View Full Version : "Violation of terms"
06 June 2009, 06:28 PM
I recently submitted a piece and was rejected on like five different qualifications. If the quality was not good enough I can understand, but two of the terms were "Your submission is in violation of CGSociety.org General policy.
Please be warned that any and all posting in violation of our
policy is subject to disiplinary action. We advise you to
study our policy thoroughly before submitting another entry." Which i don't understand at all, it has no nudity or violence, just Alice from resident evil and some zombies. Which brings me to my second point. The title was "Alice in underland" which was another violation "Your thread title was not in keeping with CGSociety.org Hosted
Gallery posting policy."
Can anyone explain these two violations to me?
06 June 2009, 01:32 AM
I don't validate images, so I have to take a guess and say that your image was rejected because of the following ...
If your artwork is a derivative of a commercial work such as a professionally photographed person, please do not post this on CGSociety.
Derivatives are works that reference existing commercial works directly. Your work needs to be original, and not bear resemblance to any commercial work in existence. In order to protect artists, CGSociety reserves the right to remove any work that is found to resemble a commercial work.You did not cite your reference image and it's quite obvious you painted this from a still from one of the RE movies. That would be the definition of commercial work (i.e. the film released by Sony).
I have no idea on the title. Probably just human error when selecting the reason(s).
06 June 2009, 02:25 PM
Kirt, Thank you for telling me this. I looked all over and could not find any terms I might have been in violation of. You are absolutely right, I did use a reference from a movie. I'm a little bothered by this as I spent about 10 hours on her alone. I'm thinking if i were to go through the gallery I would find several other movie characters and be able to site references...but I guess there is no point in that is there!
06 June 2009, 02:25 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.