This is not an emergency - This is a test of the Drama Broadcast System

[brenna]

I apologize to everyone who has received a PM from tori out of the blue recently. She is upset with me right now. I do not know exactly what was in these messages, but I can guess. If you care to know what is going on, ask me. If you don't, enjoy your day.

Comments

[brenna]

Eep, my bad on flurgh. It didn't say in the profile, and scrolling through posts for evidence I saw a photo of a dude biking in a post about "I went biking!" and stopped there before I got to the bra-shopping one. (So sorry, flurgh.) :( I am dead to rights on this one.

However, your evaluation of my relationships is unsubtly manipulative padding of a comment that has, percentage-wise, relatively little to do with the issue.

Now. I base my assumptions about your intentions on this: when I first called you on taking someone else's art, while it was still private, you didn't correct my stated assumption that that's what you were doing. It would have been a perfect time to do so, because I really did accuse you of that in so many words. "Oh, I'm not really using this picture. It's just a starting point/a rough example of what I'd like/etc." But no. You listed a bunch of reasons why it was okay to do so. "It's on the internet so it belongs to everybody now and someone did the same thing to my husband and it's no different from getting any other kind of generic Apple tattoo because the work of an unknown hobbyist is the same as the universally-recognized icon of a major corporation and LOOK MICKEY MOUSE!" It was only after I left word for the artist, who you didn't bother to link to or even name, which is extremely bad form, that you started talking about how clearly you simply meant to use it as inspiration. Now, maybe that's what "I'm going to get this except maybe with a dragonfly instead of a bird" means (and no, no words to the effect of "something like this" appeared anywhere in your post). Clearly some people think so, and as I said at the dA thread, if the original artist is one of those people, that's all that matters. But I think she had the right to know about possible art theft and judge for herself, because art theft sucks.* That's all. I mean, by your own admission, that's all.

I'm just going to repeat that for emphasis. At every turn in this ridiculous saga, you are the one who has tried to make sure that evidence of what actually happened remains hidden, so everyone who wants to know what happened has to rely on your or my description of events, both biased and pre-interpreted and unreliable. When I thought you meant to appropriate the design outright and were counting on nobody finding out, I didn't approach it by just bad-mouthing you, pointing and shouting "SOMEONE NAMED TORI IS TAKING YOUR STUFF, GRAB A PITCHFORK!" If I had only claimed that, that would be me taking my assumptions and starting fires, yes. But I let your words speak for themselves. If I was so unhinged and your intentions were so obviously innocent, why try to have all the evidence removed (although the Photobucket one, supposedly pulled, actually still seems to work for me-- maybe it's my cache)? As for this post of mine, it is low on facts because I started out simply trying to address some odd behavior I had no way of knowing the scope of-- all I knew was that people connected to me were being told I was the aggressor in some ill-defined grudgematch-- without adding another front to the war, and have tried to keep it confined only to the points necessary to counter your portrait of me, in my own journal, as an unstable psychobitch.

*The fact that you refer to my advance warning of asserting my rights to my work, should you infringe on them, as "leaving a threatening comment" suggests to me that you do not fully get this, and I have little patience for that. This stuff is serious, and it's why I simply can't agree with your assertion that it should have remained a secret because that's how you would have preferred it.

[luludi]

I didn't correct you because I was addressing the issue of internet image distribution and deviantart's penchant for unreliability when it comes to who made what, and not your assumption about my intentions. If you read what I wrote again, you'll see that my comment about people taking mine and my husband's graphics on deviantart and posting them as their own in the past coupled with the fact that I did not even get the graphic in question from the artist that you linked to, in addition to the fact that I wasn't even out searching for tattoo graphics I was browsing for Apple themed wallpapers all go towards proving two points... 1) I didn't link to where I found it because I had, literally, a hundred wallpapers (all downloaded from the little 'download' link to the side, which artists CAN block if they don't want people taking them for personal use) on my desktop at the time, and I was just grabbing the ones I liked, one after the other. When I looked at them again while choosing which one to change my background to, I got to thinking what a cute design that was but couldn't remember the artist's name with which to credit the image (or god forbid and actual link). The image, as I found it, was part of a wallpaper, one that is not listed on the artist's site that you linked. There was no intention of not crediting anyone or stealing stuff ~ I didn't claim it as my own. 2) How am I (or you, for that matter) to know, even if I did remember where I got it from, which artist to credit? Do I credit where I found it, or do I credit the artist you linked? I found it while looking under "apple mac wallpaper" as keywords, while you found the same image from a different artist under "apple tattoo" or whatever you said in your last comment in that entry. You said it was the first image that came up, while I looked through (literally) probably 50 pages or more of wallpapers.

If you look at my icons (and, yes, many of them are still there, there is just no default at the moment), you'll see that I do credit people for their work, and if I don't know, I'll say that. I make it a point to grab names and such when I am using images publicly or in a journal, but I don't necessarily do that for wallpapers that may be from Google or deviantart or what-have-you that are for my own personal use, on my own computer. I brought Mickey Mouse and other well-known, highly used images for tattoo art for the same reason flurgh did... to make the point that people use images/logos, etc. for inspiration for tattoo art all the time. Frankly, when I say I'm planning on changing the design, I would think that would spell it out very clearly for you that the piece is an inspiration, an idea, not an exact copy of what I want.

Look, brenna, to be honest, your reaction to this whole scenario is way out of line ~ you mentioned that you are a graphic designer/artist yourself, and maybe you've had a bad experience in the past which makes this a knee-jerk reaction for you, and if that's the case, I get that, but I have to tell you, this was my thought process:

I like Apple.
I think I want another tattoo.
I think I want an Apple-themed tattoo.
*looks up "apple tattoos" on Google - finds many black Apple logos and rainbow Apple logos, some with 'Think Different' across the bottom*
I think I want a black Apple logo tattoo.
*husband gets ink pen, draws black Apple logo in size desired on my person - colors in with black sharpie so I can see how it will look*
*looks good - decision is solidified*
*several hours go by - looks up "apple mac wallpapers" on deviantart because I am tired of my current image on my MacBook*
*finds lots of cool backgrounds, saves them under new names, places in 'Wallpapers' folder*
*looks through wallpapers recently downloaded - finds cool Apple tattoo-like image in one of them - posts to journal that this is a direction I may go instead of plain black Apple logo previously mentioned*
*massive misunderstanding/wank ensues between us while everyone else just says "oh, that's really cute!"*

So, there it is.... my whole evil plot. Satisfied?

I get that this is serious business ~ I'm a published writer and a law student. What you don't seem to get is that this whole thing was blown WAY out of proportion. I don't mind that you disagree, or even that you interpreted my intentions differently... I don't even care that you passed those assumptions on to the alleged 'original artist'. What I don't appreciate, though, is you breaking trust by posting my locked entry elsewhere, publicly, and linking it to my journal, inviting future wank. You didn't say "there she is, GO GET HER!" but that doesn't mean others wouldn't take it that way, just as you took what I said in your own interpretation.