#and included screenshots of the artist’s twitter bio where it’s even more obvious they do not allow reposts

[bagelsand-creamcheemse]

soooooo funny to me that op would delete my reply and block me over calling them out for blatant art theft (I don’t care if the art was credited when the artist in question doesn’t allow reposts and makes that glaringly obvious in the art itself. also a screenshot of the og post is like. the most laziest of “sourcing” when @kadeart literally has a tumblr. it takes what. ten seconds to type in that extra seven characters, if pasting the link to their tweet was too much work?) I get avoiding drama and blocking people quietly, and if op had the artist permission that’s one thing, but it really doesn’t look like they have that permission. could have corrected me if they did but 🤷‍♀️ guess not

Source:

[honeytrappaz]

call out post for @ratsofftoya

TW: GROOMING/PEDOPHILIA AND SUICIDE MENTIONS

recently @i-am-a-fish got suicidal baited off tumblr for the most bullshitted accusation post I've seen so far.

apparently I-am-fish is a pedophile/ potential child groomer, as said by @ratsofftoya

All because he made a joke on twitter about moving to pornhub, and follows artists that draw lolicon/aged-up smut of fictional underaged characters.

but there are some major fallacies in @ratsofftoya 's accusations (as if it wasn't obvious enough).

moral appeal:

ratsofftoya's commentary on goldie's pornhub and sex toy posts were very moralistic despite the posts clearly being a joke.

Humor is subjective so it's okay if you didn't laugh at this post, but that isn't an excuse to take away its humor to demean someone by making hasty generalizations about his fanbase. We can't confirm his fanbase is mostly kids, but because this claim is based on a hasty generalization, it is an inappropriate appeal to emotion. Trying to imply that goldie willingly exposes kids to child porn, classic "but think of the kids!" argument.

• There is no data we have on I-am-fish 's audience age demographic.

• there is no proof that majority of the fanbase are minors. that's just a hasty generalization.

• I-am-a-fish does not claim to be a blog for kids, not including "18+" in your bio does not make you a blog for kids.

I can't believe i have to point this shit out, but tumblr and twitter are not for kids. Nobody on these two platforms should have to put "18+" in their bios because nobody below that should even be on these two platforms. I-am-a-fish is an adult making adult jokes on an adult platform, to imply he could be a child groomer because he makes sex jokes that minors see is unfair because thats beyond his control. Tumblr and Twitter are adult spaces and yet we are not responsible for kids being in a space where they don't belong, that responsibility goes to the parents. All we can do about minors in online adult spaces is REPORT them.

2. cherry picking:

ratsofftoya specifically picked TWO sexually suggestive artworks by japanese Twitter artist Krskii. problem is ratsofftoya uses these two posts to portay this artist as a highly lewd/fetish account, when that isn't the case. In actuality, krskii's twitter page is a fanart page for a duo from IDOL MASTER: cinderella girls starlight stage anzu fubata(the blonde loli) and kirari moroboshi. it's a fanart page for other IMCGSS characters as well. i use to play game, its alot of fun but its japanese exclusive so i couldn't play much due to language barriers. the fanart page is almost all SFW, but ratsofftoya pick TWO out of dozens of sfw pics to solidify her claim.

you can go on Krskii's twitter and see for yourself:

and my personal favorite:

(ooh lawd this is cute i might have it as a PFP with credit!)

anyway, ratsofftoya ignored these possibilities:

• There is no proof goldie liked the two photos, or any engagement at all.

• there is no proof that he had seen it, especially out of dozens sfw art.

• just because he follows this artist does not automatically confim he has a sexual attraction for lolis or kids. especially due to how the page is mostly sfw.

• goldie could just be a fan of IMCGSS.

this isn't a creepy pedo twitter page, just an idol fan page. but what really is illogical is the commentary ratsofftoya has in regards to loli drawings. Now with using two pics racy pics, ratsofftoya came to the conclusion that Goldie is sexually attracted to children. But lolicon isn't real children, it's not real CP and it's not even a realistic depiction of humans children, so what rataofftoya did was simply pass off her opinion of lolis as fact. I'm not trying to debate on whether lolicon is okay or not and im not gonna share my opinion, because the real point isn't the subject of lolicon but the wrongful accusation. the real fact is that lolicon is still legal, but social opinion of lolicon is very mixed, our opinions on such a complicated subject is not enough to convict someone as a pedophile. you're opinions do not hold that kind of power, especially without sufficient evidence. let's actually move on to ratsofftoya's evidenced and how insufficient it is.

3. False attribution of discord chats

the screenshots provided from the discord chats do not add up to ratsofftoya's claims, making the screencaps irrelevant more than anything.

she provided this screenshot of a mod stating their opinion on aged up fanart, and claims that this opinions makes ALL MODS in that discord MAPS and Pedo apologists. problem is that there is no real sympathy for any pedo/maps in both ratsofftoya and nestbian's screenshots. if anything, it's just some bad jokes, and Goldie doesn't even say one himself.

rattsofftoya commits the same fallacy like with the loli argument; the concept of aged up characters is complicated subject, its not illegal but there is alot of debate surrounding it. Ratsofftoya makes her opinion clear that aged up artwork of characters is wrong. she uses small and insufficient screenshots to to help make her OPINION seem like a fact, and accuse the mods of being MAP sympathizers. she's convicted these mods based on a biased opinion, the concept of aged up characters is not legally pedophilic so whether you think the subject is right or wrong, is still not enough to convinct others with opposing opinions as MAP enablers.

Another issue is how she claims minors are talking inappropriately with adults on discord, but there are no such screenshots, the screenshots provided give no evidence of such accusation. With her convictions based on biased opinions, that accusations is not going to be getting any credibility anytime soon. Many of us know how discord works, it's not unusual for adults and minors to be in the same server, it's not a pedophilic thing. But one thing that discord mods do is have NSFW chats specifically for adults, while minors are exluded and stay in the SFW chats. ratsofftoya has no screenshots on minors in a nsfw chat, you'd figure that nestbian would take screenshots of that if it was actually true.

Lastly, ratsofftoya uses these discord screenshots to further solidfy her statement that I-am-a-fish is exposing sexual content to children. But you don't see goldie or any inappropriate/sexual content in the screenshots, just problematic opinions at best.

4. Bad intentions:

from what i've said in this post above, I can conclude ratsofftoya's post overrall was very manipulative and biased. I think the most manipulative part of the post was the last paragraph:

Using the idea of child exploitation and sexual abuse to pull on people's emotions, a huge inappropriate call for emotion. yet, ratsofftoya has not proven or shown any child exploitation or pedophilia at all. we have yet to see any evidence of abuse! How can I believe ratsofftoya has good intentions when I can easily break the accusations apart and see lies?

As a real victim of child grooming, i won't speak for all victims, but as a victim I really don't like my trauma being used to witch hunt innocent people. My trauma is not for woke points, it's not a badge and it's not for your ego to exploit. It's pretty clear that ratsofftoya did NOT make this post for the well being of children and grooming victims, but the post was made for her moralistic ego. If anything, to use sexual child abuse to lie about others, is exploitive.

5. consequenses:

I commented on ratsofftoya's post, mentioning that there are serious consequences to false accusations. Of course the response was immature af so not sure if she'll ever learn, but I'll say it for those who'll hopefully listen to my advice.

Call out post with false accusations can destroy lives, and put you, the poster, in serious legal trouble.

Slander and defamation on its own can get you a lawsuit, you never know who on this platform has money for a lawyer. If this person you publicly slander is to self harm, commit suicide, or lose their job, you can be legally held accountable for it even if it wasn't what you intended to happen, disclaimers cat save you from that. Just because ratofftoya says the suicide baiting is wrong, doesn't mean that she isn't legally responsible for it, I-am-a-fish can legally use it against her. Even with the legal consequences, lying in its own has social consequences and it will be brought to light.

Remember this, you broke ass college students, no amount of woke points is worth the lawsuit. If you GENUINELY see a real predator, report it!

[nocturnalsleuth]

[ID: Screenshots of a twitter thread.

Image 1: Twitter user hairmetals posts "ao3 getting millions of dollars almost every year in donations but as a fic author you cant even mention needing money in the end notes of your own fic because ao3 will ban you swiftly for that. cant even have a button thats like hey if you liked my works pls consider just $1". Twitter user brosnyaa replies "I see the "AO3 should let us make money" takes are going around again, so as a copyright attorney, I'd like to again provide some information about fanfiction and fair use.".

Image 2: Twitter user SolmUnable comments "Wait so these twitter writers that made us pay goals for the next chapter of fanfic is doing something illegal??". Twitter user andawasp replies "for a story they're using another author's characters for? technically yes.".

Image 3: Twitter user brosn comments "In the US, the reason we can create fanworks without getting sued is the fair use doctrine. A lot of you are probably familiar with this - it allows us to use existing IP in limited contexts (i.e., when the work is "transformative"). What most people don't know about fair use is that it's an affirmative defense. An affirmative defense is used when you DID violate the law, but the law provides exceptions where that's okay.".

Image 4: Twitter user brosn comments "All fanworks are infringing by default. When you invoke the fair use defense, you're saying, "Yes, I did infringe on this copyright, but it's okay because x, y, and z." I think this is something a lot of authors and artists don't realize. When you write fanfiction or draw fanart, you are engaging with someone's copyrighted work. You're allowed to do this, but you have to understand that you're doing it with certain rules that need to be followed.".

Image 5: Twitter user brosn comments "Two of the big factors in determining whether you can use the fair use defense are: 1. whether you were paid 2. how much of the original work you used. The 1st is obvious. It's HUGE. The 2nd is, unfortunately, why fanart is generally more acceptable than fanfic when it comes to copyright. Fanart captures a single moment while fanfic uses characters, settings, themes, etc. It's more drawn out.S".

Image 6: Twitter user brosn comments "So saying "but fanartists make money!" doesn't work. The analysis is completely different - fair use is a balancing test, and writing v. art tips the scales in different directions. Do I agree with this? No. Fanwriters should be able to make money! But that's how the law is. Back to the 1st factor. There are a lot of creators who are fine with fanworks now, but they're Only fine with it because fanfic is free. If that changes, we would most likely see more lawsuits. As a non-profit, AO3 is able to face the world and say "all our fanfic is free." ".

Image 7: Twitter user brosn comments "Their policy is in place so that they're able, in good faith, to certify that all of the fanfiction on their site is unpaid. It's a MASSIVE boost for the fair use defense. It means that if anyone sues the site or an author on the site, they'll have a much harder time of winning. I won't tell you not to include ko-fi in your twitter bios or to tweet fanfic links with tip jars, I just want everyone to understand why ao3 has this policy.".

Image 8: Twitter user brosn comments "Because heres one other thing more people could understand: lawsuits are EXPENSIVE. Especially copyright suits. It's really a gray area what's allowed and what isn't in terms of fanworks, but the point is, if someone sues you and you win, it could still cost you A LOT OF MONEY. What ao3 is doing isn't only to protect you legally, it's to make sure that no one even TRIES to sue you. So yes, they are being more cautious than the law necessarily requires, but in this case, caution is a very good thing.".

/End ID]

The rest of the thread is here.

tl;dr: Don’t monetize AO3, kids.  You won’t like what happens next.

[nvara-of-mortains-own]

twitter thread unrolled

archiving twitter thread screenshots under readmore:

link: https://sheridanbell.substack.com/

text (pulled from thread reader):

@ emrowene everywhere

Follow @brosnyaa

Oct 17, 2022• 17 tweets • 3 min read

I see the "AO3 should let us make money" takes are going around again, so as a copyright attorney, I'd like to again provide some information about fanfiction and fair use.

In the US, the reason we can create fanworks without getting sued is the fair use doctrine. A lot of you are probably familiar with this - it allows us to use existing IP in limited contexts (i.e., when the work is "transformative")

What most people don't know about fair use is that it's an affirmative defense. An affirmative defense is used when you DID violate the law, but the law provides exceptions where that's okay.

All fanworks are infringing by default. When you invoke the fair use defense, you're saying, "Yes, I did infringe on this copyright, but it's okay because x, y, and z." I think this is something a lot of authors and artists don't realize.

When you write fanfiction or draw fanart, you are engaging with someone's copyrighted work. You're allowed to do this, but you have to understand that you're doing it with certain rules that need to be followed.

Two of the big factors in determining whether you can use the fair use defense are: 1. whether you were paid 2. how much of the original work you used

The 1st is obvious. It's HUGE. The 2nd is, unfortunately, why fanart is generally more acceptable than fanfic when it comes to copyright. Fanart captures a single moment while fanfic uses characters, settings, themes, etc. It's more drawn out.S

So saying "but fanartists make money!" doesn't work. The analysis is completely different - fair use is a balancing test, and writing v. art tips the scales in different directions. Do I agree with this? No. Fanwriters should be able to make money! But that's how the law is.

Back to the 1st factor. There are a lot of creators who are fine with fanworks now, but they're Only fine with it because fanfic is free. If that changes, we would most likely see more lawsuits. As a non-profit, AO3 is able to face the world and say "all our fanfic is free."

Their policy is in place so that they're able, in good faith, to certify that all of the fanfiction on their site is unpaid. It's a MASSIVE boost for the fair use defense. It means that if anyone sues the site or an author on the site, they'll have a much harder time of winning.

I won't tell you not to include ko-fi in your twitter bios or to tweet fanfic links with tip jars, I just want everyone to understand why ao3 has this policy.

Because heres one other thing more people could understand: lawsuits are EXPENSIVE. Especially copyright suits. It's really a gray area what's allowed and what isn't in terms of fanworks, but the point is, if someone sues you and you win, it could still cost you A LOT OF MONEY.

What ao3 is doing isn't only to protect you legally, it's to make sure that no one even TRIES to sue you. So yes, they are being more cautious than the law necessarily requires, but in this case, caution is a very good thing.

(this thread is for educational purposes only, it's not intended to be legal advice, etc.)

This is already getting some RTs so: I'm a fanfic author myself, but I also write original fiction! You can read my LGBTQ+ fantasy detective series for free at sheridanbell.substack.com 💜

The Case Files of Sheridan Bell A collection of fantasy detective stories. Click to read The Case Files of Sheridan Bell, by Em Rowene, a Substack publication with hundreds of readers. http://sheridanbell.substack.com

(Another addendum, sorry: as I'm licensed in the US and ao3 is us-based, this is all focused on US law).

and the link to the AUS centric thread and backup

The rest of the thread is here.

tl;dr: Don’t monetize AO3, kids.  You won’t like what happens next.