Plagarism of Content

I don't see why. I was genuinely curious as to how such a claim was possible, since it didn't seem to make any sense: How can somebody make entirely different eyes all based off of pictures of their own, unless they actually have that many different eyes? I mean, they looked like very nice eyes, but how is such a thing possible?

 

No-one is disagreeing with you that the original designer can claim no legal rights to their ideas once they've released them into the public domain. As I've mentioned several times before this debate is not about the legal rights.

You seem to think plagiarism can only exist when it is defined by the law. This is not the case at all. If you look at the dictionary definition of plagiarism Alaska kindly posted you'll notice it makes no mention of legality. The word 'plagiarism' simply describes the act of copying an idea and claiming it as your own. Plagiarism occured long before copyright laws were invented to control it.

For example, let's say someone took one of Alaska's skins and re-posted as their own work. If you deny this is plagiarism, i.e. that person has copied original work and claimed it as their own idea, then you deny that Alaska created that idea and skin in the first place. To deny that shows absolutely no respect for her time, effort and talent.

Again, this debate is not about the legality of plagiarism, it is about the act itself.

 

Let me see if I understand the views of either side of this debate, Poobaloo:

I and several others define plagiarism as: taking someone's work or ideas as if they were your own.

You define plagiarism as: taking someone's copyrighted work or ideas as if they were your own.

Have I understood your position correctly? You can only plagiarize an artist if their work is legally protected by copyright law?

Surely, if this were the case then plagiarism cannot have existed before copyright law was invented? If so, how did copyright law even come into existence? Was it implemented to prevent something that didn't even exist yet? No, it was implemented to stop the act of plagiarism. Plagiarism didn't spring into being because of it.

 

I will agree w your definition of plagirism. But as I said, in this case, for example, a skin made by Alaska is not "work or ideas" of hers in the first place. There is no intellectual property here. If ANYthing, somone who copies a publicly downloaded outfit, is plagirising maxis, not alaska. Alaska may have made it, but once she posts it, she no longer can claim the rights to that work or those ideas, cuz she willingly gives up all right to any credit for it by uploading it.

Who made it becomes secondary. It is public domain stuff.

Very rude to copy, but not plagirising. It's no longer her "work" once she donates it to the community.

That's like... donating my time to a church, then demanding ppl shake my hand when entering. Or donating a car to charity, but expecting to get rides in it.

No. Once you upload a sim, skin, or whatever, it is no longer your work. You may have made it, but it's not yours anymore, and you are no more entitled to it than me, or anyone else.

Can GM claim ownership of my car? They MADE it after all... No. I bought it, just like I bought the rights to enjoy, download, modify, and repost skins. Can they even demand that I don't rip the "GM" logo off of it, and put "made by poobaloo?" No, of course not. It's my car. It's my skins. You post them, they belong to the community.

Some ppl have respect, others dont. But it's not plagirism, cuz it's no longer your work once you upload (donate) it.

 

Totally different.

An artist didn't do his work under an ELA that if he uploaded that work, it then becomes public domain, and all rights to it's content, become that of EA Games.

 

I don't think your odds of challenging a content plagiarist in court are terribly good. There's the difficulty in finding the offender, a lawyer willing to take the case, and a judge who won't fling it out of court as frivolous.

 

Hey, if anyone should be able to recolour my skins, it should be me.

The aquamarine ones are actually the un-recoloured ones. They're also the most fake looking. Weird lighting in the original photo.