Ren'Py Question about copyright and characters.

[Simulated Despair]

Good day, I have a question about characters, I want to try to create a game with Ren'Py because I probably know Python, but I have zero in drawing abilities, so maybe someone can suggest information about that, where I can take a free to use characters or something like that. I saw many games in which people took characters simply from pictures on the Internet, so I want to find out if everything is okay with this. Maybe somewhere there is a library or resource, sorry if the question is stupid. (3D Models unsuitable for my project :\)

Also about copyright in parody games, I would be grateful for links to instructions if any.

 

[Sphere42]

Are you planning to monetise this work in any way? If not you can probably get away with "almost anything" - redistributing copyrighted material is technically illegal and that includes sites like rule34 and torrents but no one will go out of their way to hunt down small fry like you. At worst you might get some hateful comments or a takedown request from one particularly sensitive artist (what are the chances they even find your work in the first place?) with little to no way of actually forcing you to comply.

If you plan on making money things are very different. The internet does not forget, but payment providers are large corporations and usually heed both US and EU laws if anyone makes even the slightest peep. You probably need to ask about the specific characters/IPs as well as the payment services you are planning to use and even then things might suddenly change as evident from all the Patreon discussions on here. One important thing to note is that payment processors and banks are NOT a national service in most countries. They must obey the laws of course, but they also have the right to refuse service to you for any reason, including no reason at all. There mere threat of a lawsuit against them (for facilitating piracy) can be enough to get you banned and if an artist can prove authorship via something like a signature the burden will likely be on you to prove your right to use their work through a contract if you are given a chance to appeal at all.

Morally speaking most people would consider both cases to be "wrong" of course and you should either go text-only or stick to sources with explicit permission for the intended use. There still is a difference because some open source licenses forbid "commercial use", something you should check for even on non-adult stock photo websites. For detailed legal advice you would likely need to consult a lawyer, or at least specify which country you plan on operating from. In the worst case they have some bass-ackwards prude laws completely banning the content you intend to produce for being "obscene", for example popular characters like Kim Possible or the Teen Titans might have canonically confirmed ages below 18 making any pornographic images of them illegal in the UK.

 

[DSSAlex]

Just copying images you found online would definitely be a copyright violation in almost any country. If you're just making this as a project to dick around with that's fine. If you're actually trying to make money the owners of the images can come after you, although depending on context this may be harder or easier. I would suggest against that in general.

But I suspect a lack of artistic ability is one of the main things that led to the spree of Daz3D based games (not to say Daz3D is easy and doesn't take talent to produce good images, but it can seem easy)

 

[RogueKnightUK]

Imagine you go ahead, putting your time and skills into this and create your game. Imagine all the time you spent learning stuff, getting your self set-up to do it, and then hundreds of hours of your time put in, and right after you release it, someone else simply edits your name out, their name in, and uploads it as theirs.

One would hope you'd be genuinely laughing at the irony, and honestly not upset - because that is exactly what you are doing to anyone who's images you steal in your scenario.

You learned to write as a kid, and didn't even have a choice about it. You learned to code, so you know that isn't actually hard until you get into really advanced stuff, way beyond what any VN will ever need. So guess where the hard and valuable bit comes in? Yup - the art.

For sure there are a lot of games that use porn clips, and this is/was especially prevalent from Eastern European developers. None of them tend to be critically acclaimed or greatly respected games though - and the players they tend to attract can often be just as lax about paying to subscribe, as they are about who owns the images.

If you just want to make a game, and invest as little as possible, expecting to get about as little as possible in return, then certainly using downloaded porn images etc is an option with almost no effort involved.

But if any part of your objective is to make a successful game, a game people will rate and appreciate, then you really need to do what that takes, and find a way to get legal content you OWN into your game.

 

[Sphere42]

But if any part of your objective is to make a successful game, a game people will rate and appreciate, then you really need to do what that takes, and find a way to get legal content you OWN into your game.

Well, Slave Maker was a thing...

Your opening comparison is not accurate either:

Imagine you go ahead, putting your time and skills into this and create your game. Imagine all the time you spent learning stuff, getting your self set-up to do it, and then hundreds of hours of your time put in, and right after you release it, someone else simply edits your name out, their name in, and uploads it as theirs.

What you describe is direct plagiarism. What OP describes sounds more like piracy at worst. There was no stated intent of claiming the images were created or owned by OP. Due to the different forms of consumption the rest is a bit of a grey area as technically showing the image within the game provides everything said image could on its own even if the work as a whole can be considered "transformative" and thus potentially even legal in some countries where copyright laws are not dictated by Disney.

All "pirate" projects I know of were free (though potentially accepting donations) and had some kind of community contribution or modding system with members other than the main authors providing most of the illicit images though. Usually including a significant overlap with "adult parody" interests which would attract those with an already lax stance on IP rights. Slave Maker, SuperDeepthroat, Legend of Krystal (the forum) etc. certainly had decently large communities though and were rarely if ever shunned (at least for piracy, everyone likes to bash on LoK furries ofc). Search for Brothel King on this site, that seems to be a decently active Slave Maker remake with a similar outlook.

From a practical standpoint however I do wonder what the legal standpoint of using free online publications made by the artists themselves is. Pixiv probably isn't governed by US or EU law and with obscure *chan or *booru boards it's anyone's guess. At what point do non-exclusive distribution rights become equivalent with the public domain?

 

[RogueKnightUK]

In any country that has laws relating to intellectual property, an author/artist/creator automatically owns those rights.

Those are the laws that apply, specifically copyright. There is no law called 'plagiarist-rights' because plagiarism is simply another word for a thing that breaches copyright.

Now, knowing that you were woefully uneducated on that part, try to understand that "parody" applies to using trademarks and intellectual property - i.e. the use of a character, name or otherwise a trademarked invention of another. It can never, in a billion years, apply to the situation as discussed. Never.

Given your clear and easily demonstrable lack of knowledge on these things you mention, (you know how to Google and look up copyright don't you?), you should probably leave this discussion to people who have an idea and clue what they are discussing.

But somehow I'm certain you won't.

 

[Sphere42]

In any country that has laws relating to intellectual property, an author/artist/creator automatically owns those rights.

Initially owns those rights, probably yes. But it is also possible to lose said rights in court, to transfer them to a different entity as is the case with most corporations in the entertainment and software industries or to straight up willingly put them in the public domain. If any of those "we own all contents of any posts you make" ToS can ever hold up in court then the image hosting sites might have shared rights to the works.

"parody" applies to using trademarks and intellectual property - i.e. the use of a character, name or otherwise a trademarked invention of another. It can never, in a billion years, apply to the situation as discussed. Never.

Not just "parody" but "

You must be registered to see the links

". For example if an artist takes a pile of porn photos, downscales them to potato resolution and makes a collage landscape image out of them that will most likely be legal in itself (though using pirate sites to obtain the original photos might still be illegal independent of the creation and distribution of their own artwork). However if the collage is made using the full-size photos and the artist obtained no permission from the rights holders that would probably qualify as unlawful redistribution. Still piracy and not plagiarism though unless the artist also claims to be the creator of the photos as opposed to merely having legal rights to use and redistribute them.

Or in case my second paragraph threw you off, my point was that a significant portion of the "adult parody" community do NOT support IP rights and openly engage in piracy even against freelance adult artists as evident from their works being uploaded to r34 sites. Thus it is possible to gain considerable renown and a decent following in such a setting even if you openly disregard and break copyright laws

And instead of condescending while citing no sources to back your own points, perhaps you could instead mention relevant INTERNATIONAL agreements and treaties including ones which Japan and Russia actively support? My entire point is not that OP's plan is "100% definitely legal" but that what could be legal depends on personal information we do not, and probably should not, have access to. Do you know the copyright laws in India? Why should any of us slog through the ToS of Patreon or Pixiv if OP might intend to use Subscribestar and Deviantart instead?

 

[RomanHume]

A good rule of thumb: If you didn't make it or pay the creator for it's use in your product, you're in violation.

If you do a google search for images, you can click on "tools" and "usage rights" and from there select "labeled for reuse with modification" and that will give you search of image that have specifically been released for public use (generally speaking). But outside of that, if you have to ask, you're probably in violation.