08-26-2011 at 2:24 AM

No player owns the design, really...<br /> It belongs to Ala, which would mean it REALLY belongs to Rob, right? o-o It's just a generated image using premade markings. I think people just get too butthurt over things. XD<br /> <br /> It sucks to have a dog duplicated, yeah, that's why I think it would be nice to be able to hide a dog's markings or opacity so others can't duplicate a design so easily. n___n<br /> <br /> *scuttles off*

08-26-2011 at 2:14 AM

"I'm not here to say you're wrong"<br /> <br /> "ITS WRONG."<br /> <br /> lol, It's quite alright if you think I'm wrong, you don't have to be apologetic about your stance on the issue. XD I'm just stating my own stance in the debate, which is obviously subject to others not agreeing. That's what debate is all about, disagreeing, but discussing the disagreements and different sides of the issue in a civil environment. I don't take it personally. ;}<br /> <br /> Edit: And Kael pretty much just stated the line of logic I'm running on.<br /> <br />

08-26-2011 at 2:12 AM

In the art world, I believe it is more commonplace to sell prints or copies of a work than it is to buy the rights to the artist's image. Quite conversely to the sentiments I'm reading here, it's not only accepted that the work will be reproduced (in limited quantity, or not), it is expected. <br /> <br /> This is where it is important to understand who holds rights to an image or idea, as well as to discuss things like limited edition/copies, unique design, commissioned work, etc. <br /> <br /> I also think that if this was not addressed in the beginning, prior to sale or contract, the creator of the work retains legal rights to that property. This is just speaking in terms of real world applications and could hold little or no bearing on Alacrity. It's just food for thought :)

08-26-2011 at 2:03 AM

I agree with Mehou, I have never met anyone (except you, carn) that assumes that when they sell a dog, they still own it's design. As i'm not all up in the stats, i'm more of a looks person myself, so I still consider that making a replica dog ridiculous. I wouldn't say its STOLEN, i'd just say it's wrong. And not nice. Original owner or not, it's still wrong. You should AT LEAST mention you wanting to recreate the dog, contract or not.<br /> <br /> Common courtesy, yo.

08-26-2011 at 2:02 AM

You're right, it should be outlined or discussed. But how many of us just click "buy dog" without thinking to message the owner? The general assumption is that once you buy something, it's yours. At least, that's what I've always experienced and assumed.<br /> <br /> However, it is also wrong IMO to assume the design belongs to the original maker without contacting the buyer. If an attempt was made, however, it becomes sticky.

08-26-2011 at 2:01 AM

omg my computer is so dumb.<br /> ignore this.

08-26-2011 at 1:56 AM

To me, you're just selling the dog, but not your rights to reproduce it later. If no contract was ever discussed, then no one can really justify getting upset, can they? But if a contract of some sort -was- discussed at the time of sale, such as the creator agreeing they would not reacreate the design, and then going back on their word? Then sure, that could be upsetting and I wouldn't blame a person for getting upset.<br /> <br /> But if nothing was discussed beforehand, then obviously no agreement to any sort of terms was made, so the original creator can do as they wish with their own design. That's my stance, anyway.

08-26-2011 at 1:55 AM

It becomes property of the new owner. <br /> <br /> Macey has worded it so much more eloquently than I could. Unless it was in the original agreement that the design is still properly of the previous owner, then they have no rights to it. <br /> <br /> If I sold a character (ex: my fursona), I would not remake another character with that exact look/marking - because I SOLD it.<br /> <br /> Alacrity is 50%+ about looks, there are many players who do not use Ala for the competitions (I do not) and instead use it to breed pretty dogs/etc. The goal for us is unique/pretty dogs, and seeing copies of something we paid for or worked hard to mark is rather upsetting.

08-26-2011 at 1:45 AM

I never said it was wrong that they wanted to, that's understandable. But doing so without so much as a word <i><u>is</i></u> wrong. <br /> <br /> That's like me making a design, selling it, and then making that design again to do whatever I want. A character, if you will. Or a dog, like on here. It's the same concept.

08-26-2011 at 1:42 AM

I have the opposite position, in that I don't feel it's wrong if the original creator of the dog wants to recreate their own design later on.<br /> <br /> The only time I see a problem is if someone takes a design that was never theirs to begin with. At that point it becomes more of a theft, rather than just reproducing your own original idea.

08-26-2011 at 1:39 AM

The new owner. Hands down.<br /> <br /> When you sell a dog, it's mostly because of the way it looks, the other being TP or good personality or whatever. But mostly because of how the dog ~looks~. Which is it's design. If there was an EXPRESSED CONTRACT, as Kae put it, or an agreement of some sort, then it's the former owners/the original creators. <br /> <br /> If you sell a custom dog you should not just ~assume~ that you get to keep the design, because that's what you're selling. If you want the design back, or to make a twin/copy/replica of that dog you sold, then you should tell the now owner of the dog your thoughts about it. Maybe try to buy the dog back, and if not, then at least tell them your want/idea to have the dog back or make the dogs twin. Not just do it willy nilly. That defeats the purpose of a /custom/ dog. Whether you made it or not, the dog is no longer yours, and nor is the design.<br /> <br /> Yours in plural form, not pointing fingers. n__n