nefrubi is a cp tracer, excise him from the booru

Posted under General

DontTouchMyCogs said:

its an example

Hm, does tracing in one (or more?) instances necessarily mean an artist should be assumed to be tracing in ALL other instances though?

Colby for example has a history of tracing other artists' drawings (not live models, obviously) in some earlier art but some later art appears to be original.

It seems like someone could go from tracing live models to making original creations.

One of the problems with this type of thing is there doesn't seem to be any way to actually check it without breaking the law, thus the rules against being too realistic-looking even if it's not a trace.

1qa5h4.png also no longer appears to be up.

https://booru.allthefallen.moe/users/35761 just registered December 4th the day this thread was made, which makes it seem like a single-purpose account, kinda suspicious... seems like possibly an alt account.

Nefrubi appears to go by Nefas now, and Pixiv and SubscribeStar haven't taken down their accounts. I guess that png was pretty convincing that he's traced at least once, but I still wonder if that should only be the basis to take down one particular image as opposed to all of them.

That type of approach is why Colby is completed axed on Paheal despite having reformed and stopped tracing in later works AFAIK

Updated

Hm, does tracing in one (or more?) instances necessarily mean an artist should be assumed to be tracing in ALL other instances though?

I agree. It is a poor justification for wholesale deletion, especially since the individual who presented the supposed evidence is himself so suspicious. What do we actually know of this source? Furthermore, since the image that nefrubi appears to have traced is itself a perfectly legal image, is deletion even necessary under the rules?

Unfortunately, this sort of reactionary paranoia is entirely in keeping with the way that laws regarding art and expression are being enforced these days. Deletion may indeed be necessary to keep the server host from booting the site. Welcome to the authoritarian dystopia that 80's sci-fi warned us about.

zx29b said:
since the image that nefrubi appears to have traced is itself a perfectly legal image, is deletion even necessary under the rules?

This would be the relevant part:

Rules said:
If the character depicted is directly based on a real child, especially if they are a victim of production of child pornography, it is not allowed.

I don't know if Nefrubi's art fulfills the "especially" clause or not. You got a chance to see PonerLover's example and described it as clothed modeling so if it was purely based on clothes modeling it would not be "victim of real CP".

But 'especially' means that it's an optional condition of impetus, not a requirement, so even if they're not CP victims, basing it on real children is not allowed.

Of course what constitutes 'child' could be debated, like if we mean "anyone under 18" or "pre-pubescents". Greta Thunberg for example is 18 now and anything based on her is no longer based on a minor (even if it might've been while drawn, depending on if artist intended to age her up or not) but even when she gained the height of the popularity she was definitely not biologically a child, she fell under the 'early teens' lolis of mid-pubesence who were adolescents (not children) nearing adulthood.

There's also this:

Rules said:
However, exceptions can be made for artworks which are "inspired by" certain characters. For example, characters that exist in fictional art, but also happen to appear in a non animated film. These are verified case by case.

I expect this would apply to drawing a character like X-23 who was depicted in live-action film "Logan", as Shadman did.

Or maybe like the loli in Labyrinth since they also made a manga out of it.

zx29b said:
Unfortunately, this sort of reactionary paranoia is entirely in keeping with the way that laws regarding art and expression are being enforced these days. Deletion may indeed be necessary to keep the server host from booting the site. Welcome to the authoritarian dystopia that 80's sci-fi warned us about.

*shrug* at least it's not paheal?

It's good to have that kind of deniability about CP (though I don't know how much of a difference it would make) re the whole "traced a photograph" dilemma, though I don't really know how proveable the claims are since mods can't check evidence w/o breaking laws.

Without being able to prove it directly, doing so indirectly like " we know this guy traced a clothed model photograph once so we should assume their other art is tracings of photographs" might be the only options?

I do wonder though: how certain are we of "traced a photograph" vs "drew based on a photograph?

There are some examples I've seen where a photograph obviously inspired some 2D work yet clearly is not a tracing, someone posted a collection over at

http://animagirls-new.blogspot.com/2013/04/real-life-girls-vs-anime-girls.html

seen in music vid form at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHoHtr0cxJA

I would hesit a guess that all of those were non-tracings drawn simply by looking at the photo, but the better the artist (or the closer they tried to approximate a real appearance) the harder it might get to tell. It only seems obvious here since they tried to anime-ify the photos so much.

It's good to have that kind of deniability about CP (though I don't know how much of a difference it would make) re the whole "traced a photograph" dilemma, though I don't really know how proveable the claims are since mods can't check evidence w/o breaking laws.

It's not good. Rather it is necessary. Also, even if the image does not break any laws, what matters is whether or not the hosting service determines that it is worth it to make the legal argument as opposed to simply dropping the site. With that being the case, the site owners and admins do have to be mindlessly reactive toward any content that may perturb the hosting service. It's some real shit, but there is nothing to be done for it.

tyc said:
https://booru.allthefallen.moe/users/35761 just registered December 4th the day this thread was made, which makes it seem like a single-purpose account, kinda suspicious... seems like possibly an alt account.

Funny, i have said the same to a mod here.
another point is the half screenshot, much better would be the full link to the forum.
me, and the friendly mod, we both havent found anything to it in the web. absolutely nothing...

and nefrubi havent used the example for his pic as stencil. there are enough different details.
so its a good question what we should do in this situation.

DontTouchMyCogs said:

imo its better to be safe than sorry. to me its not worth it to possibly lose an entire site to.

There's always going to be the risk of that, the same squad who tried to cancel Paheal until they capitulated and changed policies could eventually target here too with DDoS or filing fake CP reports to feds in whatever country hosts servers.

I think the issue here is basically: is the standard being set that if a particular artist ever traced a clothed model that we will assume all of their other art must be tracings of models too?

That's something we should probably be clear on to any artists who want their stuff here "never trace anything ever or all your stuff gets nuked".

I had thought it was just on a case-by-case basis if evidence is supplied on a particular image.

The only exception I could see is if an artist was adding their own work, was warned about uploading model-tracings and then continued to do so, in which case the account should be suspended.

I don't think nefas/nefrubi actually uploaded their work here though, it was from fans? I think I might've uploaded 1 or 2 pieces but I just figured it was talented drawing not tracings.

1