ANSWERED:Give Concept Creators Credit In-Site

[Lythiaren]

...Wait, what I am asking her? ._.

 

c:

 

Well, why not all of those traits? A breed doesn't necessarily have to revolve around one idea, but the ideas that make that dragon the most unique compared to the rest of the dragons is more of what I'm getting at. Would the breed be completely different if one or more of those traits were missing? If so, I'd say they're pretty significant to what makes it its own dragon breed. If not, well then perhaps it's not so important.

About the circumstances in the situation of the rogue dragon. I'm fuzzy on those details so it's better to ask her if you would like to examine that. :3

 

I guess my question is, where do the traits stop being "defining" and become a mere consequence of something more important? Would the harvester's basket weaving be a defining trait in itself or is it merely a consequence of the fact that they need to collect and juice apples to live? Is their preferred habitat near slow-moving water because of a natural tendency or does it arise from the need to clean their fruit before processing? Where's the line drawn between "significant" and just "important"?

Edited November 7, 2011 by Lythiaren

[Fiona]

Um, TLOSpyrogirl, copyright infringement isn't a jail-able offense. Fines, yes. Jail, no. And it has to be clearly and undeniably proven, which is very difficult with images, and nearly impossible with prose. And as Jazi said, ideas, particularly on a website such as this, are not subject to copyright laws.

[skinst]

I apologize, I didn't mean to make out that you had. But the statement seemed to imply such, even if that's not what you felt. ^^; I'm sorry.

I merely stated how DC works currently, since people wanted to know why artists got credit in the first place.

 

What would you consider unfair about how I've defined the conceptor so far?

 

Because unfortunetly, there are a lot of variables on conception of an idea of who did what than there is to artist credits. It's much more cut and paste, so to speak, because the lead artist should (hopefully) keep tabs on who did what and credit appropiately.

 

With conceptors, say the OP makes the idea. Conceptor 1 expands on the idea, Conceptor 2 contributes a line or two, Conceptor 3 makes a new name, Conceptor 4 writes 4 paragraphs on breeding habits, Artist 1 adds a little more info, Conceptor 5 tacks on one more idea.

 

Now, imagine for a second if all 5 conceptors were given credit as credit is due. How the HECK do you try and figure out BSA's and whatnot? @_@ The whole thing sends me into a tailspin.

 

And if say only Conceptors 4 and 1 get credit. 2, 3 and 5 will more than likely kick up a stink the same way an artist would if they didn't get credit on a dragon they worked on.

 

It's just really messy. :x And not to sound like a downer, but currently I'm really not sure how to go about this in a way that will end okay for everyone.

 

(It's mostly the reason that I've stayed out of this thread thus far, because I remember how the other one turned out. It got ugly. >_< )

[Dolphinsong]

In all honesty, the looks of the dragon, espically if its very general in appearence (4 legs, one head, one tail, pair of wings, nothing really setting it apart from other dragons), shouldn't be considered part of the concept credits. Now, if the sketch if very unorginal yet is used, i see only artist credits no concept credits given. If it was a very unique sketch such as the case with the guardians, then yes concept credits should be added as it is very important to the concept of the breed (large tail shield and armor is a huge factor in that breed and is unique to that breed).

[stogucheme]

These are my dragons' features:

• Very territorial
• like avocados
• Likes to scare others for fun.
• Can live just about everywhere that‘s open; they‘re really hardy
• Forests and jungles are too hard for them to hunt in- they need wide spaces.
• fat and they like it
• Each head has a different preference for food
• they have seven different meals three times a day
• This causes their stomach to grow larger, making it seem more like a face.
• mono-gendered and sterile; they do not lay their own eggs
• they steal the eggs of other dragons and curse them. This mutates the hatchling inside into a Seven-Headed Dragon.

Forgive the sloppiness, but that gets the point across. 4 things from the list (if I'm counting 11 right) count as 30% or more.

This is why I wrote significant contribution. Significant here defined as 30% or more.

[Dolphinsong]

I wouldn't count it as such. Fleshed out details I considered as significant, half a sentance does not.

Edited November 7, 2011 by Dolphinsong

[Lythiaren]

How the HECK do you try and figure out BSA's and whatnot? @_@ The whole thing sends me into a tailspin.

If the breed is well put together I imagine all five conceptors would have come to an agreement or at least laid out what the breed is or is not. >>

Edited November 7, 2011 by Lythiaren

[~!~]

I don't think the amount of physical writing used to describe a feature should matter.

 

Take the Circlehorn dragon for example. It's got a long version, and a tl;dr version. Sure, you can read the long version, but if you read the tl;dr version you're getting the same information, and the dragon is still the same.

 

Conceptors shouldn't be given credit because they "deserve" it, nor should they be denied credit because they didn't put "work" into the dragon. They should be identified so people know who made up the dragon.

 

EDIT: Getting credit is not a reward. The artists aren't rewarded for their work with recognition, they're given recognition because it's required by law. It wouldn't be a reward for conceptors either.

 

Also, @skinst: I wouldn't suggest giving conceptors access to the artist subforum, but if conceptors end up being a "category" the way artists are, they might need their own subforum. Especially if a lot of threads with conceptors who are not the artists get in the cave. The Ascension thread, for instance, would be better off in a place where conceptors can get at it, but right now there are so few dragons where the artist is not the conceptor that it wouldn't be at all practical to do that.

Edited November 7, 2011 by ~!~

[skinst]

Oh dear god ~!~ don't go there. @_@ Happened last time, went nowhere.

[hazeh]

About the circumstances in the situation of the rogue dragon.  I'm fuzzy on those details so it's better to ask her if you would like to examine that. :3

 

I guess my question is, where do the traits stop being "defining" and become a mere consequence of something more important?  Would the harvester's basket weaving be a defining trait in itself or is it merely a consequence of the fact that they need to collect and juice apples to live?  Is their preferred habitat near slow-moving water because of a natural tendency or does it arise from the need to clean their fruit before processing?  Where's the line drawn between "significant" and just "important"?

Oh. Well, I think I was able to get my point across, I was just confused earlier as to what you were saying x) Unless I missed a question/point of yours?

 

 

Well, if it's alright to answer your question with a question so that I may better answer your original question (*headache*), what spurred you to make this dragon? What was it that came into your head that made you go, "Oh, this sounds like it would make a good dragon"?

 

 

Because unfortunetly, there are a lot of variables on conception of an idea of who did what than there is to artist credits. It's much more cut and paste, so to speak, because the lead artist should (hopefully) keep tabs on who did what and credit appropiately.

 

With conceptors, say the OP makes the idea. Conceptor 1 expands on the idea, Conceptor 2 contributes a line or two, Conceptor 3 makes a new name, Conceptor 4 writes 4 paragraphs on breeding habits, Artist 1 adds a little more info, Conceptor 5 tacks on one more idea.

 

Now, imagine for a second if all 5 conceptors were given credit as credit is due. How the HECK do you try and figure out BSA's and whatnot? @_@ The whole thing sends me into a tailspin.

 

And if say only Conceptors 4 and 1 get credit. 2, 3 and 5 will more than likely kick up a stink the same way an artist would if they didn't get credit on a dragon they worked on.

 

It's just really messy. :x And not to sound like a downer, but currently I'm really not sure how to go about this in a way that will end okay for everyone.

 

 

To me, it would just be OP, Concepter 1 (depending on what they contributed) and maybe conceptor 4, also depending on what it added to the breed as a whole. The others wouldn't have grounds (in my opinion, anyways) to make claims on the dragon because they weren't the ones to mold it, only to add suggestions. Now, if either of them suggested something that turned the dragon into something completely new, then yes, credit due.

 

I hope this thread doesn't turn ugly. ;n; I like everyone here...

 

 

The conceptors already have their own forum. It's called Dragon Requests.

._.

Edited November 7, 2011 by Shiny Hazard Sign

[Dolphinsong]

What I'm trying to say is this. Half a sentence = they live in herds. Well fleshed out = Because of their nuturing nature these dragons perfer to live in large herds, raising and teaching the younger generations all they have known.

[JaziandCo]

Even without "large contributions", people will still fuss. You could redline a dragon's toes in DR, and your name will appear on the credits list. Where does it end for idea contributors?

[stogucheme]

Even without "large contributions", people will still fuss. You could redline a dragon's toes in DR, and your name will appear on the credits list. Where does it end for idea contributors?

Are you serious??? And still not even a mention for conceptors? Maybe we should let it get ridiculous- the art credits are already that.

[~!~]

The conceptors already have their own forum. It's called Dragon Requests.

._.

I doubt this sort of logic would work on the artists...

[Dolphinsong]

Actually minor redlines don't get credit far as I know unless the main artists working on it allows for them to get credit.

[JaziandCo]

I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but ideas are not copyright. Ideas must be trademarked to have any true "owner", and that costs money. Right now none of the DC dragons are trademarked (unless TJ registered each individually), which means legally I could redraw the neos in a different pose and sell them to someone else, and not have to deal with any consequences. Morally, we know that's bad, and then I don't do that, but I easily could.

 

That means anyone can take even the most original idea and claim it as theirs as long as nothing was registered and nothing was traced. Within "ideas" are designs, colors, patterns, names, and poses. I could even call my hypothetical psuedo-neos "Neotropical Dragons" and TJ wouldn't be able to touch me legally, though he might ban me from the site and DS/Ultimate might stop talking to me.

Requoted, as a response to stogucheme. Once something appears in a solid drawn or written format, that particular piece is copyrighted to the person responsible. However, the idea behind it is not.

[skinst]

Actually minor redlines don't get credit far as I know unless the main artists working on it allows for them to get credit.

As was the case with the male Nebula dragon. Sif and I wanted Rosella to get credit for her tail edit, because despite it being a redline, it was one that we felt helped the dragon significantly.

 

Therefore, she got credit. Technically we didn't have to give that credit out. We chose to.

[stogucheme]

Requoted, as a response to stogucheme. Once something appears in a solid drawn or written format, that particular piece is copyrighted to the person responsible. However, the idea behind it is not.

...and (ex) my 2pg post about 7-headeds isn't in a written format? Seriously.

 

EDIT: I give up. G'night.

Edited November 7, 2011 by stogucheme

[hazeh]

Even without "large contributions", people will still fuss. You could redline a dragon's toes in DR, and your name will appear on the credits list. Where does it end for idea contributors?

The same way the lead artists seem to be able to ask and dictate who gets the credit for minor things, I don't see how the main conceptor or person leading the thread (if the original person left) can't do the same for idea contribution.

 

 

Edit: Everyone who posts after me should start their post with a smily face : D

Edited November 7, 2011 by Shiny Hazard Sign

[JaziandCo]

...and (ex) my 2pg post about 7-headeds isn't in a written format? Seriously.

Which means no one can copy and paste it, but not that no one can take the idea and run with it.

[Dolphinsong]

Besides, 7 headed dragons have existed for many years, long before your post about 7 headed dragons. =) If written word = concept rights then your in trouble because someone wrote about it years before you were even born.

[~!~]

Besides, 7 headed dragons have existed for many years, long before your post about 7 headed dragons. =) If written word = concept rights then your in trouble because someone wrote about it years before you were even born.

But, stogu's dragon isn't just a dragon with seven heads. It's also a dragon with lots of other things that make it unique.

 

Plus, nobody is asking that the ideas conceptors come up with be protected. Nobody is claiming that they are. We're just asking to have it be public knowledge who came up with the dragon.

 

I get where you guys are coming from, but legally there is no real reason to credit someone who comes up with a concept. Yes, you could do it to be nice, and yes, I hate it when someone uses an idea I obviously came up with and claims it as theirs. I'm pointing out that because artists onsite are still holders of copyright, TJ HAS to credit us in some form to avoid artistic plagiarism (or "art theft"). He does not HAVE to credit those who came up with an idea

This is what nobody is disputing. We're just saying that "to be nice" is a good enough reason to do it. Also because that information is useful to have.

Edited November 7, 2011 by ~!~

[Dolphinsong]

So if seven different people came up with a Fox Dragon, all very similier in description, yet only one of them has spriters making a complete set that ends up incave, who gets the credit? the one who managed to get ppl working on their idea? Yet the other 6 had the same idea, which were similier to the completed one... It would be unfair to credit one when they all had very similier ideas in how the fox dragon should look...

 

Or take the horse dragon. Say there were a total of three people, one wants the horse dragon to be based off the mustang, one wanted it throughbred in looks, the third wanted it like a pinto. Everything else is the same except the build of the dragon (which are all horse breeds so very similier in build) yet the one that its decided on get the credit while the other two don't. Still unfair in my opinion as they all throught it up around just its off a different breed of horse.

[Ferus]

Everyone is talking about copyrights and whatnot when even the title of the thread is called COURTESY credit. :| This isn't about legal stuff. It's just about consideration.

[Lythiaren]

Oh. Well, I think I was able to get my point across, I was just confused earlier as to what you were saying x) Unless I missed a question/point of yours?

 

 

Well, if it's alright to answer your question with a question so that I may better answer your original question (*headache*), what spurred you to make this dragon? What was it that came into your head that made you go, "Oh, this sounds like it would make a good dragon"?

I don't think you missed anything. owo; *drops*

 

Weeeellll the way my thought process goes is an idea takes hold (in the case of the harvester, it was "lol we should make a cider dragon" as an extension of... I think it was Kurai's thread) and I will stew on it until the vague shadow of a dragon becomes a clearer silhouette. From there I will determine where they live and what they eat (or in this case, drink, since they have no teeth) based on the originating thought. In the case of the harvester, TJ vetoed the idea of basing a set around alcoholic drinks so many concepts from that thread fizzled, but mine persisted because I adapted the cider pressing to juicing instead. When it came time to refine their appearance I took up a sample that vaguely resembled what I already had in mind (WoW Proto-drake, in this case, which I spliced with the gold wyvern body type concept, which itself was derived from Monster Hunter pseudowyverns combined with the DnD gold and a touch of my own creativity) and ran with it. Finding the dragon adorable in appearance and too cute to gift with fangs, the basis for their society and came to revolve around "eat drink and be merry", sans "eat" because they would subsist entirely on juices they pressed themselves.

 

So like all ideas, the harvester hails from a lengthy process. If you want to be quite literal, the initial spur that led to their creation was "lol let's make a cider dragon". :3