vexic929

The author's proudly displayed fetish

The author's fetish you're pretty sure they don't realise they have

The author's fetish which they're firmly convinced everyone has and is just pretending otherwise

The author's non-sexual special interest which just sounds like a fetish because of their habitually unfortunate phrasing

The fetish the author is making a well-meaning effort to cater to in spite of clearly not understanding it themselves

The author's fetish that never quite makes it into the text because they keep getting sidetracked by the requisite worldbuilding

The author's utterly pedestrian sexual preference which the text treats like a bizarre fetish because they've got shit to work through

The author's seemingly innocuous recurring trope they're going to have a personal revelation about ten years down the road

『別冊シティロード』 No.1 (エコー企画) 1981年6月30日刊行

原真祐美

ポカリスエット

but it's just fundamentally incorrect. "the point" of lawsuits like this is not to "destroy the perpetrators", it's to bring them to the bargaining table. the linked article is less than 600 words long but i can guarantee you almost nobody sharing it is reading it, because they wouldn't be able to make claims like this otherwise. here's a pretty important bit of text

wuh oh!!!! doesn't look like they're very destroyed here!!!!! you'll notice how these contracts are about compensating rightsholders, not artists. as will be the case for all of these trojan horse copyright victories you have the temporarily embarrassed vivziepops of the world rooting for.

copyright law is not your friend. copyright law will not save you or anyone else from the continued gutting of the creative sector. copyright law will make sure that the profits that come from this gutting will go to the same titans of industry that the profits from creative labor have already been going to. im begging everyone to stop falling for it over and over again.