e621

[shadsdf.livejournal.com]

Just as a heads up, since members here were disapproving of it. e621.net is back and uploading art without permission just like before, only this time they made a couple changes. If you email them your full address and phone number they'll remove your work and put you on a DNP list (though the faq says it could take a while and if you write angry emails they will ignore you and leave it up), and they started offering wiki pages to post your commission info on.

Comments

[thegentilcat.livejournal.com]

I have to ask - is it legal of him to ask for that kind of information, whether in part or in full, to begin with? Why does he need that personal information in the first place? Why not simply take the images down if an artist comes across the site and wants their images removed?

I really dislike the idea that he can keep the images up/continue to direspect the rights/requests of the original artist by using the excuse that they failed to supply the information he demands in order to see the action through.

And, through experience, a DNP list doesn't always work. 4-Chan has that same kind of deal and people still post images from artists on the DNP list (and with how many images are always uploaded, the DNP images are not always spotted and/or removed).

[nicolyrezk.livejournal.com]

Verification of identity?

[thegentilcat.livejournal.com]

I think there are far better (and safer, more reasonable) ways of confirming someone's identity than asking for such personal information.

Like asking for a link to the artist's online gallery, perhaps? (if they have one, since the stolen art initially comes from somewhere).

[nicolyrezk.livejournal.com]

Doesn't prove anything. I know the URLs to many people's galleries. Does that mean I am that artist? No.

[thegentilcat.livejournal.com]

And supplying real names, addresses, emails, phone numbers and a digital signature does? People can easily make up names/addresses/phone numbers. And in the case of artwork that has no signature on it, how are you supposed to prove that the one claiming to be the original artist is who they say they are without a signature to compare it to?

And after the behavior that had apparently taken place the last time, how do you honestly expect people to trust you with such information to begin with?

Any logical person with half a witt would not give out such personal information to some complete stranger online and I think you well know that - that's why you have it in place; as this way, you justify leaving stolen atwork up on your site because the original artist refuses to abide by your unreasonable demands.

Sorry if that sounds incredibly accusatory on my part; that's just the way I view the whole thing.

[nicolyrezk.livejournal.com]

I still have to abide by data protection laws. If an address or tel. number or anything like that is provided for the sole purpose of identification.. I can't go giving it out or anything like that.

[fanartist.livejournal.com]

There's several ways to verify artist's identities, like a high res lineart or sketch of a certain piece on their website. I don't know any people who can properly fake a small portion of a 1200 dpi pencil sketch.

Or a layer breakdown with screenshots.

Though personally, I'd prefer to just go around and ask every artist you know for permission and other artist galleries they recommend. More work, but less sticky :3

[lilenth.livejournal.com]

Technically it's not illegal to ask for it but it's hardly safe. e621.net has NO privacy policy from what I can see so basically if you give them that information, they can do anything with it, flog it to spamming/scam companies if they want and you'll have little to no legal recourse over it.