The difference matters greatly in the grand scheme of things. I was mainly responding to Mirazuki that Pokémon ocs are not technically under copyright law since they're their own design even if it was a recolor its still its own character I would rather have a recolor of a Pikachu then an exact 1 on 1 copy of the universal Pikachu design if its wildly different ie. A red Pikachu recolor vs a yellow Pikachu with a few accessories thrown on it its still its own character.
Hii so idk how to start this but let’s say what’s up th admins?!
I believe it’s valid to say that doing cbcs (character based characte/character based custom) is a way to sneak into a copyright. Recently half of my cbcs Where nuked.
id have understood that on the first place but…
EDIT: I’m just pointing out that this user has cbcs NOT that they’re an admin.
YOU CAN GET BANNED FROM TOYHOUSE!
I’m not dragging them into drama as stated we are concerned with the moderation not jaywalk
i‘d like to add many popular artists that are friends with admins or just simply popular have done enstars cbc and SOLD them. But of course th has its favorites ❤️
EXAMPLE OF A CBC ACCORDING TO TH RULES
this is my oc Guadalupe (sorry for the weird censor of the blood ;;)
his bio is that he’s an Angel etc
he’s a cbc based off rinne amagi from the hit game ensemble stars
picture here for reference
and he still got nuked :,D
edit explaining the situation: I am fully aware the rules states this and that…however this discussion is how the management is applied. As far I’ve seen and aware there’s multiple popular artists selling cbcs for good money (example I literally saw a popular artist sell furry vocaloids) and no one bats an eye while people that follow the rules making sure the cbcs is a completely inspired character gets taken down and removed due to being “fanart”.
-Admins do not look into the character or if it’s just a furry version as folks that are a system got their alters taken down (correct me if I’m using the wrong words I just felt that was very disrespectful from the admins).
might As well sell cbcs since it’s “fanart” and I’m just making merch 😝
List of alternatives!
I know this about CBCs but it’s all
About the admin being weird.
LINK OF THE THREAD ABOUT BANNED ACCOUNTS
- Toyhouse alternative for cbcs here made by King-Monhwa! https://cbc-gardens.net
-another alternative https://loreforge.co more directed to pc and writers yet offers good features and a premium like th for customization 👍
I wasn’t very clear of my argument so let me reiterate.
While it's true that altering the color of a Pokémon doesn't necessarily diminish its originality, copyright law typically requires a threshold of creativity beyond mere color changes to qualify for protection. Similarly, recoloring Pokémon might not be sufficient to establish a new copyright, especially considering the substantial similarities in other elements like shape, characteristics, and abilities. Therefore, while recolored Pokémon may have some degree of originality, they might not meet the legal standards for copyright protection.
Certainly, Ash's Pikachu, as depicted in the Pokémon series, has distinct characteristics, personality traits, and experiences that differentiate it from other Pikachu characters. However, Pikachu as a species is a foundational element of the Pokémon universe and is not owned by any specific individual or entity. Just like real-world animals, Pokémon species are part of the broader world and are not subject to individual copyright ownership.
While individual Pokémon characters like Ash's Pikachu can be trademarked or copyrighted for their specific portrayal and storylines within the series, the species itself remains open for others to use and create derivative works. This is akin to how characters like Superman or Batman are copyrighted, but the broader categories of "superheroes" or "vigilantes" are not.
jaywalk has nothing to do with the moderation for this site and i find it odd to have singled her out for animals with enstars names. point hypocrisy out and criticize the admin if you want, but there's no need to drag users into it just bc they know the admin
i have no opinion on this otherwise 🫡 good luck out there cbc-havers, hope you get some clarity on where the line is drawn sometime soon.
edit: fixin' pronouns, based off of the ones i saw on twitter
The pokemon legal link that you sent is only for fanart and character models. Of course if you are stealing official pokemon artwork to create your own character then yes that is illegal and copyrighted content. And I did not say that nobody owns the Pikachu species, of course gamefreak owns every single pokemon species they cannot stop people from making ocs of their original species.
This will be my final stance on this matter
Also unrelated to this I also believe we shouldn't bring other people into this situation. They're not apart of the admin team so its not fair to them because its the admin's decision to moderate them or not.
Mass flagging actually doesn't do much difference. literally a few days/weeks ago a literal stolen OC was mass flagged for being a legit stolen design that needed to get taken down and Sudo just replied to these reports with copy pasted "you cant prove it was malicious they just happen to have similar colors teehee".
The people sent sigular reports on CBC the thief also had and that's when the thief's account was closed. Not because of mass reporting on a genuine issues but singular reports on individual CBCs. The bias is all about the CBC thing not how many reports are sent.