I found out about this on reddit but naturally the discussion has devolved into senseless rantings with spittle. It will probably show up on Kotaku later which I'm sure will result in stimulating conversation, but until then...
- This was fanart of Princess Daphne from a video game. Can someone explain to me how much the law can actually be on this artist's side since SHE never obtained the copyright?
- Apparently the use of licensed images for academic purposes is ok, is this correct?
- Since it is fanart, it seems like an honest mistake. I mean why would FemFreq go for fanart when the rest in the logo are the original video game characters.
- Everything I've ever read about the use of Lets Play videos just makes me thing people are dumb, but ok: what exactly are the problems with FemFreq using Lets Play videos? And I thought Nintendo put its foot down last year and said all the footage was theirs? And why are people so stupid as to think a saved game means they created an original work using materials - that's a little bit separate but I can't help throwing it in anyway.
Please to explain all this for me. Thanks.
(I won't be monitoring comments for a while, so brace yourselves and all that.)
ETA: Not an update but I wanted to include this video from Cowkitty, the artist in question, regaring Sarkeesian's videos. Brought to my attention by ALulzyApprentice. I'm not very impressed with it, but it does illustrate a method of retaliation that fandom might just use if you piss them off. How to Make a Feminist Frequency Video!
ETA2: That video was not made by her, per Cowkitty.