"Patreon" is currently categorized as a copyright. Should it be changed to a generic tag since Patreon has no ownership of the source material?
Posted under Tags
Patreon is still a company, and companies are represented as copyright tags, like Touei, Square Enix, Falcom, Nintendo and such are as well. Although to be fair, the Patreon tag is used when you see the logo, whereas the other company tags are used for crossovers.
Benit149 said:
Patreon is still a company, and companies are represented as copyright tags, like Touei, Square Enix, Falcom, Nintendo and such are as well. Although to be fair, the Patreon tag is used when you see the logo, whereas the other company tags are used for crossovers.
All of those have characters to their names, though.
Social media websites are generally tagged as copyrights. I think much of the current population of the patreon tag should be retagged with patreon username and/or patreon logo general tags as appropriate, so the main tag can be cleared up for more direct representations of the site itself (e.g. character using Patreon, "Patreon-tan").
feline_lump said:
Social media websites are generally tagged as copyrights. I think much of the current population of the patreon tag should be retagged with patreon username and/or patreon logo general tags as appropriate, so the main tag can be cleared up for more direct representations of the site itself (e.g. character using Patreon, "Patreon-tan").
I don't quit see why. If you read the patreon wiki it's clear that it's only intended for use when the logo is present.
On Danbooru, this is used in conjunction with the company's logo, which is a white P in front of an orange background.
And sure patreon username has no wiki but it's also the most intuitive thing in the world.. I think the current usage is fine just as Twitter and Facebook.
So to answer the OP just read that quote; the tag isn't meant to suggest Patreon owns the material but rather their log is used, though I don't know necessarily that it should be purple because of what Gollgagh points out, although if I had say on it I'd make social media platforms copyrights.
feline_lump said:
I'm suggesting a split between patreon and patreon logo, because most of the posts in the tag aren't about Patreon, they're simply advertising that the artist has a page there. We don't tag Twitter and Facebook when an artist puts their Facebook or Twitter URL in the image.
Well I can submit to that. Split patreon between patreon_username and patreon_logo and if there's anything left over it's probably an image depicting patreon? Sound fine.
So I went through every post tagged patreon and replaced it with patreon username, and or patreon logo among with some other related ones. The only exceptions being post #2312943 (edit: team rocket logo) and parent:2657873, the first being that I'm not sure if that logo is an old Patreon logo and the latter because they could be patreon rewards that were posted to sankaku complex. Also although it only amounted to 4 posts I also made patreon_logo_censor. I think perhaps patreon_logo_censor could legitimately used with with patreon copyright too?
Should the patreon logo tag be a purple one?
Updated by final name
sweetpeɐ said:
So I went through every post tagged patreon and replaced it with patreon username, and or patreon logo among with some other related ones.
Nice.
The only exceptions being [...] parent:2657873 [...] because they could be patreon rewards that were posted to sankaku complex.
Is that relevant meta information that we care about? I mean, we don’t tag other commissions or rewards either, do we?
No Patreon logo, no Patreon user name, no Patreon-tan or anything, so no patreon tag, IMO.
Should the patreon logo tag be a purple one?
Does it have characters? No? Then no. Any Patreon characters (“Patreon-tan”) would be grouped under the Patreon tag, so the tag for the logo itself is as generic as it can be.
kittey said:
Nice.
Is that relevant meta information that we care about? I mean, we don’t tag other commissions or rewards either, do we?
No Patreon logo, no Patreon user name, no Patreon-tan or anything, so no patreon tag, IMO.Does it have characters? No? Then no. Any Patreon characters (“Patreon-tan”) would be grouped under the Patreon tag, so the tag for the logo itself is as generic as it can be.
And so why are Twitter and Facebook purpled? I'm not aware of any -tan for these platforms. Besides it's not like if they did exist that they were created by those companies. I've not seen any reports about Facebook publishing a manga.
Twitter technically has the fail whale. I assume that Pixiv started this trend of copyrighting site tags, and other tags like Facebook and Patreon were probably just made copyrights simply to follow suit.
I think site tags should only be copyrights when a -tan is present. That is, they should all be split into a copyright tag for when a character is present, and a general tag for when the site is merely referenced with by logo/username/whatever else.
Don't forget that the purpose of copyright tags is solely to make the tag list easier to read by making the most important tags stand out. Just having a logo present is not important information.
So in that case an image tagged twitter that only has the Twitter logo should be tagged twitter logo instead, with only the copyright tag being used when -tans, or perhaps mascots like the fail whale, are present?
Seems look a good policy I'd abide by but would also require quite a lot of retagging.