We create ourselves out of what we consume.

seen from Ireland
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from Romania
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Malaysia
seen from Russia
seen from China

seen from Singapore

seen from Russia
seen from China
seen from Malaysia
seen from Philippines
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Thailand
seen from Türkiye

seen from United States
seen from Czechia
We create ourselves out of what we consume.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Somebody from an alternate universe without our type of draconian copyright laws would think our world is utterly dystopian.
A world where all of our culture is owned by mega corporations and traded as a commodity.
This is done under the pretense of protecting authors, but the ones who are really protected are the oligarchs who have spent millions of dollars making the copyright system as oppressive as possible. Especially to the actual creators who work for them. Because the creators who make characters for the mega corporations do not own their own characters.
The person from this other universe might ask how people are able to iterate and retell stories. Because in their world, it's normal for somebody to create a character, and for others to create new stories with that character. Each one putting their own spin on it as it evolves over time.
One person makes a character, and another makes a story with that character with a different spin on it. And another makes a spin on that person's interpretation of the character. And so on and so forth.
And you would explain to this person from the other universe how things used to be like that. 500 years ago, characters couldn't be copyrighted. Stories were passed down from generation to generation. Different authors would retell stories their own way. Each iterating on the previous.
And to an extent, we can still do that today. The internet is filled with fanart and fanfiction. As long as we don't make profit from it, most of the corporations will ignore it. We can make works using popcultural icons, we just can't make any money off of what we create.
But even this really only exists as long as the mega corporations allow it. If they chose to bring the hammer down on fanfiction websites, there's really not much that could be done. The way the laws are written now, courts would probably deem a lot of fan works as not falling under fair use.
And companies could make reasonable claims that fanfiction hurts their bottom line. Why would somebody buy a poorly written Star Wars novel when there's tons of Star Wars fanfiction they can get for free?
If Disney or Warner or Paramount decided one day to use their billions of dollars to target fanfiction websites, those communities would probably find themselves demolished overnight.
This person from that other universe would be able to see things more clearly than we do. They would see what we ignore because this is how things have been as long as we've been alive.
They would see that our culture is owned.
They would see that this isn't normal.
They would see that humanity is meant to tell stories and to be able to retell the stories they've learned. And that claiming the rights to a story, to a character from a story, to our very culture, is a perversion of what humanity was meant to be.
Okay, I'm mad about something now, and I put up the video for context. You see, there was this fan-chapter of Warhammer 40K Space Marines called the MaidMarines.
Long story short, they were this funny fan-chapter with an original Primarch, a theme of anime catgirl maids (and yes, they included female Marines), they kinda slyly satirized Warhammer 40k's themes with their ideals being centered around feeding people and communal care, and there were these wonderful fan minis by the user Solflamer for fans to 3d print
Long story long, well, watch the video. But NOTE THE USE OF THE TERMS "WERE" AND "WAS" HERE.
Because Games Workshop, owners of Warhammer 40k and copyright dickheads par-excellence made them take them down, both the minis and even the fan codex the original creator ChummiChan!
And, to the people saying "Well, they infringed on GW's IP, what did you expect?" firstly, fuck you, stop licking boot leather you bitchass coward, you're probably one of the assholes cheering on the record companies trying to kill the Internet Archive.
Secondly, let's analyze this case from a perspective of fair used, based on the US standards of the four factors:
-The purpose and character of the use, IE whether it is transformative and what field it is being done in. The use is indeed for miniatures akin to the kind GW sells, but of a faction that does not exist and will likely never exist officially, satirizing both fanwork tropes and internal setting tropes in ways that GW would never do due to major lore reasons. It is also being done in the field of 3d printing, a field that GW so far has refused to touch.
-The nature of the copyrighted work. The work is narrative, which were presented as nonprofit, but also embodied in physical miniatures, which are designed to be customizable by the end-user, and there are many early examples of GW themselves showing this off like the old Deodorant Grav-Tank and the original Space Marine tank that was a modified GI Joe Armadillo. Therefore, this is in the spirit of a pattern encouraged by GW.
--Though, this might be complicated by a decision in the lawsuit against Chapterhouse that saw them win on this, but lose on the issue of variations. I would imagine a rename would be in order, but now, GW didn't ask for them to rename them now did they?
-The amount of the content used. GW has no official STLs to derive from, and while they share design elements, they are clearly distinct in ways that do not resemble other Marines on multiple key points. The narrative relates to theirs, but it was released largely for non-profit and does not use their original text and contains mostly original elements; and game mechanics have been found to be largely protected by fair use so the codex being taken down might still not be kosher!
-The effects of the use on the potential market. This is their strongest point, nobody who wants to buy regular fucking Space Marines is going to buy Maidmarines instead. This is even before you get into the fact it is primarily within the niche of 3d printing; which again; GW has never done. Hell, the fact they are cross-compatible wit hGW models might improve sales, given the potential for kitbashing, again encouraged by the hobby.
Overall, while there are some gaps, they might have a case to challenge GW in court about that.
Except here's the thing: GW has way more money and lawyers than them, and could financially ruin them. And orgs dedicated to fighting this either don't exist or have large enough umbrellas they current;y have bigger fish to fry due to the hellish global situation.
So if they were in the right, it ends up meaning nothing in the end because of power. That is not justice. That is a bully doing whatever the fuck they want.
Because they're big enough to get away with it and nobody will stop them. And I fucking hate bullies.
And I think whatever Patrick Bateman in GW's legal department or executive suite did this deserves to shit out raw Legos for the rest of his life, or at the very least be publicly named and shamed...
Patent lawyers with a PhD in quantum physics or some shit when they’re asked to fax a document
Need ppl to understand IP laws are not in their favor. You cannot be seen agreeing with Anne Rice on matters of IP, okay? You’re embarrassing yourself + ur embarrassing me. If you:
Write fanfiction
Read fanfiction
Make fanart
Enjoy looking at fanart
Plan on ever creating a piece of media inspired however loosely by another work
Plan on ever enjoying a piece of media inspired however loosely by another work
Are not wealthy with a successful IP franchise
Are not a giant company that owns successful IP franchises
Want to live in a world where creative expression is not paywalled or otherwise gatekept
Want medication to be less expensive/do not profit off medical patents
And etc etc etc
Then IP laws are not in your favor. If you’re a “small artist,” IP laws are not in your favor (could you afford to take Hot Topic to court right now to sue for infringement if they used one of your designs? If you sell a shirt with an IP Hot Topic has the merchandise rights to, do you think they or the IP owner would have similar financial issues coming after you? Do Disney and Nintendo exercise restraint when it comes to derivative works?). You are not George R R Martin. You are not going to be George R R Martin. Stop championing copyright.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I LOVE PIRATING!! ! I LOVE FREE STUFF!!! PIRACY IS AWESOMEEE
A great design can set your product apart but without protection, it can be quickly copied. In this webinar, we’ll walk through the core types of […]
A great design can set your product apart but without protection, it can be quickly copied. In this webinar, we’ll walk through the core types of intellectual property and focus on how design patents work in the United States to protect the visual aspects of your products. We’ll look at real-world examples across industries, highlight common mistakes entrepreneurs make, and briefly touch on key considerations for protecting designs internationally. We’ll close with time for live Q&A.
May 15, 2026
12:00 PM Central Time
Zoom (Live)
Register here: https://app.lawmatics.com/forms/share/c76d1c12-c218-4d0a-b08e-0158da062886
after reading robert kurvitz's novel (supposed to be the first in a long series) and playing disco elysium (one of the most beautiful things i have ever experienced), and then seeing his studio and his life's work wrenched away by IP law, kept from him - i have zero respect for anyone who suggests that IP law could be expanded to help "protect artists from theft of their work" or any other vaguely-stated offence to your notions of artistic integrity. you should have no respect for this position either. it is an indefensible position. if you hold this view you are either 1) legitimately want to live in a world where all stories, all art, all expression is closed-source and gatekept by the moldiest, least-human lawyers that nintendo, disney, and universal music group can dig up or 2) you are a useful idiot for group 1. you cannot make this work