Here we go again...
If you are going to delete fan art for being kiddy porn not having any artistic merit to offset the fact that it might depict someone under 18 [EDIT: Clarification] (and I say 'might depict' because LJ says the characters are under 18 and the artists are disputing it) then picking some of the (I'm told) better known artists in the Harry Potter
( Read more... )
Comments 5
Reply
The legal side of it really isn't my area and I am avoiding it like the plague so I have no clue. I'm just (selfishly) rather glad I have finished doing my thesis now so I could stick with the traditional 'copyright' issues rather than having to deal with the 'is a picture of the 17 year old Marauders in an puppypile kiddyporn' and is this what my research is really about. I get enough crap about tentacles.
I think the style you are referring to might be 'chibi'. I don't think they are actually supposed to look like children just sort of smaller. I always had similar problems with hobbits ( ... )
Reply
I always said, if I could actually draw (as opposed to Photoshop), I'd do a cartoon of Jim as Paul Bunyan, strolling through the trees, with Blair sticking out his breast pocket nattering on about "Where are we going?!" *g*
is a picture of the 17 year old Marauders in an puppypile kiddyporn' and is this what my research is really about. I get enough crap about tentacles.
a) Puppypiles should never be considered porn, and b)...tentacles? Do I even wanna know?
I think the style you are referring to might be 'chibi'. I don't think they are actually supposed to look like children just sort of smaller. I always had similar problems with hobbits.*rolls eyes* So, of course, the Wiki couldn't be bothered to actually a have a picture to go with it...if you feel like it, shoot me an e-mail (so I have your address), and I'll send you privately the Sentinel pics I was talking about. ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment