hey, moon

gensing:

grapeyguts:

brook:

so pixiv might be blocked to all citizens in non-asian countries because PEOPLE DON’T FUCKING STOP EDITING SHIT WITHOUT PERMISSION

props to you tumblr

if you fuck up a great art website for everyone else because you want to throw some shitty filters…

(Source: mossdeepcity, via hidans)

staff:

One of the great things about Tumblr is that people use it for just about every conceivable kind of expression. People being people, though, that means that Tumblr sometimes gets used for things that are just wrong. We are deeply committed to supporting and defending our users’ freedom of speech,…

you got to be kidding me.

too much for letting “you effortlessly share anything”.

townup:

stormofthunder:

“From what I can tell it’s even LESS known than ACTA. I haven’t even been able to find any YouTube videos on it.

Here are two lovely quotes I think you will find interesting:

“A leaked version of the February 2011 draft U.S. TPP Intellectual Property Rights Chapter indicates that U.S. negotiators are pushing for the adoption of copyright measures far more restrictive than currently required by international treaties, including the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.”

“The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is pursuing a TPP agreement that will require signatory counties to adopt heightened copyright protection that advances the agenda of the U.S. entertainment and pharmaceutical industries, but omits the flexibilities and exceptions that protect Internet users and technology innovators.”

Yep, more restrictive than ACTA.

Countries will be forced to rewrite their copyright laws and adopt this agreement’s (beyond sucky) laws.

I don’t really know much about this myself, but here are a few points summarized from the article:
-Temporary reproductions of copyrighted works without permission will count as infringement. (So I’m guessing you can’t put your music on an external drive if you’re getting a new computer?)
-Countries can’t import legitimate goods without copyright owner approval. (So basically Japan could say that USA is no longer allowed to import anime.)
-Extend the Life+70 years copyright in individual work, and the 95 years after publication/120 years for corporation stuff.
-Ban circumvention of digital locks. (DMCA is a whole host of issues in and of itself.)
-“Adopt criminal sanctions for copyright infringement that is done without a commercial motivation.” (Pretty self-explanatory there.)
-“Adopt the U.S. DMCA Internet Intermediaries copyright safe harbor regime in its entirety. This would require Chile to rewrite its forward-looking 2010 copyright law that currently provides for a judicial notice and takedown regime, which provides greater protection to Internet users’ expression and privacy than the DMCA’s copyright safe harbor regime.” (Couldn’t have said it better myself.)” - WindieDragon

Mother of fucking god, I am seriously getting tired of the fucking US continuously fucking trying to fuck shit up by making so much fucking shit and caring so fucking much about fucking copyright and fucking intellectual fucking properly fucking problems when there are so many other fucking much more fucking important fucking problems that have to be fucking taken fucking care of. Fuck.

I don’t fucking care if this will fucking fill my fucking fuck quota of the fucking month, holy fucking shit balls on a dick.

I don’t fucking even fucking FUCK.

Just spread this shit. Just fucking do it.

What

I have to admit I’m slightly impressed by how these seem to be getting more and more ridiculous, but what.

(via zackthepuppy)

In a shock ruling in the UK this Tuesday, a photo was found to be in violation of the copyright monopoly of another photographer. There’s only one hitch with this ruling: the infringing copy was not a copy at all, but another original with a similar composition.

This verdict throws the entire copyright monopoly concept overboard; it has always been a monopoly on outright copying of a work. Here, for the first time, something that is not a copy is found to be in violation of the copying monopoly. The judge determined that the compositions were similar enough for the second photographer to be in violation of the copyright monopoly of the first one.

Deem for yourself – here are the two images side by side (from the public court verdict):

read more…