?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Ok so...Last year in November, a friend of mine saw that I really wanted an adoptable that went up for auction but it was out of my reach. My friend ended up autobuying the auction, and gave me the adoptable as an early Xmas gift. The premise of the auction is that once the design is bought, it belongs to the buyer 100%. So since my friend bought the adoptable and gave it to me, he relinquished ownership to me.

Fast forward to today, I end up finding the adoptable recolored and raffled off. Confused, because the design was supposed to be relinquished upon purchase. So I asked the person about it, their gf won the raffle and gave it to the person that I found the recolored adoptable from. We talk back and forth, and upon doing some digging through what they presented me, said artist sold the original adoptable to my friend for a lot of money....but two weeks after that, they resold it to the person that my friend beat to get the adoptable in the first place.

Then, said person that lost raffled the recolored adoptable to the gf, and said gf gave it to the person that I spoke to.

At this point I'm pretty peeved because the design was unique, and there were NO recolors presented at the time of the auction. I'm wondering how my friend and I should proceed with this...

Community Tags:

Artist's beware has moved!
Do NOT repost your old bewares. They are being archived.
https://artistsbeware.info/

Comments

celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 01:04 am (UTC)
This is a tough one. Was it specifically advertised that this would be a one off? As in the lines wouldn't be reused at all? Obviously without seeing it, it's going to be a tough one because the artist does have the right to reuse their art unless one of the stipulations for purchase was that the lines wouldn't be reused.
kayla_na
May. 2nd, 2017 01:10 am (UTC)
It wasn't stated that specifically, but it said:

"- Once this adopt is yours you're free to do whatever to the design, make changes, swap the gender, your choice since this character is all yours now! Have fun."
celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 01:11 am (UTC)
That doesn't particularly stipulate that the lineart won't be reused. I suggest contacting the artist to voice your concerns. However if they never stipulated they'd never reuse the lineart again it may be just a case of not going back to them.
kayla_na
May. 2nd, 2017 01:46 am (UTC)
We did, just waiting a response right now. Just kind of worried what to do after this point.
celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 03:57 am (UTC)
Let us know how it goes! I'm definitely curious to see how the artist responds to you.
kayla_na
May. 2nd, 2017 03:26 pm (UTC)
Well supposedly the person that bought the look-alike was supposed to use the artist's art as a temporary reference, but they never changed the character's lineart design while it was in use and when they raffled it off.

My friend and I are just going to chalk it up as an experience, and to make sure we get everything in writing in the future. The timing of the whole thing was just really suspicious, but not much we can do at this point.
celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 03:31 pm (UTC)
We did a little digging, and it definitely is suspicious as all get out. Given the artist tends to recolor their lines quite often this one wasn't uploaded, and not used in a batch like their other batch linearts.

It's really unfortunate, and imo shady. I wonder if this is the only one to ever get this kind of treatment, because it was obvious this one was meant to be a one-off like all of their other one-off designs.

Edited at 2017-05-02 03:32 pm (UTC)
wuvvumsoc
May. 2nd, 2017 01:59 am (UTC)
Context is definitely important, yeah. It's normal to see an artist draw over the same lines and use the body as a template, but usually something changes (such as hair/ears/tails). I don't know how often they'll sell a straight up recolor though, I believe it's considered less acceptable unless it's being done for super cheap adoptables.

That is a downside of the adoptable market is that entirely enforced through social capital and good faith. You can't always have a set of clear expectations and rules.
celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 02:01 am (UTC)
That doesn't particularly matter. The copyright to the lines belongs to them; they're free to do as they wish with it without making changes.
wuvvumsoc
May. 2nd, 2017 02:12 am (UTC)
It's true from a legal standpoint but it doesn't make for the best business ethics, I mean like selling a character, then slapping on different colors and selling it again.

With adoptables you aren't specifically selling art but you're selling an idea which makes it much muddier territory, but I think selling the same adoptable twice has been considered beware-worthy in the past.
celestinaketzia
May. 2nd, 2017 02:18 am (UTC)
It's been beware worthy when it's the exact same adoptable, not a simple recolor. As you said earlier, there are no hard and fast rules.

At any rate, only once a post is in the queue can we determine if something is bewareable. In this instance I feel (I can't speak for the other mods) it's going to come down to:

1. The original agreement. If the artist claimed that this design would never be reused then that's a big no no to do so.
2. How they handle Kayla-Na's concerns.

Edit: Fixed my sentences because I can't type.

Edited at 2017-05-02 02:21 am (UTC)
wuvvumsoc
May. 2nd, 2017 02:22 am (UTC)
Fair enough. I didn't know if same exact lines, different colors warranted the "same" adoptable.

Profile

A_B icon
artists_beware
Commissioner & Artist, Warning & Kudos Community
Artists Beware

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com