athos

False, but i don't really understand your question And btw i know you fap if you had an erection. And because of the previous facts i know that you didn't want to admit. And you said: <'aLso thats the knowLedge of other username, how did you know that information?' I would have believe you if i didn't know that and if it doesn't involved 'even by watching hentai, porn or eroge'. If you watch all of these and you say you have erection and you never fapped in your entiere life, then come on. I know persons who don't fap but they don't watch porn at all. Next person wanted to answer false to my previous question because deniying this would be too much of a lie and too obvious.

False, i watch the cgs but i don't fap to them in eroge, i'm more interested by the story. I watched euphoria cg and my lower part didn't even bulge a little. (and btw i know about some informations because i have means to know them ) Next person never had an erection or wetting (if you are female) in his entiere life while watching hentai, porn, or eroge, just some interest but never an erection.

False, you have reasons to lie because you don't want to admit it. But you already admitted that you wanted to see the boobs in some games and that you didn't want to admit you played for H and fap to some scenes ealier, and i remember. But btw true i cannot check if you lie or not. Next person know i am right.

False. Because i know what you say is not true and as such i don't need to say it. Next person has falsely answered many of the questions asked here.

False, the two together are not good. Next person has never fapped in his entire life even if he watched hentai, porn or played eroge.

Mmm, you didn't get the complete title. (it's Qwaser) But tbf, i guess i may consider it ok. And False. Next person's native language is a germanic language.

True. I broke my computer display 5 or 6 days ago. Next person can't guess where my avatar comes from without checking on google.

I came cross the topic previous posts, and i've seen some people mention the Prism case and so on. There isn't anything wrong with this exemple either. The artist just got inspired by poses from an actual photo, and i think he didn't even traced the photo. Just got it as a reference. The people who say it's a fault are deluded. Every artist come up with inspiration from somewhere. It doesn't appears just out of nowhere from the mind. References comes from real life inspiration or inspiration from others work to draw characters, write stories ect. Poses from artists are always inspirated from somewhere. Every artist has references. The reality is that it's in fact it's about people not being able to know where the references are from. But if you were able to dig through every material on the world, you would be able to find them in 99% of the cases. (it's obviously impossible for people to know about them in virtually every case). How is it posing a problem? Simple. Because some people are idealising the creation process as being something which only comes out from one person's mind whereas it's actually not true at all. References and influences are something which are unnavoidable. Sometimes it's not even conscious. There's one example: a lot of people problably now about the erotic painting (shunga) from the painter Hokusai involving an octopus? If so, fine. Then, do you know about Toshio maeda, who is the creator of urotsukidoji? He is known as the 'inventor' of tentacle rape, and some people keep asking him if he had done it in direct reference to Hokusai's painting. Here is his answer from an interview he gave to usa otaku magazine (complete link: http://www.otakuusamagazine.com/Manga/News1/Interview-Tentacle-Master-Toshio-Maeda-6904.aspx ) The point about a reference is that it's just a basis and a starting point, the artist is still creating something else out of it. Or is adding something else to it or expand it in the case of a derivative work (which is not really the subject here). In prism manga the characters have obviously no common point with the photos. In no game no life illustration, there are big differences which justify why the artist should not be obligated to mention his inspiration (if it was even intentional). Here another actual example to illustrate the problem: anime adaptation of the manga 'Aku no hana'. The anime was created by using rotoscoping which consists of tracing over actual footage of real actors for each frame. It's something very rarely used in Japanese animation normally, but has been quite used in western ones. Basically, it's the prism manga case with a x1000 order of magnitude: instead of one drawing there's more than 10000 drawings traced over involved at each episode. Now think about it. Did this fact pose a problem to the point of having people claiming that the animation should be cancelled? No. The only complaints were from the audience who thought the characters looked too different from the manga, were ugly, and that the animation was unnatural. And indeed rotoscoped animation has this aura of weirdness around it. Rotoscoped animation paradoxally is perceived to be unnatural even if it just takes real persons movements. There's nothing wrong with the game no life artist because his art is completely different and the pose is not even identical. It could even have been unintentionnal. The article in question doesn't come from an official source, but the author very unlikely will get a trial for the sole reason (some of) the pose has been (supposely) traced. A pose cannot be copyrighted. Once again, not directly the subject, but It's good to know that selling derivative works which are considered fair use (e.g doujinshi or fanart), can be perfectly legal, if you mention where and from which series the character comes from. It's just that if you are plainly tracting the drawings without any other element or novelty, obviously no one will be interested. If you take direct reference from another work and what you make is sufficiently different, even by not mentionning anything, it's not plagiarism. It happens all the time but audience doesn't know about it.

Like i said in my above post, maybe you didn't explain it clearly enough, but at some point i understood that you didn't understand why some people (in the article, which is an unofficial source btw) say some things about the no game no life drawing. I guess there was a misunderstanding. Also, once again, i agree, i don't see something wrong in the drawing. I think that it's sufficiently different even if the author doesn't mention the inspiration. Because maybe it was not even on purpose, artists having inspiration from a pose or a character to do another art, and who don't mention any reference are not rare at all. It's very common, even in other media as well (novels, films, modern art...). By the way anyone can meditate about this quote from Picasso: "Good artists copy, great artists steal."

I don't think i said the same thing. People here mostly say that it's wrong, and not many provided the reverse perspective that it could be perfectly ok and even a good thing. And regarding the article in the OP, seriously, if it was nekolover question, i don't see anything wrong with the no life no game's artist drawing as well. It is sufficiently different and transformative, and i don't think that even on a legal standpoint he would have any problems. Maybe it's where comes the misunterpretation, and actually maybe nekolover doesn't understand why there's a problem related to the drawing in the article. I think that's what he meant. It's simply the pose which has some similarities, every other thing about it is different. And the pose is not even 100% identical. Could have simply been a coincidence or an inspiration. Like i said, inspiration is very frequent in artistic works, and by digging deep one could find many similarities between works in which no inspiration was aknownledged. Really you would be surprised how often artists could share similarities to others in their work. Sometimes it's not even intentional. Also some people (in the first pages) said that it was wrong because it was illegal, which is first incorrect; it can be legal; and not even appropriate as an argument given the nature of fuwanovel.

Fuwanovel in a nutshell< Having a fairly new user or not as old or 'popular' than others, asking a question, and displaying a different opinion. Result= circlejerking against him (15 vs 1) And calling him a troll. Putting this little digression aside: in defense of Nekolover, he might not have a good english (he himself recognised it) but if he doesn't understand it, why are you blaming him? He probably has a different opinion. And from what i read he doesn't ask about it from a legal standpoint. First, tracing is not bad. Did you know that tracing is very often involved in the creating process of many works? When you see an anime on tv, it has been traced. Yes, what we call the "genga" which are handrawn were traced by other people to renforce the lines and give a clear outline to the drawings, and also to do the inbetweens necessary for the animation to take place. When you read a manga it has been traced: the mangaka assistants or himself traced the outline of the drawing with a ink pen, and this process is called "pen-ire". And so and on. There's nothing morally wrong this the act of tracing by itself. Absolutely nothing. However, if you trace the drawing of an artist, make very few change to it and you claim you made everything in it without mentioning where the character comes from, and you try to sell it, then it's bad. And you could have problems (from a legal perspective). For example, if you trace the character of a vn so all the characteristics are identic (facial features, hairstyle, clothes) just change the character name and say to other people that you created the character , what you do is not good. If you trace it then you change some details and say that it is a work based on the character from xxx vn then it's perfectly ok. If you are tracing the basic pose and are modifing every other detail of it, you should mention that you were inspired by xxx character from xxx artist, but there's absolute no problem with it. The first case is called plagiarism (because you claim everything was your own whereas it's not true), but the two others are called derivative works and also fair use. Morally speaking, it's just about aknowledging where the character comes from and your inspiration. Otherwise there's nothing wrong. That's why you have doujinshi in japan, and fanart, which are perfectly ok and even good, because they show the interest some people have for some series. And even known artists sometimes do fanart as a tribute to other artists. In that case no problem at all. But you should mention the name of the original character and where he comes from. Also almost all artist get their inspiration from somewhere. As such it's very common to notice sometimes some similarities between some artwork especially if the artists in themselves have a pretty unnoticeable style. Remember for example that for many people with no interest with anime, manga, vn and such, and who know nothing about it all the characters coming from these media all look the same in their eyes. So some people may not like it, but even in the case of no game no life author, the problem is that the author didn't aknownledge the reference if it was not simply a coincidence, but even in that case, if he can prooves that what he did is sufficiently different than the other work, his art can be accepted as "transformative" and derivative. Now to the people who talk about legality. Please. Stop being hypocrits, given that the forums talk about fan translation of vns. Fan translation is illegal. Because a translation is a derivative work, and so stricly speaking, making a release of a translation when it is made without the authorization of the Vn creators is technically unlawful. If a vn developer wanted to sue an user because he has released an english translation of their vn and they don't want to, if they start a trial, then the fan doing the translation will lose with 100% certitude. So stop using this argument.