'm guessing if I delved further I could find far more articles from accredited sources [academic articles, governement resources, textbooks etc.]. I've also read some academic texts about this stuff, so checking out stuff that's not on the internet is always a good idea- the internet is riddled with stuff, so it's pretty wobbly for research.

That's why teachers write "Wikipedia is a not an accredited resource" or other such comments on papers and deduct marks. Because it's lazy researching.

edit- hey look here's the press release about their arrest of the guy who pirated the Wolverine movie http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/sanchezArrest.pdf and another from a group of people who were pirating cable http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/kwakSent.pdf

[The Xenos]

Just saw this interesting comment over at Bleeding Cool.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/03/18/thursday-runaround-the-lives-of-millar-and-simmons/
TVWatch: The Osbournes ripoff Gene Simmons Family Jewels’ new series starts on March 21st on A&E. And in the first episode we see Gene and Nick Simmons playing at last year’s San Diego Comic Con, and launching Nick’s graphic novel, Incarnate. Whether we see him tracing scenes from Bleach, I’m not yet sure.

So I guess that should be interesting as the show is promoting a comic that has been put on hold by its publisher pending investigation of allegations of plagiarism. You'll have fans of the show get interested in checking out their celeb's comic, only to find the s---storm online and a publisher that's halted the presses. So I guess this story is far from over.

[Paploo the Ewok]

I imagine a lot of the general public will come across this stuff when they go to google Incarnate. I wonder if the show'll touch on the topic any?

[Inkthinker]

Given production turnaround, if they do it probably wouldn't appear on an episode until late this season or the next.

I wondered if and where they'd get into his kid's comic... I ended up catching parts of the show over one of my co-worker's shoulder, it's pretty standard reality-TV stuff. Gene Simmons seems to have a bit of a shotgun approach at business ideas, which I guess works when you've got millions of dollars to spend.

[The Xenos]

I saw an ep recently out of morbid curiosity. Funny enough Nick wasn't in it much as he was leaving for college. Meanwhile Gene and his wife decided to open a nail salon. It was unbelievably dumb and they totally screwed it up. Though I'm curious about this new season and how much they show of the kid making his comic with 'original characters do not steal'.