>>79976377>If it was ANY seifuku design you'd have a point.Clothing isn't like other things, a vast array of clothing is considered to be useful articles, not creative works, and thus receive no copyright protection. My comment on "unique enough" is looking at whether Jingo's SF design has more creative work than other SF designs--not whether the design is different. It is my belief that Jingo's design does not have the additional quantum of creative expression, and thus that Jingo's SF design does not constitute copyrightable subject matter.
>>79976064(from the guy who wrote the long post) I said "hypothetical" for a reason--in Japan, there wouldn't be lawsuit. If Filian was Japanese and lived in Japan, there wouldn't be this extra effort. In terms of the Jingo-GSC case, Jingo probably wouldn't have a case so long as GSC doesn't do anything more, since it seems that GSC was unaware of the origin of the Filian model.
>>79976442I meant "using the model for streaming"--the normal way she uses her model. That sort of use is contemplated in the license and allowed without permission (unlike redistribution, which is banned, and merchandise, which requires prior approval).
>>79976839>broke ass artistThe thing is, lawyers can work off of commission, so the artist could get a lawyer working "for free" (he'll steal most of your money in the end) to go after Filian's (probably Mythic's, as mentioned above) money. But that is highly unlikely from a Japanese artist, in my opinion.
