Whoops!

THROBBS

I am Fauve
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Posts
19,286
well, folk may have noticed, or not, the absence of of the "gallery" thread of ummmm... santortienamyera errsumthin' (santoss let alone)

The one with the digitally rendered, overly muscularly distorted women behaving extremely violently.

That one. Well, I never cared for the content, but tended to ignore it — different strokes and all. Today, I happened to look, as I wondered if the content had changed. IT had not, perhaps it was "worse" (pretty bloody in some images)., But I also noticed an add for a discounted subscription to more of the same (I guess).

I "reported" it, simply because of the adds. Next time I looked — it was gone.
I do not know if there had ben prior complaints, warnings given or what. And frankly, I do not even recall the user's name.

so, that's the story, if you're missing it. Sorry.
(not a whole lot sorry though):rolleyes:


I don't often report posts/threads, but when I do, it seems rather effective! ~The Least Interesting Man on LIT
 
Last edited:
Dafuk?

And here I came on tonight specifically looking for porn depicting overly muscularly distorted women behaving extremely violently with the express purpose of getting off. Throbbs, you've ruined my fucking evening :rolleyes:

All kidding aside, I know the thread that you speak of, and I'm shedding no tears over its overdue (in my opinion) demise. I understand that it takes all kinds, but I have to wonder what kind of individual can get sexually aroused over images of women beating the living shit out of one another, being brutalized in unimaginable ways. And there are guys out there beating off to this shit!

I'm sure there will be some who wail and gnash their teeth over this. Me, I'm going to sleep just fine tonight! I think that you've done us all a service.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
whew.

Well it was not my intent to have it pulled without warning or the person banned.

Hopefully there had been measures taken.:rolleyes:

I am not a fan of "poser" type "art" and much less so when done poorly and not at all when that is the subject matter.
 
Wait, you can't have ads? Y'all are burying the lead here. What are the guidelines for something like that? I was planning on linking to my gallery once I got it up and going, and maybe my webcomic or patreon. Are you not allowed to do that? I've never heard of a site that would punish it's content creators for trying to make a living. That's insane.

Is that a real thing? Because I probably won't be posting any art here if it is. That's awful. I'd never heard anything like that before.

How do they think people are going to be able to sustain the time and energy they put into their work if they're not even allowed to link to paid galleries, subscription services, etc? What is the point of using Lit for hosting if that's the case? Why would anyone create content? I'm really concerned now.

Like I know Lit doesn't have premade patreon or gallery buttons, or integration with any kind of print shops or anything like most free hosting services, but the idea that they would forbid that sort of thing is... unheard of. Is that real?

They really treat their content creators like free content generating machines to the point that they would ban them for hosting THEIR OWN ads? Not even third party ads, literally them trying to make a living?

Is that even legal? I've never heard of any other hosting service EVER doing anything like that?
 
Wait, you can't have ads? Y'all are burying the lead here. What are the guidelines for something like that? I was planning on linking to my gallery once I got it up and going, and maybe my webcomic or patreon. Are you not allowed to do that? I've never heard of a site that would punish it's content creators for trying to make a living. That's insane.

Is that a real thing? Because I probably won't be posting any art here if it is. That's awful. I'd never heard anything like that before.

How do they think people are going to be able to sustain the time and energy they put into their work if they're not even allowed to link to paid galleries, subscription services, etc? What is the point of using Lit for hosting if that's the case? Why would anyone create content? I'm really concerned now.

Like I know Lit doesn't have premade patreon or gallery buttons, or integration with any kind of print shops or anything like most free hosting services, but the idea that they would forbid that sort of thing is... unheard of. Is that real?

They really treat their content creators like free content generating machines to the point that they would ban them for hosting THEIR OWN ads? Not even third party ads, literally them trying to make a living?

Is that even legal? I've never heard of any other hosting service EVER doing anything like that?
You can promote content off Lit on this thread:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=569279&page=88

your signature block, and in your profile, and that's it.

What's "legal" got to do with anything? It's a privately owned website, Laurel's rules. She can do whatever she wants to do, and what she doesn't want to do is encourage eyes to go elsewhere, pretty obviously.

CandiCame, you seem to have been around a while, I'm surprised this is all new to you - it's all in the FAQs somewhere. By I do see you've only got one thing published, so maybe it's fair enough that it is all new. It comes up in the Authors Hangout regularly, but if you don't hang there, you won't see the discussion.
 
You can promote content off Lit on this thread:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=569279&page=88

your signature block, and in your profile, and that's it.

What's "legal" got to do with anything? It's a privately owned website, Laurel's rules. She can do whatever she wants to do, and what she doesn't want to do is encourage eyes to go elsewhere, pretty obviously.

CandiCame, you seem to have been around a while, I'm surprised this is all new to you - it's all in the FAQs somewhere. By I do see you've only got one thing published, so maybe it's fair enough that it is all new. It comes up in the Authors Hangout regularly, but if you don't hang there, you won't see the discussion.

No, I get it for writing. I don't get it for visual art. I actually had a lot of stuff posted on here, but I took it down because it wasn't very good.

And I mean that even privately owned businesses, for visual art, have to handle it a certain way, and that includes a lot of publishing issues if it's online. I don't think it's legal to host an artist's work and deny them compensation or ability to link to and promote their portfolio. You can't do that in an offline gallery or hosting space because it infringes on the artists's image and branding rights.

Like have you never seen companies being sued for not properly crediting an artist? You're supposed to credit by providing a link to the artist's preferred site. That's different from written works, because the publishing laws are just different. But if you provide a gallery space online, you're supposed to link to the artist with full credit on their preferred platform, and if you host a physical gallery you're supposed to do that via the little pamphlets that you put out.

Artists have to eat, you know.

The only time I've ever seen anyone try to get around this is by saying that they provide, "exposure" but even then they have to provide the link. I've never seen anyone try to outright ban that. That's why I was questioning the legality. Because I'm not a lawyer, but if you're providing a hosting service for content creators, you absolutely can NOT just "do whatever you want". You still have to abide by certain guidelines. And I've never EVER heard of a host being allowed to NOT credit the artist with a gallery link. And it boggles my mind that it would be legal to straight up ban them because that just... is art theft? There would be absolutely no way to know if what you were publishing was actually done by the person claiming to be the artist. There would be no verification process, which you have a legal obligation to do. Because the way you verify that is by checking the provided link to the gallery.

Like this is not a small thing. I'm just now getting into nsfw art, but I've sold art professionally for years, and if that's true it's a major, major departure from the norm in a way that is, frankly, horrifying. Like other sites have gotten taken down for it. Other sites have been sued to hell and back over it. It's not something I think you'd be able to just put in an FAQ and be ok with.

I think that you guys have to be mistaken somewhere about this.

https://www.diyphotography.net/giving-credit-credit-due-important-credit-artist/

https://aminoapps.com/c/art/page/blog/how-to-source-credit-artwork/vmhn_uNwEqvlvexP2PG7Dke8Qvv0PV

https://julieblanner.com/how-to-properly-credit/

You are required to source images with proper credit back to the original artist's gallery. Like, legally. Because of a bunch of various laws, to prevent art theft. I genuinely don't know how the site could stay up, host images, and not do that. And I sure as hell don't know how they could ban it and allow users to register from within the United States.

It absolutely is not a thing like, "Well I own the site, so my rules" because like... no, there are actual laws regulating that shit. Try to do that on any other content site and watch the site get taken down. I really think you guys have to be mistaken.
 
nope.

You CHOOSE to post images here. No on is stealing.
You can and should have a by line (unless you choose to remain anonymous), but that is different than advertising.

This a bulletin board, for sharing.

If you find abetter place to host images, let us know.

I found that deviantart had far too many limitations of "deviance", if you will.
 
Like have you never seen companies being sued for not properly crediting an artist? You're supposed to credit by providing a link to the artist's preferred site. That's different from written works, because the publishing laws are just different. But if you provide a gallery space online, you're supposed to link to the artist with full credit on their preferred platform, and if you host a physical gallery you're supposed to do that via the little pamphlets that you put out.

I may be missing something, I'm not an IP lawyer and it's a long time since I did a training course on intellectual property law, but I'm not aware of any law that specifically requires crediting the artist as a condition for publishing my work.

My understanding of copyright law is that the copyright holder (i.e. the artist, unless they've transferred those rights) can set whatever conditions they like on copying their work. Attribution is common, and many artists will license their work under something like CC-Attribution, but individual artists may choose different rules. Some will not give permission to reproduce even with attribution, unless they're being paid.

As I understand it, the things you're describing as "supposed to" are common license conditions and quite possibly norms in some areas, but I'm not aware of them being legally codified beyond the general "copyright holders get to set the conditions for reproduction of their work".

It would be very common for artists to refuse permission for sites to display their work without some kind of advertisement for the artist's business. But it's also within Literotica's rights to say no to some kinds of advertising, in which case the artist needs to either change their rules or not post there.

If somebody else puts your work up here without your permission, and without following your rules, that's shitty and illegal. But if you put your own work up on a site, you're giving them permission to host it, and it's up to you to decide whether their conditions are acceptable.

As EB has said, Literotica does allow some ways for contributors to promote their own business - I have links in my signature and in my profile to places where people can buy my stories, which is permitted here. But they probably don't want these forums to turn into an advertising free-for-all where people come here with the primary intention of promoting some other site.

(FWIW, on the rare occasions when I do post art on Literotica, I do my best to credit the artist with links, and I've never had any grief from the mods on that; it sounds as if the removed thread may have been a bit more spammy?)
 
... snip...

(FWIW, on the rare occasions when I do post art on Literotica, I do my best to credit the artist with links, and I've never had any grief from the mods on that; it sounds as if the removed thread may have been a bit more spammy?)

yep.

and yes, there were "images" which were all text advertisements, along with pretty "offensive" (to me, which is inconsequential) — extremely violent, and that may have been an issue as well. lemme go look at those rules.

back
FROM FAQs:

What are the guidelines for submitting an Illustration?

Illustrations must meet certain guidelines, which are basically the same as for our stories:

- All persons in the image(s) must be over 18 years of age.

- Image must not contain a URL or other advertisement.<some WERE ALL advertisements and I think with URLs

- Image must be no more than XXX pixels wide. (Note: we will size the image to fit if we are able to do so. However, if we are unable to shrink the image, you will need to resubmit.)

- Like all other submissions on Literotica, images must be your original work - i.e. comics you created, or paintings or drawings that you yourself painted or drew. Please do not submit photos or other images you have found elsewhere.

- We do not accept images of bestiality. (This means we do not accept human beings with real animals. Vampires, werewolves, robots, and other fantasy beings are acceptable.)

- While we accept violent imagery of the type found in horror and adventure stories, we do not accept "snuff" (imagery that sexualizes murder or extreme torture). If you�re not sure if your image complies, try submitting it with a note letting us know of your concerns.<was getting into a questionable zone. I did not "study" the images

- We reserve the right to reject any submission we believe may infringe on other people's copyrights or trademarks.

- We do not currently accept photographs or photo-manipulations to our Illustrations category.

As with Literotica stories, if your image does not meet all of the above requirements, your submission will be sent back to you with a reason why we can't publish it.


*****
btw: there is no official moderator for The Visual Artists Corner, so stuff tends to "slip on by". As I said, I pretty much ignored the thread, and only happened upon the adds (and increasingly violent images — very bloody women)
 
Last edited:
I may be missing something, I'm not an IP lawyer and it's a long time since I did a training course on intellectual property law, but I'm not aware of any law that specifically requires crediting the artist as a condition for publishing my work.

My understanding of copyright law is that the copyright holder (i.e. the artist, unless they've transferred those rights) can set whatever conditions they like on copying their work. Attribution is common, and many artists will license their work under something like CC-Attribution, but individual artists may choose different rules. Some will not give permission to reproduce even with attribution, unless they're being paid.

As I understand it, the things you're describing as "supposed to" are common license conditions and quite possibly norms in some areas, but I'm not aware of them being legally codified beyond the general "copyright holders get to set the conditions for reproduction of their work".

It would be very common for artists to refuse permission for sites to display their work without some kind of advertisement for the artist's business. But it's also within Literotica's rights to say no to some kinds of advertising, in which case the artist needs to either change their rules or not post there.

If somebody else puts your work up here without your permission, and without following your rules, that's shitty and illegal. But if you put your own work up on a site, you're giving them permission to host it, and it's up to you to decide whether their conditions are acceptable.

As EB has said, Literotica does allow some ways for contributors to promote their own business - I have links in my signature and in my profile to places where people can buy my stories, which is permitted here. But they probably don't want these forums to turn into an advertising free-for-all where people come here with the primary intention of promoting some other site.

(FWIW, on the rare occasions when I do post art on Literotica, I do my best to credit the artist with links, and I've never had any grief from the mods on that; it sounds as if the removed thread may have been a bit more spammy?)

Ok. Sweet. Thank you, that's exactly what I was asking.

Where I got confused was I didn't know we were talking about the forums. I thought they were talking about using Lit as an actual host site, because I know that you can submit work to be hosted here. I didn't know we were just talking about a forum thread. And that might be completely on me.

Thanks!

The copyright law thing- I'm on mobile so I can't link it, but if you want to not credit the artist that's art theft and you have to have explicit written permission from the artist and a way to verify that the person you got it from is the artist. It can't be verbal or implied, it has to be explicitly written. You have to have a way to prove it because it actually violates a bunch of laws, not just copyright and licensing stuff. Because an artist IS their brand there are laws about misrepresenting the brand, laws about piracy, etc. It's not a small, simple thing, which is why I was so shocked that somebody could say something like, "the site sets the rules" or, "you voluntarily posted here" like those are real things that can just be brushed aside instead of huge legal issues.
 
Last edited:
nope.

You CHOOSE to post images here. No on is stealing.
You can and should have a by line (unless you choose to remain anonymous), but that is different than advertising.

This a bulletin board, for sharing.

If you find abetter place to host images, let us know.

I found that deviantart had far too many limitations of "deviance", if you will.

The issue of art theft would still remain under those guidelines. But that makes sense on a forum.

I just opened an account on hentaifoundary, but I've not been using it long enough to know if I would recommend it.
 
Where I got confused was I didn't know we were talking about the forums. I thought they were talking about using Lit as an actual host site, because I know that you can submit work to be hosted here. I didn't know we were just talking about a forum thread. And that might be completely on me.
I've not seen Lit spruiked as a hosting site for visual art. Sure, you can submit your own art like you can a story, but I don't think that places any legal obligations on the site as a "host." Burden of proof of ownership remains with you, and anyone using the image without attribution - that would also be down to you to go chase, if somehow you identified theft. Or have I missed something?
 
I've not seen Lit spruiked as a hosting site for visual art. Sure, you can submit your own art like you can a story, but I don't think that places any legal obligations on the site as a "host." Burden of proof of ownership remains with you, and anyone using the image without attribution - that would also be down to you to go chase, if somehow you identified theft. Or have I missed something?

It's basically that any site that claims to have a submission procedure is a host. So somewhere like, say, facebook or this forum, where a user can just post whatever they want, isn't considered a host. It's still illegal not to credit an artist unless you've licensed the work, but it's an individual responsibility thing. So if someone posted an image without proper credit to facebook, facebook wouldn't get shut down, the user would.

But if you have a submission process, if you're an online publisher, then you're supposed to be vetting those submissions in some way. At that point it's your responsibility to prevent art theft.

That's why when I learned it was just a forum thread I was like, "Oh, yeah, that makes perfect sense." Because that's just on the user, that's not the site. And a place like that, where the onus is on the user, can just pretty much delete whatever thread they want.

My question was answered so I'm cool now. I just got worried for a minute, but really it's my own damn fault because OP used the word "thread" in the original post. So this one's on me.

In my defense I've had a couple recent problems with art theft so I've been froggy. But the misunderstanding really was on me and I'm big enough to admit that. I thought we were talking about vetted user submissions in a virtual gallery (like you can do. That is a thing the site does, the main Lit site.) But we were just talking about a forum thread. And I should have read closely enough to know that. So- my bad! Sorry!
 
hmmm... it's baaaaack.:rolleyes:

YOU can notify the authorities this time.
 
Last edited:
Gross, in pretty much every way.

Does anyone here actually enjoy that imagery/fantasy?
I am not so naive to imagine that there is no audience.
Anything you can thin of (and beyond) is out there.

Heck, I am sure much of my own imagery squicks some folk out.
 
Last edited:
Gross, in pretty much every way.

Does anyone here actually enjoy that imagery/fantasy?
I am not so naive to imagine that there is no audience.
Anything you can thin of (and beyond) is out there.

Heck, I am sure much of my own imagery squicks some folk out.

There are some, guys mainly, who are into it. They get off on violence towards women, because they feel threatened by them. They're afraid of an independent woman who thinks for herself and doesn't need a man to support her and can stand on her own. They're so offended if a woman in real life turned them down that they have to beat her into submission. So they indulge in their fantasies of women being brutalized, getting their pitiful dicks hard as they get off on the imagery.

Yeah, I may have a thought or two on the subject.
 
There are some, guys mainly, who are into it. They get off on violence towards women, because they feel threatened by them. They're afraid of an independent woman who thinks for herself and doesn't need a man to support her and can stand on her own. They're so offended if a woman in real life turned them down that they have to beat her into submission. So they indulge in their fantasies of women being brutalized, getting their pitiful dicks hard as they get off on the imagery.

Yeah, I may have a thought or two on the subject.

It does seem a bit more twisted than many/most "fetishes".

I like a bit of SM/BD "imagery" — some of the trappings, and dishing a spanking, but only in a consensual way and I'm not keen on leaving marks. I happen to know a woman who actually liked pain, and even bruising... I never got that far/deep, not sure that I would want to either....hmmm. That is a bit of a conundrum, if the recipient actually enjoys it. (not to any near the degree of violence depicted in that thread).

That thread, doesn't show any men (that I noted, not that I studied it)... just Steroid/synthetic women savaging each other.
 
That thread, doesn't show any men (that I noted, not that I studied it)... just Steroid/synthetic women savaging each other.

True, but it still shows women being brutalized for no purpose other than to entertain worthless assholes while they jerk themselves off.

And in all those pics, I don't see any of guys getting the living shit kicked out of them or having their nuts crushed. Just an observation.
 
True, but it still shows women being brutalized for no purpose other than to entertain worthless assholes while they jerk themselves off.

And in all those pics, I don't see any of guys getting the living shit kicked out of them or having their nuts crushed. Just an observation.

baffles me.

Ok, they are nude. They have big boobs. They are sweaty. I get that works for some folk.

But the are poorly rendered. They are overly masculine for my taste.
and the violence... nope, could never jerk off to that imagery (even if well rendered).

It also seems that entertaining that fantasy is not healthy.
 
It also seems that entertaining that fantasy is not healthy.

Unfortunately there are probably quite a few unhealthy (i.e. sick) individuals out there who get off on that shit. Says mountains about "civilized" society.
 
Unfortunately there are probably quite a few unhealthy (i.e. sick) individuals out there who get off on that shit. Says mountains about "civilized" society.

indeed.

And, sadly, that is just one example.
 
:rolleyes:

With no apparent encouragement, it keeps on coming.



oh.
wait.

I suppose that applies to me as well!:eek::confused:
 
Back
Top