Talk:WTFur

Art removal policy
Is art copied from an artist's site ever actually removed, or is the removal policy just a sham to try to draw artists into sending comments that can be mocked? Everything I've heard indicates the latter, and I'm wondering if the article should reflect that.


 * I have only been aware of the site recently, so I can't confirm or deny the "removal policy" of the site with any examples. Jeremy Bernal's art (who served WTFur with a DMCA notice,) is posted routinely, but at least they are straightforward that this because of their "Don't threaten us" rule. But then, there's is artist D.C. Simpson,...


 * Short and sweet, somebody posted a mocking image of Simpson regarding his sexuality on WTFur "temp" furry directory, followed by some of his copyrighted images, Simpson asks to be taken down, images stay up, administrator posts email takedown request on CYD,... Seems to be like WTFur is breaking the rule on this one just to rake Simpson over the coals for "X" reasons, specially since his email does not seem to "threat" them,... But, to give them the benefit of the doubt, it could be that since this is just a "temp" board until the main site comes back online, they could just be letting it run rampant, disregarding the "removal policy" until then.


 * So, no, I can't see anything that contradicts 100% their "removal policy" at the present. Just FYI. Spirou 06:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * ...That's until I just checked the new "temp" directory. One of three, either A) they truly are letting it run rampant, disregarding the "removal policy" until the main site comes back online, which is not kosher for a lot of artists, B) the "removal policy" is indeed a sham, so, yes, a rewrite would be in order or, C) there's been a lot of "Threatening" emails lately from artists, which would make their "removal policy" meaningless Xp Spirou 06:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Arcturus comments here doesn't really help on bringing credence to their "policy" either. Any thoughts from other Wikifurs about this, and a course of action?. Spirou 07:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I've noticed that they have deleted quite a few files, just not the Simpson ones. There's a few threads with "What the fur?!" error text which link to deleted files. So they may just be trying to rile up Simpson. They may make fun of Bernal and Simpson but they do seem to follow up on some deletion requests, at least.--Kitsune Sniper 21:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

WTFur 2006 server move
Just a note - the entry originally linked to a page which had a torrent download for all the files posted at WTFur. Due to this being possibly being copyright infringing and that it may be against Wikia's user policy (not to mention a lot of people would complain about it), I changed it to be a link to the main Pirate Bay site. I also removed a very biased comment regarding The Pirate Bay - the poster called it a warez site, when it's not one. Yes, the tracker is mostly used to distribute illegal software, but it's not a warez site, just a BitTorrent Tracker. The comment felt very biased, and I changed it to be more neutral.--Kitsune Sniper 23:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, no biased was intended, as the mention of "Pirate Bay" in the news is as often preceded by the "Warez" wording (the Swedish government involvement being the most recent one.) The entry was actually intentionally straightforward, but "Bittorrent" can work as well.


 * I dare say that you had more of a problem with the perceived insinuation of the word. "Whitewashing" can be as bad as "bias" ^-^ 00:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I think considering the site's founders actually call it "The Pirate Bay" and indeed run under a political platform for the drastic restriction of copyright, it's fair to assume that there is a certain amount of intentional facilitation of illegal copies going on. It may not store the warez itself, but it's fair to say that it helps distribute it. --GreenReaper(talk) 03:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * But still, it's unfair to call it a warez site. Those kinds of sites usually host the files themselves, or at least host patches to transform trial software into full versions. Torrent sites only host the files needed to get those files, and help people's computers communicate so the files are passed from person to person, but TPB does not hold a copy of the file at any time.


 * I do agree with you on that it helps distribute the files and may be considered a pirating site, but it is still a legitimate Bittorrent tracker. The media calling it a warez site, like Spirou mentioned in his reply to my comment... was way too broad of a generalization, and the news reports I read implied that all bittorrent sites or distribution methods were illegal, when not all of them are. Calling it a warez site may make some people think that all BT trackers are warez sites. Sorry if I seem a bit aggressive, I just suck at explaining things over text at times.--Kitsune Sniper 17:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Art removal policy II
A follow up: After talking to several artists that had indeed got their art taken down after a polite request and/or were helped when attacked on the board by removing threads or malicious images, it seems that their "removal policy" is more of a personal choice and belief than a set standard. A little biased, but it's their way and site. Should the article be rewritten to reflect this?. Personally, no, as they don't try to hide that their "removal policy" does not "apply" to everybody.

As for the poster that ask the original question: "Is art copied from an artist's site ever actually removed, or is the removal policy just a sham to try to draw artists into sending comments that can be mocked?," it seems the answer is "yes." Arcturus has indeed helped artist on this matter, but she has made no bones that if an artist (or their supporters) make a "fuss" about it, expect to be ignored on your request. The mocking is not directly enticed by WTFur, that's just people and their personal behavior. Spirou 17:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that with D.C. Simpson's post, it's clear that their removal policy pretty much is, "We'll take down your art if we feel like it". I think the article should be edited to reflect that.DuncanDaHusky(talk) 12:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks =)
"DuncanDaHusky (Corrected References syntax)" Thank you, I see were I made the mistake now =) Spirou 17:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)