Welcome to Inkbunny...

To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )

What is and isn't rule 34

by

No one blinks an eye when a major corporations character is rule34 into oblivion. But when's it's someone popular that participates as a furry suddenly people question whether or not they should rule34 other furries characters.

Too me I could care less if someone draws some even weird shit of my Characters but I'm not really famous enough to have so many fans that wanna do shit for me for free. Just saw some e621 comments about how people shouldn't rule34 one popular furries clean cub character becuase he doesn't like it.

It doesn't make much sense to me since fan art really doesn't effect artists original creation I'm anyway unless they say so.

Was just what was on my mind

Viewed:	132 times
Added:	7 years, 12 months ago 27 Aug 2017 02:13 CEST

11 Comments on this Journal

Leave a Comment...

Shea715

7 years, 12 months ago

link

My opinion on the matter is uh.. You shouldn't rule 34 people without their permission.

Like, some guy rule 34ed Suzy from game grumps and I'm like.. "..lolwtf that's an ACTUAL PERSON!"

Daneasaur

7 years, 12 months ago

link

Rule 34 stems from deeper websites that listed an assortment of various rules.

34 = There is porn of it, no exceptions.
35 = If there is no porn, porn WILL be made of it
63 = Porn will be made of [character] being the opposite gender

What is important to know is that 34 has no mercy. It has no sympathy, and it has no limits. Don't want [character/person/item] to have porn of it? Don't get popular and don't put it on the net. Popular? On the net? 35 takes over and 34 will be the result.

No exceptions.

"Oh, I'm a special snowflake and I made [OC Donutsteel!] so I say what can and can't be done." If you are online and have this mindset? You'll go insane and 34 will be made EVEN HARDER. 34 stemmed not just from "childhood ruined" and "that actually IS hot", but ALSO trolling.

"Don't do porn of [something]"
"I'm gonna make porn of [something] JUST because you said NOT to!"

A smart person just rolls with it and turns a blind eye to it if they don't want it.

Zeikcied

7 years, 12 months ago

link

I kind of wish people would draw more r34 of Jay Naylor's cubs from his Original Life comic. I've only seen one drawing of Thomas and his cousin Leo over on Paheal, but that's it. I don't know what Naylor's stance on cub porn is, but he did have Fisk lose his virginity at age 10 in his old Better Days comic. It wasn't exactly explicit sex, but it is part of the comic.

As for the whole Rule 34 thing, I think if the characters are in like a web comic series or something like that, then they're fair game. If it's just someone's personal character, then I think it falls under "fan art" and you should get their permission first.

Kaheiyattsu

7 years, 12 months ago

link

@ Zeikcied

Well said character was from a webcomic to be fair. Though he did show personal distaste for people rule34ing the underage skunk girl there.

GreenReaper

7 years, 12 months ago

link

Edited 7 years, 12 months ago by Owner

I think a lot of it comes from how people's characters are seen as representations of [portions of] themselves. It's easy to get squicked if a representation of you is pictured doing something which you wouldn't do - or even which you might, but would want to have been consulted on first.

Corporations can't get hurt in the same way because they aren't people. Arguably individual animators could, if they identify with their creations, but they also get paid to have their characters do what other people want anyway. So there's not really that same kind of moral justification for not doing it. (From a copyright perspective the companies will probably never do the kind of thing in rule34 themselves, so it's not like you're depriving them of a market - and the concept of defacement of trademark is hard to prove.)

Where it gets tricky is, as

Zeikcied

says, when there are people who have made a specifically-promoted product (and often made good money on it). The characters may have certain elements of the creators in, and they may feel fondly for them. But they also have a separate "life" - they are not mere proxies for the creator - and thus, arguably, don't deserve such protection. And most don't try; they just try to avoid it if they don't like it (arguably easy enough here with suitable keyword blocks).

This is a very complicated area to navigate in, which is why Inkbunny refers to "commercial copyright characters". Note that this doesn't mean you can make money off these characters. Corporations tend to be smart here and focus on products such as character statuettes for which they have licensed the rights to others (and so have to defend). It's only been a issue once or twice.

eonzeetyphlosion

7 years, 12 months ago

link

Because someone's OC is significant and meaningful to them. It's made to be an embodiment or ideal version of themselves, or aspects of themselves.

Soulfire

7 years, 12 months ago

link

what about what that character means to the person who perceives it ? Philosophically speaking , many of us grew up loving certian disney characters , for example. And they helped form apart of who we are . Are we to now draw line in the sand and say um this part of that worship is ok and such and such is not . I would submit that things like rule 34 fall into a form of worship .

emulating bugs bunny is ok , doing a routine , trying to imitate the voice comedically is ok , but wanting to see lola and bugs do it is not . Why do people always draw the line at sex?? IT speaks more to the western christian up tightness over sexual things than it does to anything else..

in anycase . if you throw something out there don't scream and yell when someone comments, uses or whatever one it. you want everything to be pure keep it at home . *Shrugs*

DownThePipes

7 years, 12 months ago

link

I never keep a stable cast so it doesn't affect me much either

EvanSKVRL

7 years, 12 months ago

link

I have to disagree. As GreenReaper says, OCs are extensions or representations of the person, so there's a very personal connection. Corporations rarely give a damn about the mascot/character they create, at least to the level of members of fandoms who create their own characters. Also, corporations can (and have in the past) issue a Cease & Desist order.

Also, from a personal level, someone using a character of mine in a way I don't condone pisses me off immensely. It actually caused a huge rift between myself and someone I once considered to be a friend. More than one, actually. If you're okay with people doing whatever they want with your character, more power to you, but I'd say you're in the minority as most people have at least some boundaries on what's okay to them.

Makroth

7 years, 12 months ago

link

You can't stop rule 34. It's gonna happen. But look at it this way: The more rule 34 of a character or series usually means the more popular that series or character is. Lots of MLP porn = lots of people like MLP. Personally, i would be honoured.

RepoFox

7 years, 12 months ago

link

Edited 7 years, 12 months ago by Owner

Well. The "Rule 34" is not meant only for furries/anthros/cartoons characters/ etc, it simply includes everything.
Actual persons too and their "fursonas". You just can do nothing about it.

If people can make rule 34 out from an actual celebrity, why a "popufur" (or their characters) should be treated any differently?
They just have to accept it.

New Comment:

Move reply box to top ↑

Log in or create an account to comment.

Help

Information

Policy & Legal

All artwork and other content is copyright its respective owners.

Powered by Harmony 'Gravitation' Release 80.

Content Server: Los Angeles Cache - provided by Inkbunny Donors. Background: Blank Gray.

The Inkbunny web application, artwork, name and logo are copyright and trademark of their respective owners.