When you need to rant...

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
38,849
Reaction score
12,814
See, this is why I've never even remotely thought about monetizing any of my fan films like my MORON LEAGUE shorts, because that would, indeed, be copyright infringement. They're parodies, of course, but because they use toys of character I don't own, I have no right to monetize and profit from them . . . Logan is either completely retar--ignorant in this area, or he just doesn't give a $#!+ either way.
 

PumpkinJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
445
Reaction score
126
See, this is why I've never even remotely thought about monetizing any of my fan films like my MORON LEAGUE shorts, because that would, indeed, be copyright infringement. They're parodies, of course, but because they use toys of character I don't own, I have no right to monetize and profit from them . . . Logan is either completely retar--ignorant in this area, or he just doesn't give a $#!+ either way.
Same, I have been making fan films crossing over/parodying cartoons and anime, but I keep them for personal use, don't profit from/monetize them, and don't submit to film festivals/comic cons, knowing I'd get into trouble for copyright infringement. I also remember that Peter Spears got C&D'd by Sesame for producing and screening his Ernest and Bertram film at the Sundance Film Fest.
 

fuzzygobo

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2004
Messages
4,880
Reaction score
5,069
I guess if you create a wholly original character or intellectual property, you become very possessive of it. You’d hate to see it get ripped off, cheapened, or somebody else making money off your work. By all means you should get any royalties or residuals you’re entitled to.
But not everyone is Disney with banks of lawyers on retainer to fight for you. I feel bad for any little guy who has to fend for themselves.
 

PumpkinJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
445
Reaction score
126
I guess if you create a wholly original character or intellectual property, you become very possessive of it. You’d hate to see it get ripped off, cheapened, or somebody else making money off your work. By all means you should get any royalties or residuals you’re entitled to.
But not everyone is Disney with banks of lawyers on retainer to fight for you. I feel bad for any little guy who has to fend for themselves.
Original work aside, a lot of fans tend to make their own fan animations of cartoons/anime just for fun, TBH. I dunno why but some of the very toughest companies I can think of who draw a very hard line towards fan projects include Nintendo (a very common one who always shuts down fan projects), Viacom (who is very picky about SpongeBob stuff uploaded by fans), Funimation (who is very against fanart to a vicious degree), and Disney. These four companies' legal departments are just some of the most strictest and least friendly in the biz, and there's more than likely no way to legally get permission from them to make fan projects of their franchises they own/license, therefore they're not open to fan ideas/concepts– all they'll do is just C&D anyone who creates fan work resembling their property. They're just fanatical and creepily greedy about everything. I remember when fans wanted this fan-created character Bowsette to become canon in the Super Mario franchise, and Nintendo denied the idea.
 
Last edited:

PumpkinJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
445
Reaction score
126
And second of all, I don't put my original characters online, knowing people would steal and profit off of them, and I also don't submit any of my original ideas to any network, since their greedy execs just take the creator's idea and reign direct creative control over it, hence the reason I refuse to work at any networks in the future. I can just jot down a list of outcome consequences to any creators' ideas that fell for the execs' direct creative control:
  • Stephen Hillenburg never knew what Nick would do to his show SpongeBob once he sold the idea to them. They wanted to make SpongeBob an "underwater" version of Hey Arnold, they forced Stephen to create Mrs. Puff and make SpongeBob attend school (even though SpongeBob is an adult). Stephen also originally wanted the show to end after The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie in 2004, but Nick wanted to keep the show running. Stephen also didn't want any crossovers/spinoffs of his show, but Nick apparently wanted to do the direct opposite of what he wanted after his death in 2018, which angered so many SpongeBob fans that they wanted to harass the network into cancelling the show and its spinoffs for disrespecting Stephen's legacy. Nick can't make SpongeBob any good anymore, now they just use it to make more money for greed.
  • Craig McCracken and Genndy Tartakovsky honestly shared time working on each others' projects The Powerpuff Girls and Dexter's Lab that they carried cameos of some Dexter's Lab characters over to The Powerpuff Girls, but despite fans wanting a crossover of both shows' main casts cuz of the style and also some similarities the characters share in each others' universe, it appeared Cartoon Network completely ignored that concept and wanted to stick with the original plan: crossing over only shows that do well with fans or strictly go by matching show genres, which evidently shows why Major Glory was the only character to cross over in The Powerpuff Girls at one point. Craig also didn't want a PPG reboot, but CN wanted to make one anyway, and– out of disrespect for fans– they recast the roles of the three titular girls and even removed all mentions of Dexter's Lab from the franchise. I was angered for years that they never made this crossover involving the two shows, and yes, that network doesn't care about that PPG/Dexter's Lab crossover that everyone wants to happen.
  • Butch Hartman's The Fairy OddParents was somehow being treated unfairly by Nick as well. They cancelled his show five times in a row and ended it for good in 2017. Then, Butch also didn't want a TV series based on his doodle of a boy and his monster that he drew back in 2009, but the selfish execs of Nick wanted to make it into a show anyway.
  • Greg Miller wanted to stick with the original Word98 voice for Robot Jones' voice in his show, but Cartoon Network insisted on recasting him to a human child actor. Greg was left very furious about the show not going his way, causing Cartoon Network to unjustly want to completely remove everything Robot Jones in return.
All this being said, these networks' executive-ing is just plain evil. I'm seriously not working at those networks, and TBH, I'm boycotting Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon because they can't make their shows like Powerpuff Girls and SpongeBob any good anymore, they always have the fetish of intentionally tarnishing any shows' connections with other shows they were from the same creators of, and they make such baffling decisions to treat their shows to how they see fit to ruin childhoods (such as cancelling out crossovers for no reason, recasting character roles when the OG voice actor didn't die yet, making a god-awful reboot, etc.). I'm sticking with watching shows I enjoyed in my pre-K childhood, especially VeggieTales, Arthur, Barney and Friends, and Sesame Street. (IMO, PBS Kids seems to have WAY better shows than does CN and Nick.)
 
Last edited:

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
38,849
Reaction score
12,814
Unfortunately, that's the problem when you dealing with big corporations who have other agendas that go against your creative vision . . . that's been a problem since about the 80s or so. It's usually supposed to be a give-and-take process, but it's to the point where the creators do all the giving and the networks or studios do all of the taking.
 

PumpkinJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
445
Reaction score
126
Unfortunately, that's the problem when you dealing with big corporations who have other agendas that go against your creative vision . . . that's been a problem since about the 80s or so. It's usually supposed to be a give-and-take process, but it's to the point where the creators do all the giving and the networks or studios do all of the taking.
Boi, many networks/studios just enjoy being hostile, don't they?
 

fuzzygobo

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 11, 2004
Messages
4,880
Reaction score
5,069
There should be some happy middle ground, in the case of SpongeBob, where everyone is satisfied.
Stephen got SpongeBob off the ground, and Nick more than recouped it’s investment.
There should be a point Stephen could say, so many seasons or so many episodes is enough, let’s call it a day.

But I can hear Nick execs saying No, let’s milk every penny out of this thing, even ifwe run it in the ground.

One of the best exceptions to this is John Cleese and Fawlty Towers. He had complete creative control. He only made twelve episodes spread over two seasons in four years. But each one is a masterpiece. Since then he’s been offered tons of money to make more, but he held firm he was done, and nobody could take his property from him.
If he was only in it for money, he could’ve milked it some more. But then the quality might suffer.
 

D'Snowth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
38,849
Reaction score
12,814
Seth MacFarlane has had similar problems with his shows, especially FAMILY GUY: there came a point in time where he felt like enough was enough, and they should just call it a day . . . but FOX isn't about to let that happen . . . and now it's gotten to a point where people actually complain about how the show's lasted too long, has overstayed its welcome, and actually want it to end if only to put it out of its misery. I swear, THE LOUD HOUSE is going to end up like SpongeBob . . . I've heard/read rumors that Chris Savino wanted to end it sooner than later to avoid this very thing from happening, but, well, now that he's fired, guess he has no say in anything about it anymore.

And, as we all know, Jim did the same with TMS as John Cleese with FAWLTY TOWERS: after five seasons and 120 episodes, while still being one of the top-rated shows on television, Jim wisely chose to end it on a high note while it was still popular and successful, rather than run it into the ground to the point people were sick and tired of it. I myself have a number of show concepts and treatments, most of which have only been planned out for a single season for a number of different reasons, but yeah, maintaining quality is one of them.
 

PumpkinJ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
445
Reaction score
126
I believe Ed, Edd n Eddy might've been the only CN show whose creator had all the creative control of it himself, with the network not making any baffling decisions on how they want the show to be like. Danny must've made the show end to the point with enough seasons+episodes he wanted it to stop at.

I also forgot to mention, Charles M Shultz didn't want all this modern Peanuts **** after his death.
 
Top