/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6704690
It's feels like its just scamming with extra(or fewer?) steps. If not, enlighten me.

I have a pixiv dedicated to reposting AI art from people on twitter that try and get away with it. Then I link it back to their twitter with the AI generated tag.

>>6704690
i've only seen this adopt shit on deviantart. it seems like the stupidest shit to me. do people do it on other sites?

>ai adoptables
now I've seen everything

>>6704717
It used to be relevant way back in the late 90s cause it was like commissions but backwards.
Basically you posted your random designs in forums and charged some schmuck to write them a copyright transfer agreement.

>>6704717
There's auction sites and such dedicated to adpotable oc designs. It's not really that crazy when you think about it, it's like buying a premade design from artists that specialize in designing characters and don't have any particular use for them other than visually. The really crazy shit is the furry side of things with what's called "Closed Species". Basically NFTs before NFTs were a thing.

>>6704756
you realize that is literally how the entertainment industry works, right?
like how sony paid marvel so only they could use spider-man?

>>6704690
what am I even looking at

>censoring the username and the two likes it has received
Apparently you do this.

>>6704690
I thought you shitters want people to see your garbage? why are you censoring the use you retarded grifter.

IMO OC adoptables are already a scam, so yeah

>"""stealing""" awful """stolen""" art
Have fun, I don't care either way and wish everyone involved in the story dies painfully.