/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>2672112
>Some of the hottest Peach fanart I've seen didn't keep to the model presented by Nintendo but was still distinctively Peach.
This. I don't understand why this is NOW of all times being ignored.
Listen, to the Nintendrones of this thread, unless you forgotten your childhood so much because it was a shit one or some shit, I'm positive 99% of you all have drawn, at least ONCE, drawn some fan art of something, whether it was just Mario with the raccoon suit (which my older brother back in the 1990s did), or of some anime shit because "le awesome as a kid" (DBZ, I know I did that a bit or Sonic back in the day) so no one ITT can tell me with a straight face you're not saving face through your teeth because Doxy got "tagged by Nintendo". It doesn't matter. It hasn't mattered for 20+ years, why NOW? Basically >>2671363 WAS how fan art was conceived, now it's like everyone thinks it's to claim ownership over the shit they draw, which is flat out retardation to accuse of as a clutch to your argument. NO ONE with common sense would:
>Think Nintendo would do anything with explicit adult content, because it's a company marketed mostly to children
>Think fan art is anything official when it's blatantly off model as all hell (this is why I preferred if people stay away from drawing IPs on model because that could make it a closer gray area otherwise)
>Seriously think fan art is now bad to do after countless of decades people have and still will for the rest of humanity draw something based on what they like or what they saw. It's never been bad then, it should never be bad NOW.

TL;DR: This whole thread is just pointless because no one really is taking this seriously and is just making a front about it. It's been plenty of times Jewtendo has done "something" like this the past, but as a global rule, it's protected by law that parody work is allowed, no matter what a pretentious company thinks it can think it can do. Just keep drawing what you like and move on.