The Process Forum

The Process Forum (
-   Growth (
-   -   Giantess Fan Comics (

The Governor 04-18-2016 04:49 PM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Lets keep this thread on track shall we?

qzar9999 04-18-2016 04:58 PM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Fine with me, boss.

LK 04-18-2016 05:24 PM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Just the facts, ma'am.

macromega 04-20-2016 02:44 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
I have been very clear on Facebook, DeviantArt and SW Realm that, while "Maya & June" was inspired by ddral's "Maggie and Jane," it's not a continuation of the same comic. The characters aren't the same and behave in different ways. I even provided a link to ArgleSW's version on those sites, since the original from ddral is no longer available, so far as I can determine.

Maya & June is NOT an effort to continue that comic (which I loved, btw). Rather, it tells what I think would happen in a similar situation. That's why this comic isn't called "Maggie & Jane."

The size-change process works differently in this comic than in the earlier one. Maya takes an action no one in the original story took, and takes it near the beginning of the comic. That action drives this comic, not the original hook. Maya is a different character than is found in the other comic, and so is June. The story is also profoundly impacted by a third character; the original comic only has two. Most of the story takes place in settings and situations neither found, nor hinted at, in the old tale.

What makes Maggie and Jane a public domain story is that ddral never copyrighted it and has allowed repeated continuations with no effort to address them. That's a side issue, though, since this comic isn't "Maggie and Jane," and it's not just the names that are different.

Maya & June is a tribute story that I think is fun in its own right. If you can enjoy it on those terms, fine. If not, that's your issue, but you don't need to try to trash it for everyone else.

As a professional writer, I am personally offended by these accusations. LK, if you have any further comments or accusations involving me, direct them to me personally before making them in a public forum. Doing this in this manner is inappropriate.

LK 04-20-2016 08:26 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Mac, I will start by saying that there is a difference between an inquiry and an accusation. I have not accused you of anything. I asked two questions and provided, in response to qzar's speculation, where my head was at. I can see how you, as a professional writer, would go on the defensive when the spectre of plagarism is raised, but being offended is not in itself a defense or makes asking these questions wrong.

Further, I disagree that my chosen forum to address this issue is inappropriate, and I don't see what authority or expertise you have to state that it is. I am not going to take this communication private because this is a public issue that I want to have multiple eyes on for these and other reasons. First, no confusion about what was written, since it deals with serious subjects. Second, I want you to respond / make your case not just to me but to every one who reads it. Third, you, as a writer, may be the target of the inquiry, but Giantess Fan's staff also needs to be notified of the issue as a business entity. If their actions create a liability issue for themselves, then they would want to know about what happened and how it can be prevented in the future.

I am a writer of paid and publically-distributed creative material in this community. Generally, I would hate to see someone come along, use my premise, lines, characters, and other unique aspects of my work as source material for a new creative work, then make money off that output and claim it as an original. (There you go, qzar.) So I have an interest in knowing what happened here and whether it was Giantess Fan not providing proper credits and that you had conducted your due diligence, or that you told everyone that your work was inspired by Maggie and Jane but Giantess Fan in an official capacity.

These questions were an opportunity for you to show me and everyone else that you did everything that you were supposed to, Mac. However, what I am seeing is that you are evaluating based on what you believe, without basis, rather than what is the case in reality.

Plagarism is a matter of proper sourcing. The only determination that could ever be made here would be in a civil suit, and only then in the eyes of the law. I do not plan to sue, though ddral might have factual basis to take the steps to do so. I bring this up because using a shared definition is the only means by which we will approach an understanding rather than our personal opinions of not only what happened but what certain words mean and entail. Legal definitions are all I have to work with that you might be able to look up yourself in case there is any confusion.

The facts:
1. You have stated through social media that you used ddral's Maggie and Jane as a basis / inspiration for Maya and June. What this means is that you admit to having created a Derivative Work of Maggie and Jane.
2. You state that ddral's work is Public Domain.
3. You are the sole writing credit on the published version of Maya and June's credits page.

You have two arguments that are related to each other:

1. Maya and June does not plagarize Maggie and Jane because you changed enough elements from the original that there aren't enough similarities to make this claim.

2. Maggie and Jane is a Public Domain story because ddral never officially copyrighted the work and allowed others to make repeated "continuations" with no effort to address them.

I will break here to allow an opportunity for you to respond and clarify if I am accurate about the facts and the arguments before proceeding.

macromega 04-20-2016 11:41 PM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
LK, you have not phrased this "discussion" as an inquiry. You have accused me, previously of copyright infringement and, in your most recent message in this thread, of plagiarism.

I still maintain this should have been discussed with me before you made it public, especially in light of your history of flaming items from Giantess Fan Comics posted here. It's also basic human relations. You raise the question initially with the individual, then raise the matter publicly if it's unresolved.

I am on Giantess Fan's staff; I'm a senior editor for them. We discussed this comic throughout the process of its creation. They followed my posts on other sites about the story's origins.

I resent the rather clear indications that you think I and/or Giantess Fan committed plagiarism here. I resent even more the clear implication that you believe I would try to slide a stolen work by my publishers.

As originally written, this was to be a two-issue series that was virtually all giantess content and featured four main characters. That certainly does not describe "Maggie and Jane." It was edited down in the process of its creation to its current length, and one major character was cut almost completely out. (She appears in only one scene now, and has no major role.)

Your assessment of my claims also is inaccurate. I do not claim to have "changed" enough elements; this isn't the same story. I told the story I wanted to tell, and it is my own story, an original story with a parallel jumping-off point, but not the same story or characters.

Since your complaints here, other professionals have reviewed “Maya & June” and told me there's no infringement or plagiarism of "Maggie and Jane." They volunteered this information; I didn't ask them to do that. It's not the same story.

I posted preview information months ago explaining this story's origins, but also explaining that it was an original story based on a similar idea. I'm sorry that you feel there's some sort of infringement here. I have repeatedly acknowledged that it is a tribute to Maggie and Jane, yet you persist in insisting it is plagiarism.

Now you want to use my acknowledgement of the story's tribute aspect against me, and to flame Giantess Fan in the process. You have a history of doing the latter, so I suppose that shouldn't surprise me.

Here's the thing, LK. You can't copyright an idea. There are a lot of stories, some of which predate Maggie and Jane, about computers with programs that change the size of people in the real world. This story is substantially different from Maggie and Jane, using that idea as a springboard. That's legitimate.

I have been writing and editing as my full-time employment for 17 years, including both fiction and (under another name) non-fiction, including coverage of the legal system. I also abhor plagiarism. Since the tendency now is for people who don’t know what plagiarism is to cry “plagiarism” over the slightest similarity, no matter how coincidental, I chose to share the tribute aspect of the story so the public was aware of it.

As to the copyright status of "Maggie and Jane," I have been made aware that there are some interpretations of copyright law that say that simply publishing something constitutes a copyright of the work. But the law clearly says you can't copyright an idea, and we've been clear about the story's background.

And failure to protect a copyright is a legitimate consideration in whether the work is in the public domain.

But all the copyright discussion is a side issue, since it’s not the same story.

It seems to me your major beef is that you feel a credit to ddral should be on the actual comic. I simply don't agree. It's not uncommon for authors to use a concept from another source in their own stories. Look at how many knockoffs of "Groundhog Day" are out there. And ddral had nothing to do with writing this comic.

Again, the way this most recent post of yours is phrased is clearly an accusation. Since what you are alleging could be considered a criminal act, you are accusing me of a crime. THAT certainly should have been done privately first, not publicly. You have chosen to confront and combat rather than try to sort out. You claim this is an inquiry, but the starkness of your stance says it is an inquisition.

I have no doubt you will respond with a presentation on copyright law and/or plagiarism and why you feel what I'm doing is wrong/illegal. It's clearly what you're gearing up for in the last few paragraphs of your accusation.

Your signature here says, “Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.” Don’t kid yourself. You aren’t discussing ideas or anything else; you’re issuing judgment.

You ended your last message in this thread saying, “I will break here to allow an opportunity for you to respond and clarify if I am accurate about the facts and the arguments before proceeding.”

Oh, thank you, O self-appointed prosecutor, judge and jury, for allowing me time to respond before you pronounce me guilty! For that is clearly what you intend to do, using the kangaroo court of a forum you control to do things that would get others in trouble.

This is a ridiculous effort to defame my character over an imagined offense and in a manner that may cost me income in my role as a professional writer. It is out of line and it is wrong. I won’t take further part in this discussion, and the defamation needs to stop immediately.

LK 04-21-2016 04:24 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
I read over your response; my tone and methods have had a strong influence in how events have developed. Oh well?

Your most recent response has statements that are difficult to substantiate and seem to distract from the issue. What happens behind closed doors has only your word to go on; hence why I am prioritizing transparency. Further, labeling my actions and words and telling me what I should be doing seems important enough for you to spend considerable time doing it. This is not about me and what I am or am not doing, nor your feelings over it.

You have made considerable effort to distinguish your work from Maggie and Jane (without mentioning it by name) in your DeviantArt postings. You had the foresight to try and head off anyone that might see a link between the two as I did. You go further still to highlight the differences between your work and Maggie and Jane on this forum.

You knew your work might be suspected of plagarism for months, and yet you are still offended when someone suspected you of plagarism.

I am not here about differences, but similarities, and not over the idea of a size-changing PC. That is taking things to far too abstract a level.

Your posts can be interpreted as acknowledgment that there *are* similarities. Why would you feel the need to not only distinguish your work, but explicitly state how Maggie and Jane is in the public domain? What other Giantess Fan work has necessitated that?

You say it is a tribute in one place, that it is your take in another, and that Maggie and Jane was an inspiration in this thread. Well, which is it? Regardless, on a fundamental level, you *do* acknowledge that there is some creative link between Maya and June and Maggie and Jane.

You stress, on multiple occasions, that this work is in the public domain, but that seems to be based on your personal determination rather than knowledge of its status in the eyes of the law. You weren't able to locate the original work, and you have not indicated you did any research except observations about what other people were doing with the work. Notably, the others you cite did not use their works to earn money.

Citing that a failure to protect one's own copyright can be one factor when considering whether a creative work should be put into the public domain (source?) has no bearing on what the copyright status of ddral's work actually is. As someone who claims to have covered legal matters, you should be familiar with the automatic copyright protection of creative works and what a derivative work is.

You are correct that all this was because I thought there should be a credit on the Credits page that Maya and June was based on Maggie and Jane rather than implying it is your sole creation. It is your opinion that there should be no such credit based on your reasoning. I do not find your arguments convincing or strong. In fact, I see you leveraging fallacies to give the appearance of strength, which undermines your credibility in my eyes.

I leave things here.

Vincent Van Grow 04-23-2016 09:58 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
I love these comics!

Phoenix the II 04-23-2016 04:30 PM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Can I still ask if there will be a chapter 2? Or am I getting eaten by wolves if I did?

qzar9999 04-24-2016 07:49 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics

Originally Posted by Phoenix the II (Post 770869)
Can I still ask if there will be a chapter 2? Or am I getting eaten by wolves if I did?

The wolves have all been rounded up, tranquilized, and shipped off to the FBS animal preserve. You should be safe now. ^_^

That said, while I wouldn't mind seeing this story continue, he did cap it off with "THE END" instead of "TO BE CONTINUED," so I'm not holding my breath...

J Yubari 04-24-2016 09:39 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics
Fans of unaware rejoice -- A Weekend Alone 8 has just been released for download! :D

Valeyard Vince 04-27-2016 04:29 AM

Re: Giantess Fan Comics

Originally Posted by J Yubari (Post 770951)
Fans of unaware rejoice -- A Weekend Alone 8 has just been released for download! :D

And best of all, this issue actually has some "process" included in its fetish content in the form of several shrinking men and women!

A Weekend Alone 8 by Kevin Fred and Jieun is now available for downloading!

A young man has his girlfriend over while his father is away. The neighborhood mysteriously shrinks before she arrives, forcing them to seek refuge at the father’s home. Shortly thereafter, the girlfriend arrives, and trouble begins…

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.