February 2020 donation progress: $116.32/$250 (47%). Click to learn more...
close
Hello! Thank you for using yiff.party!

We hope you enjoy using it. yiff.party operates on a non-profit basis, and as such, all the server expenses are paid by our users. We don't want to run ads or infect you with crypto miners. We depend on users like you to keep the site running, and to preserve years and terabytes of amazing content—some of which is no longer available from its original creators!

Because of the nature of the site, many users are reluctant to donate. That's OK! yiff.party was created so everyone can enjoy the content we host without any restrictions or paywalls. But if you value the service we provide, and are able to, we—and our users—would be tremendously grateful if you considered making a donation.

Donation progress for February 2020

So far, approximately $116.32 has been raised out of our target of $250.00. We're about 47% of the way there! Please note: this tracker is updated manually—don't worry if your donation doesn't show up immediately!

yiff.party's server costs are due on the last day of each month. So, we need to meet this goal before 29 February!

How to donate?

At this time, yiff.party can only accept donations in numerous cryptocurrencies. Please select a currency below to display the relevant donation address.

Bitcoin (BTC)
Bitcoin Cash (BCH)
Ethereum (ETH)
Ethereum Classic (ETC)
Litecoin (LTC)
Why can't I donate through other means (eg. PayPal)?

Due to the nature of sites like yiff.party, it is very difficult to find payment processors who will accept clients like us. If we were to accept donations via PayPal, it wouldn't take more than a day for someone to submit an abuse report and get our account frozen. Until a viable way of accepting monetary donations becomes available, cryptocurrency will remain the only option.

There are many resources available on how to purchase crypto. For Bitcoin, check out bitcoin.org's page on buying Bitcoin for a list of methods. For beginner Bitcoin users, yiff.party recommends using an escrow service such as LocalBitcoins.

is this site legal?

undoReturn
images.jpg (14.3KiB, 409x282) save_alt

is it?

Yes.

What do you think?

obviously its not lol but good things in life are usually illegal

No, we are just stealing content from creators in Patreon.
The content is not protected by Copyright, it's only protected by paywalls.

The key word is 'not illegal'

Hated by patreon, yep. Which is why they updated their security, now all creators can only be updated if someone is subbed to that artists and tracking to YP.

>>56520
>stealing
>implying donors aren't importing content they were given access to
>implying Patreon is a marketplace

>>56673
I'm just trying to say this site is not illegal.
Some people (especially the creators) think we're stealing their content when we're already paying.

It's probably legal, but it's kinda unethical.

I mean if you paid for the content, it's legal. You are not stealing, you're just sharing what you paid for.
It's like buying a brand new phone and asking is it illegal to show it around.

Now what artist are doing is like some company saying "hey, we know you paid for this phone, but don't show it to anyone or we are going to throw a tantrum".

Copyright is given automatically to the creator of any photography and digital media https://thelawtog.com/copyright-laws-for-photographers/ https://fstoppers.com/originals/know-your-rights-basics-photographic-copyrights-203294 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/481194/c-notice-201401.pdf

So really no, the site isn't legal. But I don't really give a shit anyway.

>>56815
What about the legal jurisdiction?

>>56815
Nice sources

It's a gray area. Some countries? Yes. Other countries? No.
It also depends what gets uploaded. in the first place.

Like a lot of the internet, it's illegal in some ways, and legal in others, although it's more illegal than legal it's often not worth the time and money most people make to shut it down. It's like making a Flash sonic game. Is it illegal? Kinda. Is it going to get shut down? Probably not, at least not unless you piss off the wrong people or get famous enough to anger the wrong people.

Open source community creates many tools and software which is used by every one . They give their source code and support for free,many people use these tools to make contents and clames copyright for it and what is the logic in that

If they are using open source resources their final product or content should be also opensource

It's not illegal. The artist gets paid because someone has to be paying the artist thru Patreon to unlock & update the posts here.

>>56933
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj9Gk84jRiE

>>58467
>A look at the past few decades of legal precedent regarding emulation, done by someone who has no idea what he's doing.

How does that change >>56933?

>>58467
Reverse engineering is legal in the US
https://reverseengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/60/is-reverse-engineering-and-using-parts-of-a-closed-source-application-legal

>>58742
Re-read the link

>>56681
It's piracy. Piracy is illegal is every modern developed country.
this site is the equivalent of someone paying for Disney+ or Netflix, then downloading that content off that platform somehow, then re-uploading it to a dedicated site specifically for stealing that content. The difference is that Netflix and Disney have billions of dollars and will sent an army of lawyers after you, where Patreon has decided to stay out of it, leaving independent content creators to fight that battle for themselves, which they can't afford.

You can have your opinion on whether or not content creators have a right to put a paywall up for their content, you have a right to think whether or not it's right to have paywalls for creators' content, you can have your opinion on whether or not it's justified to give those creators the middle finger by freely sharing content they charge for, and you can have your opinion on whether or not yiff.party should exist. Whether or not it's morally right.

But the fact is this site is for piracy. It's for pirating content that independent content creators make and charge for. Piracy is illegal.

And looking at https://yiff.party/removals makes it clear that this site doesn't care about the creator at all. This site is more about blackmail of the creators to stop charging for their content. It's the revenge porn site, but against pay-walled content creation instead.

The fact is if these creators knew about this site, and also could afford a decent lawyer, it wouldn't exist anymore, not without employing the same kinds of things that thepiratebay has to do to stay up. There is no valid argument suggesting this site is legal

>>59120
There are no damages, case dismissed.

>>59120
> It's piracy. Piracy is illegal is every modern developed country.
This website is hosted in a third world country or whatever, your western BS has no jurisdiction here.
You can try to shut us down, but then again, we are the wikileaks of bad creators.
> Patreon has decided to stay out of it, leaving independent content creators to fight that battle for themselves, which they can't afford.
The problem is that most of the creators here are violating tax law (thots), obscenity laws (thots AND 2D content), or some other regulation.
They avoided the whole issue because they will be sued to death by US, not the other way around, for not conforming to YOUR laws.
> This site is more about blackmail of the creators to stop charging for their content. It's the revenge porn site, but against pay-walled content creation instead.
It is not blackmail when you turn your smut into commodity, you are literally breaking decency in front of YOUR country.
The only way this is valid, is for you to repent of your ways and declare that what you are doing is IMMORAL. coward.

>>59172
You're just a cons00mer lmao

>>59120
>It's piracy
>being this new

>>59125

Your definition of "damges" needs to be updated

It's like saying a bully didnt break your leg, they just called you a useless leech on society that needs to kill themselves, so there's no damages

It's like saying a stalker taking naked photos of you from a window without your consent and jerking off to them hourly is fine. They added content to the world so there's no damages

>>59200
Over-exaggerated example, see;
>>59183

I'm sorry you feel "damges" but the examples you outlined are more reactionary, than logical.

First one: that's more on the bully, they're insecure and you can just go about your day as usual. Why give a shit about what some prick says, on the internet at you, anyway?

Second one: who's stalking whom?

I BOUGHT something and I want to share it. What law can stop me? This is not piracy, this is called "free will".
It's equivalent of me buying a car and sharing it with someone, or even giving it to them. According to some dumb fucks this is piracy.

>>59220
>It's equivalent of me buying a car and sharing it with someone, or even giving it to them.

That's false equivalency. When the primary method of consuming/using what you bought is to OBSERVE it, then what you do by sharing it for public is piracy. Again, not with friends or family: Public.

The primary method of using a car you bought is to drive it, even if you bought the car for showing off. The primary method of using a movie/comic/book you bought is to watch/read it. If you were just holding up the retail copy of this product you own, in order to show the cover art to the public: That would be more analogous with your example. But when your idea of "sharing" is the same as consuming this product, you can't pretend that's not the case.

>>59182
Nah, I want to see both the c00mers and th0ts burn in hell, because fuck both of y'all.

>>59230
IDK the equivalence seems pretty sound to me, thanks to your post. Be glad Anon didn't try to argue those things were exactly the same.

I'll just say that without piracy, the world would be fucked in many, many ways. Removing it would control the population by limiting what they consume.

Piracy is a necessity. It doesn't mean that people won't pay for products. They still do despite it existing. It merely provides a necessary freedom and even more importantly - access to people who can't afford all the shit they want.

>You wouldn't pirate a car.
Yes. Yes I fucking would. Piracy is copying. I'd gladly spawn in a new car. The problem is that once you spawn new cars, the car producers start getting fucked, and that means no new cars or research due to lack of money.

Ultimately, moderation is important. if you like an artist - support them. If you just think they're okay or can't afford to - pirate them, perhaps through this site. You won't harm the creators by doing it. Spreading stuff through piracy also leads to increasing its popularity and more potential supporters. I wish i was joking, but it's the truth.

The lagality of the site might be dubious, but anyone who opposes it or piracy in general should be flogged.

Don't they 3d print cars or something? I know they print guns.

Aye, but it's not quite the same. For one, you still need materials, meanwhile online piracy has no such requirements. Also you'd still have to use blueprints (free use or otherwise).

>>59349
That is a level-headed response, but what about the censorship angle?

>>59349
>The lagality of the site might be dubious
>>56755

>>59172

> The only way this is valid, is for you to repent of your ways and declare that what you are doing is IMMORAL. coward.

LMAO, what are you going to do next? suicide vest them? Jesus Christ you sound like a religious nut job. Get off your moral high horse. You're literally on a site for pirating smut content. You have no moral high ground here you incel.

>>59446

Digital content is not the same as physical content. It's fundamentally different because it can be copied and shared infinitely. So the selling of that content comes with different rules, namely that you're not buying ownership of the content, you're buying the permission to access the content. If you buy a physical print from that creator that analogy would work, but digital content simply isn't the same. That's comparing apples to oranges.

It's funny when a thief doesn't understand what copyright is

>>56755
^I mean this person btw

A person who has the right to copy their works controls who can duplicate a good/service

That's why it's called a copyright. Artists have copyrights. The customer doesn't unless the artist gives them the copyright, which is normally limited or out right restricted

Your argument is like someone walking into the back employee area of Walmart because Walmart let you through the front door. You'd be called a dumbass for that logic

>>59520
By rules I came up with you need to pay me money for work you do. >.< Let's face it artist true deserves money for art, but only for drawing art, so selling art, especially digital art as commodity is not really stable. You never get your work worth and there is competition who sells it. Also sorry I don't need someone's permission to access data on my PC I can do it quite myself. Neither I doubt that that someone pays for my internet or hard drive amortisation. Hmm come to think of it this site deserves actual payment for keeping that content and they have far more fare business model by paying to the keeping server alive/ storage space.

If you personally need advice how not to deal with piracy at all then sell commissions or do croud funding, that's simple. People pay you for do your art you get money for what you payed, or do what you paid for to extend you paid for.

>>59349
>Yes. Yes I fucking would. Piracy is copying. I'd gladly spawn in a new car.

Look. "Open-Source everything" is a really just system on paper, and perhaps even in real life. I wish we all had Star Trek replicators to just spawn food and have computers do most of the work for us. Maybe as people that's where we're heading. But we're not there. Yet you seem to exercise your ideals where you can.

And currently, where you can, only hurts the niche creative individuals. Piracy of internet creators will not push you towards your ultimate ideals. It just hinders those who, frankly, wished to be out of the corporate system themselves but require money to afford food, tech and housing.

Maybe piracy is the true ideal but having Patreon creators as your first action of upheaval indicates cowardice than anything else. You do it BECAUSE laws permit it in this instance, despite that you don't like any piracy laws. And in the end it hurts your argument.

>>59532
Movies should only be paid for when it's being created, once it's hit theaters you should be able to see it for free

>Also sorry I don't need someone's permission to access data on my PC I can do it quite myself
I'm glad you know how to ctrl c, ctrl v. Surprising this was an issue before the internet. Just because you have something doesn't mean it's yours.
These servers, that site around bad produce nothing, hold illegal content and make money off of other people's work while paying no respect to the work. That's not a fair business model to say the least

>If you personally need advice how not to deal with piracy...
Really solving the world problems there huh. I'm surprised no one has thought of doing commissions or crowd funding before. I wonder why everyone doesn't do that... I guess it'll forever be a mystery

>>59537

Piracy is not a good goal. The goal is a better distribution system.
You don't have to steal anything if it's systematically given to everyone. Piracy can't do that because the creator can't make anything if they're starving

It's time for "the conquest of bread" comrades!!!

But let's be real, people here are lazy coomers that will talk a big game then literally just jerk their dicks off thinking they're doing a good thing when in reality they're just making a gross mess of their lives and others

>>59540
>The goal is a better distribution system
>It's time for "the conquest of bread" comrades!!!
You laugh, but ancomism is unironically a better system than crapitalism.
>Piracy can't do that because the creator can't make anything if they're starving
Piracy doesn't hurt sales, this has been scientifically proven: https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/22/eu-suppressed-study-piracy-no-sales-impact/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9ndWNlLmVuZ2FkZ2V0LmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACukzs2ULYSScVldvtLoB8OCXNo2GZrVDpv22tSds3nHHE9rDIeYg4jvOttCsQD_twxus8Xiu5M4Iu5MpSAIRxWVo5bkJX73m4LL5ilBJKUdgdRFkqTpCqcB1IkXlcXM1QM2g0KR6wA7YsYxiNXDazFz3dhoG4M-W3K7AdcU8r8p

>>59520
Says who? I paid for it, so it's mine to do as I please.

>>59349
Actually It would be compared to copying fake car, you know thing that looks like a car but not a car. So it the clause is closed. And yes you can(well if you have money) to open a car factory. No one prohibits you to produce cars. In fact long ago the technology of producing a car was quite open, because no one sold something that is not a commodity as commodity.
>>59537
Piracy is not ideal it is just is. As part of the system and would be. Because historically Piracy are just capitalists that produced copies of digital or (analogue???) production better than others. They appeared part of so loved market and overgrown it. Reason - well, technology. Costs of selling copy is marginal. So now you have what you have. It is not perfect it is just is.
>>59352
I know Russia experimented with 3D printing jet engines. But again... It hardly matters look above.
>>59362
Actually requires. Setting up servers acquiring raw material and copies. Just cost is marginal. Which you can thank technology. At 18th century making a copy of art was worth as much as acquire new art.

>>59570 Continuation
>>59539
Oh so you want to own my PC, and my Hard drive. Have you payed for its ammortisation? or maybe for internet. Or maybe... Well I guess I could pay the costs, and you for my work copying it from third party server not hard, I could pay several times fold, and so there would be no problem I would pay you in same curency I acquired it. I.E. Copies of images. How many copies you need. 1k, 10k, several billion you know It might be quite possible to setup even bot and do it until you would say enough, I even neglect my work costs. But then again Do you know Indian folk tale I think it was called Golden Atnillope. There was Shah who thought all gold in kingdom belongs to him. But then again would you pay me or other users for their work of downloading it, pay partials of exploitation of the mechanical things. ( I doubt it). So don't demand others to pay for their work.)

This site produces service, better cheaper for most artists, aren't consumers supposed to find most profitable and best products(you know part of market competition, you act like petite monopolist ;) ). Well they produce copies cheaper than most artists selling art as commodity for sure. Not more illegal than any of them, unless art is equates to drug, explosives or weapon production. Then sure then why you make illegal things in first place.

To be fair Artists shold be payed for work. And it is far more than price they ask for copy, hence why I propose to take commissions or croudfund(Aka you want me to draw, then pay me so I could do it.) it works and it works well for many artists who actually care to treat their art as work(even if they draw something of their own).Or find other job you have more talent for, sadly it is easier said than done, but only option in short term or without more radical ways.

>>59572 continuation
>>59540
Piracy is is not a goal. Yup it just was born from capitalism and part of it. Does it hurts artists. Well to be fair a little bit, but hardly significant as ones who can afford buying would buy art, especially if want to support a good person, we are not at this point of confrontation yet. But it is part ofcapitalism and was born from it. So what you can do... nothing. Piracy is just part of larger system built into it and materially it hurts really less than the system perpetuating it. I guess you understand why that system should go. And welcome to the billions of other people who got hurt by system that birthed piracy.

I would open you a secret, majority of visitors on this site just do not care. Apart from crusaders, whos subculture behavior of such artists is hurting. Well I can do about it as much as with desire of certain people to put a price tag on everything that is not even a commodity, and then questioning why everything is failing. If you still questioning why, you probably should study history of the furry community, it is not a lot to study just 25-21 years of new history, and maybe you understand why they are doing it.

And true producing art should be paid or recompensed to artist in some way provided it is worth for someone willing you to do it.It is way more than artist takes for copy, so it doesn't looks like a good way to earn for living. You either get not enough to be paid for work and necessarry goods to keep drawing, or just rip off your customers who pay you. I wouldn't argue with that.

How the fuck does capitalism keep getting thrown into these arguments? That was never the original question. I don't see why these mega virgins feel the need to shoehorn this into everything.

>>59578
Cuz 'murica...

>>59578
>>59629
Proprietary Niggas thinks they can get away with their BS.

Copyright infringement isn't illegal. It's mostly a civil matter that requires the copyright owner to file a lawsuit and prove that their copyright is being infringed upon. It's a constant battle with no hard rules as fair use and arguments regarding a work being transformative evolve. In Sweden, people can copy and share works so long as there is no financial gain (this is what ultimately done in The Pirate Bay). For most cases of copyright infringement to become criminal, it needs to be wilful and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.

In Japan, artists are constantly committing copyright infringement with their fanzines and fanart and selling these works for private financial gain, and this is tolerated by most copyright holders because of the unique environment over there. However, there was a case where Nintendo went after Japanese artists dealing in erotic materials involving their characters (i.e. Blue and Red double-teaming Pikachu's orifices), which surprises me that Nintendo has yet to go after all of the Western artists committing the same thing yet (if you're a Western artist, I highly urge you to stop tickling Nintendo's sleeping tiger).

This is why Patreon cannot go after Yiff Party; they're not the copyright holder, and what Yiff Party is doing isn't illegal, so the police cannot automatically step in and arrest the site owner. One of the infringed parties will have to go through international courts to prove damages to get anything done. Such a thing is time-consuming and expensive. However, what content creators can do is side-step the courts and follow the same example that has turned Youtube into a hell-hole by contacting Google and other services to 'hide' Yiff Party from search results and stuff to ensure that less people are able to discover their works being freely distributed.

>>59691
No wonder people keep saying copyright is "mostly a gray area". Like, I get it, completely. But damn, that's a lot of bs to go through just because of some selfish paranoia. :/

>>59629
And?

>>59691
>However, there was a case where Nintendo went after Japanese artists dealing in erotic materials involving their characters
That was 22 years ago and japs have kept making Pokemon porn by the hundreds of thousands ever since, it's one of the most popular tags on Pixiv, too.
>Which surprises me that Nintendo has yet to go after all of the Western artists committing the same thing yet
But they do? Western artists are the ONLY artists Nintendo goes for since 2 decades ago. Where have you been?

Jesus how did you manage to fuck up so badly and get everything backwards?

I can see that people defending patreon are calling upon "copyright". First of all, as the name suggests "COPY-right", has different purpose. It's to prevent people from, for example, stealing characters and calling them their own. It literally has nothing to do with piracy.
Now before you say "B...but it determines how and when to share it" No. Countries don't have same regulations and even moral standpoints are different.

Now my question is, if you are such a morally good person, what have you got to say about ARTISTS making money of drawing characters that are copyrighted by some company or a person? You do realize that this IS piracy in a form and is literally infringing copyright.

As for car comparison, if you claim "it's different, physical vs digital" how about games? Sharing games is not piracy. Steam literally enables you to share games. For games, it's very hard to debate if it's piracy or not, but for pictures, posting them online is NOT piracy.
Anon said that pictures are supposed to be looked at, I agree with that too, hence this just gives me 100% proof that this cannot be piracy. If I can't use it, can't earn money off from it, but just can watch it, what is pirate-ish there?
And I already know what that anon will say "But you watch movies too", but movies are entertaining and give you about 1-2 even 3+ hours of enjoyment and take huge amounts of money to make. When a picture can make me enjoy it for 3 hours and it costs some money to make, then you can start CONSIDERING to talk about piracy and pictures, especially ones coming from PATREON which is not marketplace (even though WE PAY for pictures from it, but in the end we can't even share it?).

>>59537
>And currently, where you can, only hurts the niche creative individuals.

It helps the poor. It helps deal with shitty companies. It helps spread knowledge. It helps keep the internet a good place.

Perhaps it doesn't even hurt anyone. I'm not willing to believe 'scientifically proven' anon's thing blindly, but I do know that piracy usually isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

It's not perfect, there are bad sides, but if the niche creators want to stop piracy so they can profit more - boo hoo, get off your high horse. It's not all about you.

Artists prosper from supporters, not customers. Popular ones who have large-enough followings are able to paywall their consumers, but this was never the standard, just something they could get away with. If one makes profit by locking things off, they'll be hated even if they succeed (and success in this model needs an existing following, keep that in mind, i'll come back to it later). If one provides content and asks for money, they'll always be in a good light, meanwhile.

>But you can't succeed like that!
The world isn't black and white. This is where samples, PSDs, early releases, comissions, sfw/nsfw versions, etc, comes in. Art might not have trial versions like games or software, but there are many ways to still give to your supporters while making reasonable income.

Ok, back to that point in brackets. Like I said, only artists who have a large following can afford to not provide content for non-payers. These are the same artists that are shitting themselves in rage about piracy - these same artists have started out far more humble & reasonable before they got big. Power corrupts. If piracy stops existing, they get to earn more money from RESTRICTION. They don't need more followers, they need existing ones to pay more, which includes people who pirate. Even in the fucking furry artist community, this is a scheme to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

(I'm >>59349)

>>59769
You're spitting out points that I've been trying to make since I first started commenting here. It amazes me how much copyright infringement, artist are willing to overlook, and even act like they aren't outright committing the exact same crime they falsely accuse us of committing.

>>59734
> That was 22 years ago and japs have kept making Pokemon porn by the hundreds of thousands ever since, it's one of the most popular tags on Pixiv, too.
If it is a parody, i.e. goes under fair use, you can't do anything. the issue is you cannot profit from fair use goods.

If B copies from A without permission, and C dumps content of B into YP or Kemono, then both B and C are committing copyright infringement.
Then the only solution for B to not get sued, is for B to declare his art under fair use, which would mean A can't do anything, and what C did is fair game.

And from the basic logic, if X creates obscenity (i.e. things that are "too lewd") and then Y shares it on YP or Kemono, then X is not protected under the law.
Technically X can use the internet as a way of avoiding his Miller-test-breaking fetishes by using international borders, BUT X has no rights to sue Y, EVER.

>>59691
>>59769
>>59778
All are good responses.

>>59811
Yeah I forgot to elaborate on the "Miller test":

The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v. California It has three parts:
- Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
- Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,
- Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, writing for the majority, included the following definitions of what may be "patently offensive":
- Representations or descriptions of ultimate sex acts normal or perverted, actual or simulated.
- Representations or descriptions of masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibitions of the genitals.

So basically anything "lewd" and "titillating" that you cannot sell in an art gallery or a book fair, or act as either scientific research or political commentary.

children children - its never ok. It is illegal. by re-posting it you are making a digital copy of the work, this is the illegal bit. And if creators can work out which patreon is doing it they can sue them for loss of earnings damages.

This post really shows how you guys are trying to legitimise something you dont understand

TheChameleon 01/20/20(Mon)12:48:21 No.56681[R]
>>56673
I'm just trying to say this site is not illegal.
Some people (especially the creators) think we're stealing their content when we're already paying.

Yes you are paying - but then you give the content to the rest of that creators clients for free - can you not see the problem?

>>59816
I just typed up a whole reply, then deleted it because I thought I misread you, then realized, no, this person's just an idiot. Learn how to fucking greentext before you go calling us all children. Anyway:

>children children

That is how not to win an argument. In fact, this pompous attitude, you have is one of the reasons people hate patreon artists. They look at there "clients" like children and living banks, and therefore, treat them as such. This is exactly what we are fighting against.

001.jpg (405.1KiB, 1280x1830) save_alt

>>59811
jap artists do profit from pokemon porn by selling doujins or paywalling illustrations on fanbox/fantia/enty etc.

>>59816
In a normal world paying for something results in you owning that which you have paid for. Go live in your fantasy if you don't like it.
So if I pay for a photo, I own it. End of story. If you want to question morals then question your own first, because you're obviously without a moral here. You want to make money? Sure, nobody is preventing you from doing so. I've read here before that this site actually helps and I agree with that. Basically, because of this site, you always have at least one paying "customer" (hah, you can't be a customer if you don't own what you buy) and this site works for promotion.
Most artists are "just looking for support", but when people decide if the want to support or not "MuH Yiff.Party ruining me".

What you guys are doing is a scam, but too bad for you most people aren't dumb to be scammed that way nor do laws go in your favor, in fact as I've stated before, they go AGAINST you. If you sue anyone for *cough* "stealing" your art or whatever you do, you will be in trouble. Why?
Well for one, you're probably porn artist, you made multiple copyright infringements, and laws of most countries in the world don't say anything about forbidden sharing of stuff that YOU OWN BY BUYING IT OR CREATING IT.

Checkmate.

>>59838
Which Nintendo can, by law, slam them at any time... It is just that they don't care, and we can leak their stuff too... And Nintendo don't care either... Until they do and take the whole lot out.

>>59900
That's not what we were talking about though. The original post claimed that Nintendo didn't go for western artists which is the opposite of the truth, they don't go for japs but do go for westerners.

>>59838
Why do the japanese seem to absolute adore drawing cute girls getting railed by the ugliest and fattest motherfuckers on the planet?

c7ea7595a868fe92216e8da341fc65ca.jpg (100.6KiB, 696x800) save_alt

>>59935
You think that's bad? Have a look at this:

>>59944
I mean that's literally a pigman, and he seems fine other than his face. I've seen ugly bastards that look 10x worse.

>>59949
True. That's not even close...

>>59949
>>59951
Shiiiiit. I gotta step up my game then.

Try kunaboto or KDC. Teikoku Kizoku does this as well sometimes.

>>59935
Audience Surrogate.

>>60017
That's a myth. Only a small percentage of hentai watchers are ugly bastards - this is just conclusive because only a small percentage of people in general are ugly bastards, but it still applies. If there was a reason for it, i'd say it had to do more with humiliating the girls. Most people don't like to look at ugly people, male or female, but humiliation is a pretty big fetish, and fucking an ugly guy is humiliating.

That's my theory, anyway.

What do you think sunshine?

>>59578
How goods/services are distributed will bring up the topic of capitalism since that's the way we primarily distribute things right now

>>59870
If you pay for a massage you don't own the masseuse
If you pay for a ticket you don't own the movie theater
If you pay for food you don't own the recipe
etc etc

I'm going to assume you're the anon going to other threads saying the thing about "if artist infringe on copyright then we can too" implying that **ALL** artist do this when that's not true at all. There are creators on this site with only original works and characters who are still stolen from

Making creators into a monolith just makes you look like a dumbass

Also most countries have regulations on selling and buying stuff because otherwise markets fail otherwise.

Just to be real clear, you can draw dick fucking pussy and not have it infringe copyright

Lots of artist do that. Lots of artist don't do that.

EVEN IF EVERY ARTIST DID DO THIS, stealing someone else work is still wrong. This is like when people say Trump is bad and the rebuttal is "obama was bad too"
Like great, they both have to repent. What's your point?

Btw, it would be good if yiff.party stop uploading drawn CP to this site

You guys are suppose to be pirates not wannabe child fuckers

>>60427
Lewds are not protected by copyright due to it being frowned upon by the law, so it is basically fair game for us to do whatever. We are dealing with a black market here.

>>60428
You are right. Even though it is not ethically wrong...
"Section 1466A of Title 18, United State Code, makes it illegal for any person to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, or possess with intent to transfer or distribute visual representations, such as drawings, cartoons, or paintings that appear to depict minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct and are deemed obscene."
But remember, the related laws around this ALSO banned all the other fetishes that YP contains, so that is a moot point.

For reference this is the "Dost test".
- Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child's genitalia or pubic area.
- Whether the setting of the visual depiction is sexually suggestive, i.e., in a place or pose generally associated with sexual activity.
- Whether the child is depicted in an unnatural pose, or in inappropriate attire, considering the age of the child.
- Whether the child is fully or partially clothed, or nude.
- Whether the visual depiction suggests sexual coyness or a willingness to engage in sexual activity.
- Whether the visual depiction is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer.

>>60450
>>60449
The law would definitely frown upon "hard Loli"...

>>60515
Black market politics, friend. Same goes for all the other kinks and copyright infringing content as well (if you really want to go that route).
Just offshore all the content to a poor country that allows it, and just strip some of the stuff WE deem unfit.

>>60543
Hard drives in Russia lol because they don't care about anything 'P or something like that.

>>60425
>How goods/services are distributed
Not the thread's topic.

>I'm going to assume you're the anon going to other threads saying the thing about "if artist infringe on copyright then we can too"
>>56755
>>56933

>>60428
The world should ban violent videogames too since they create murderers, right?

>>60665
Yes because of the children durrrr hurr lol

>>56520
Both of the things that you said are factually wrong. Did not expect better from a namefag.

>>60665
A careful consideration about how one uses violence in media sure. Violent media doesn't inherently make violent people but last time I looked at american culture it sure does produce a lot of shooters

Also some presidents and leaders of industry are exposed pedophiles so maybe it's something we shouldn't turn a blind eye to
Epstein didn't kill himself

Just to be clear, getting rid of drawn CP will not stop people from becoming pedos, but it will reduce the amount of pedos floating around on this site which seems like a good thing

Unless you want to defend the argument that Pedos should hang around on this site with all you pirates. You all can be PPs

>>60772
>with all you pirates
>>56755

>>60770
> Violent media doesn't inherently make violent people but last time I looked at american culture it sure does produce a lot of shooters
That's not an argument for fictional things influencing people. Shooters are mentally ill you know.
>Also some presidents and leaders of industry are exposed pedophiles so maybe it's something we shouldn't turn a blind eye to
What in the goddamn shit does that have to do with anything?

>>60772
>I don't like this fetish ergo all those people should leave
Cool. I don't like scat so we should ban all that content too I guess.

Dude, how new are you?

File