Jump to content
Sharkbelly

Unpopular Question

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

, and some of the extreme stretches in the recent Mechwarrior lawsuits (this vehicles has two arms, a head and two legs, so it MUST be this other vehicle with a completely different shape, but those same characteristics), I have a hard taking some parts of copyright law entirely seriously. 

 

Given Disney's history of waiting till things went into public domain to make movies (and tons of money) off of them, then lobbying to change IP laws to ensure it never happens to Mickey, I have a hard time taking Disney in particular's IP woes seriously.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TauntaunScout said:

Given Disney's history of waiting till things went into public domain to make movies (and tons of money) off of them, then lobbying to change IP laws to ensure it never happens to Mickey, I have a hard time taking Disney in particular's IP woes seriously.

 

Agreed. If it were just FFG for Legion miniatures, or some other small company, I'd be more sympathetic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Agreed. If it were just FFG for Legion miniatures, or some other small company, I'd be more sympathetic. 

And at the same time, I don't have any sympathy if some 3rd party printer gets in hot water about it. It's not like they didn't know who they were fiddling with. I mean it's like Shar'belly says, it's an interesting subject but I don't really care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yeah in this whole discussion, let’s remember that when production started on Coco, Disney set out to put a literal trademark on “Day of the Dead” until Pixar told them that was not cool.

 If that’s not offensive and exploitative cultural appropriation, what is?

Edited by ClassicalMoser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2019 at 3:16 PM, Derrault said:

To the contrary, the phrase “white knight” is deeply ingrained in the pathology of men’s rights activism, to the point that it isn’t actually being employed in any other context.

In other words, by choosing to use the language of that group, you convey to a reader that you are aligned with and in agreement with it. If you didn’t intend to do so, and that reads as thoroughly implausible in today’s day and age, don’t use the extremely specific dog whistles. 

A white knight in this context is normally described as a particular type of fan that idolises the creator (s) of their fandom to the point that they can do no wrong and that will defend them at every turn no matter what, and unsolicitedly seek to fight their battles on their behalf.

See definition 3 below. In this case, the figurative damsels in distress are Disney and FFG.

white knight (plural white knights)

  1. (business) An individual or corporationthat intends to acquire another company in order to avert a hostile takeover.
  2. (fiction) a hero, savior, or righteous individual
  3. (figuratively, derogatory) Someone who unnecessarily defends someone else.
    1. (informal, derogatory) A man who defends a woman in debate etc. in an attempt to gain her favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Yeah in this whole discussion, let’s remember that when production started on Coco, Disney set out to put a literal trademark on “Day of the Dead” until Pixar told them that was not cool.

 If that’s not offensive and exploitative cultural appropriation, what is?

I think you're attributing a bit more malice than was present. Some intern who didn't know anything about non-American holidays probably made a big list of associated terms and then they just tried to trademark the whole list. It was stupid, and someone with decision-making power needed to be paying more attention, but no one was cackling in a cigar-smoke filled room twirling their mustache seriously thinking they were going to trademark the name of a holiday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

I think you're attributing a bit more malice than was present. Some intern who didn't know anything about non-American holidays probably made a big list of associated terms and then they just tried to trademark the whole list. It was stupid, and someone with decision-making power needed to be paying more attention, but no one was cackling in a cigar-smoke filled room twirling their mustache seriously thinking they were going to trademark the name of a holiday.

I don't think they planned on suing all of Mexico when the holiday rolled around. But I bet they did indeed plan to take action if any competitors used that exact combination of words in new similar product lines to their own, ie, cartoons and amusement parks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@aniron
I always find it enlightening to check my sources, especially the transient and essentially un-monitored ones like Wikis.
 
The "definition" (airquotes intentional) that you've cited was added 6 November 2015 by the user Romanophile.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:History/white_knight
 
Someone who seems to lack ethics, as in their own words:
1. Test edits to see if anybody would soon notice my vandalism. I thought that if I vandalised articles that only I worked on, nobody would (soon) notice.2. Boredom and lack of respect for the community. --Romanophile (talk) 13:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
Further perusal leads to a history of hostility, racially tinged "humor", and casual misogyny by them under other usernames, AE&CE:
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:Æ%26Œ/archive
And as as Pilcrow:
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:Pilcrow/archive
 
So far, they are not a great reference for your case that it's supposedly an innocuous term. 
 
Now, if we reference some real dictionaries (read: professional editors who have a job to do, not a bunch of anonymous hacks) it reveals that there's no such definitions in the mainstream.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white knight
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/white-knight
 
A further quick jaunt to know your meme (a site I'd consider fairly NSFW) of the term indicates a meme history stemming from...
4chan of all places, back in 2010, in which it's used by someone employing casual misogyny, specifically **** "jokes".
 
I'm not sure how, purely on the basis of it’s documented historical use, you could possibly have come to the conclusion that it has anything to do with fans, fandom, or idolizing of creators.

That's never been associated with that, ever, anywhere. And it would by weirdly credulous to assume that is the case now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The use of White Knight is actually substantially older than 2010. It has a long history in advertising and finance. In finance, it refers to a well-intentioned takeover of one company by another. In advertising, it was the subject of a very successful ad campaign for Ajax from the 1960s (i.e., coming to the rescue of housewives). In recent media sources, it has been used in print to refer to an individual championing a cause. 

Cross-referencing multiple UK English and US English definitions of the word as in Merriam-Webster and Collins, for example, will show multiple instances of its accepted use outside of the loathsome MRA movement in multiple contexts, including 'one that champions a cause' (Merriam-Webster). Out of curiosity, I checked both online and print versions of these definitions. Anecdotally, I remember it being a long staple of forum arguments to denigrate someone's seemingly fan-motivated defense of a company or product.

Although I generally agree that one should avoid the use of such phrases which become better known as catch calls of antagonistic or offensive cliques, it is also important to not let such groups claim ownership of perfectly serviceable language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, srMontresor said:

The use of White Knight is actually substantially older than 2010. It has a long history in advertising and finance. In finance, it refers to a well-intentioned takeover of one company by another. In advertising, it was the subject of a very successful ad campaign for Ajax from the 1960s (i.e., coming to the rescue of housewives). In recent media sources, it has been used in print to refer to an individual championing a cause. 

Cross-referencing multiple UK English and US English definitions of the word as in Merriam-Webster and Collins, for example, will show multiple instances of its accepted use outside of the loathsome MRA movement in multiple contexts, including 'one that champions a cause' (Merriam-Webster). Out of curiosity, I checked both online and print versions of these definitions. Anecdotally, I remember it being a long staple of forum arguments to denigrate someone's seemingly fan-motivated defense of a company or product.

Although I generally agree that one should avoid the use of such phrases which become better known as catch calls of antagonistic or offensive cliques, it is also important to not let such groups claim ownership of perfectly serviceable language.

Good point on the pushback against corruption of language; I did indicate it was the non-business, modern internet meme usage. AKA the one used earlier in the thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fan models, props, cosplay and garage kits have historically been hand waved by movie studios because they are often done by people in the special effects houses. They would essentially have to tell on themselves.

this is doubly true for Star Wars where fans in costume end up being hired by LF for events.

But that was a pretty small market. 

Star Wars has been getting pretty good at providing official licenses for small artists and such and I think platforms like shape ways could make a good play for opening up licensing to creators. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Derrault said:

Good point on the pushback against corruption of language; I did indicate it was the non-business, modern internet meme usage. AKA the one used earlier in the thread.

 

Except as has been noted, you're also mistaken about that usage.

Chief, I've been having unnecessary arguments about wee toy sodjers ever since I got the internet in 1998, and I have seen "white knight" used *specifically* in the context of an overzealous fan leaping to the defence of a corporation literally(not figuratively) countless times. For a period of several years not too long ago, you couldn't read any thread on a forum discussing GW's business practices without people hurling accusations of white knighting at anyone who expressed even the most qualified and equivocal positive statements about the company. You are the only person here who saw that term and immediately associated it with "MRA" nonsense, and that you only seem capable of viewing it in that more political sense says far more about you than the person who was, given the context, quite evidently using it in the way I just described.

Just give it a rest eh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yodhrin said:

Except as has been noted, you're also mistaken about that usage.

Chief, I've been having unnecessary arguments about wee toy sodjers ever since I got the internet in 1998, and I have seen "white knight" used *specifically* in the context of an overzealous fan leaping to the defence of a corporation literally(not figuratively) countless times. For a period of several years not too long ago, you couldn't read any thread on a forum discussing GW's business practices without people hurling accusations of white knighting at anyone who expressed even the most qualified and equivocal positive statements about the company. You are the only person here who saw that term and immediately associated it with "MRA" nonsense, and that you only seem capable of viewing it in that more political sense says far more about you than the person who was, given the context, quite evidently using it in the way I just described.

Just give it a rest eh.

Uh, no.

I noted the use for business and that the meme use by internet trolls didn’t start until about 2010. I provided sourcing for this.

If you have proof of your vague claims, where is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never come across any references to "white knight" with any association with a men's right movement, but then again I haven't came across any substantial men's rights movement either. 

 

 

Counterexample one of white knight being used per the definition that we are referring to, dated 2016:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/the-white-knight-counter-thread.272126/

I quote:

"My name is Electric Kite.

And i like Elite Dangerous.

In most parts of the Galaxy (and these forums) i am also labelled a "White Knight". A fanboy or "Someone who has F.D's inserted firmly into my Heart <AHEM>"
I suppose. for the most part, thats true. While i have no problem being called a white knight...what i do have a problem with is people assuming its some kind of insult."

Counterexample two: 

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/129419/

While tongue in cheek, they are clearly referring to the "overly or unneccesarily defending fanboy" definition rather than anything related to gender activism.

The other definition of "defending women on the Internet in the hopes of certain reward" is referenced in the comments, though.

"Ways to tell if you're a White Knight:

1. You defend the crap out of something you believe on the interwebz!!!
2. You know maths and swords r fun!
4. You inevitably have been dubbed a White Knight by an angry forum member."

I think it's reasonable to conclude from context that the "defensive fanboy" definition is the relevant one for this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Yodhrin said:

You are the only person here who saw that term and immediately associated it with "MRA" nonsense,

No he wasn't. He's just maybe the only one who was saying so.

Quote

 given the context, .

The context is the only thing that kept me from thinking [something awful]. I've never heard it used to talk about what the kids nowadays are calling fanboys. Only as a derogatory term that is applied in [horrible corners of the internet] to people who act like decent human beings. But given the specific context that didn't make sense.

Edited by TauntaunScout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@aniron

"I have never come across any references to "white knight" with any association with a men's right movement,"

What, so you didn't bother to google the terms "white knighting" or "white knight"?

The first results are specific to, not being a big ol fan (shows up...not at all) or saving a business from hostile takeover (shows up buried a bit later), but pejorative misogyny.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=White Knight
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Internet White Knight
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/white-knight
https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/White_knighting
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Whiteknighting
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6v7spt/eli5_what_is_white_knighting/
https://www.reddit.com/r/whiteknighting/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.405838-Why-is-white-knighting-seen-as-such-a-bad-thing

There are literally a multitude of other links for sites that I wouldn't want to direct traffic to by adding. 

It's fairly peculiar that someone who says they've been on the internet for the better part of a decade and heard of Star Citizen would be so completely in the dark on the first 10 pages of google results for terms that are, now, almost universally associated with those same results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/3/2019 at 11:04 PM, Derrault said:

@aniron

"I have never come across any references to "white knight" with any association with a men's right movement,"

What, so you didn't bother to google the terms "white knighting" or "white knight"?

The first results are specific to, not being a big ol fan (shows up...not at all) or saving a business from hostile takeover (shows up buried a bit later), but pejorative misogyny.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=White Knight
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Internet White Knight
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/white-knight
https://geekfeminism.wikia.org/wiki/White_knighting
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Whiteknighting
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6v7spt/eli5_what_is_white_knighting/
https://www.reddit.com/r/whiteknighting/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.405838-Why-is-white-knighting-seen-as-such-a-bad-thing

There are literally a multitude of other links for sites that I wouldn't want to direct traffic to by adding. 

It's fairly peculiar that someone who says they've been on the internet for the better part of a decade and heard of Star Citizen would be so completely in the dark on the first 10 pages of google results for terms that are, now, almost universally associated with those same results.

I said I have never come across it. But then I wasn't actively looking for "definitions of white knight" either.

I do not dispute that the definition you refer to exist nor even that it might be the more commonly used in certain Internet circles today. As I said, it was even used in that context in some of the comments to the forum thread a quoted.

I just suggest that therw are multiple valid meanings of the word and that you shouldn't be so quick to ascribe to malice what can be explained with ignorance. Now can we please get back on topic?

Edited by aniron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, aniron said:

I said I have never come across it. But then I wasn't actively looking for "definitions of white knight" either.

I do not dispute that the definition you refer to exist nor even that it might be the more commonly used in certain Internet circles today. As I said, it was even used in that context in some of the comments to the forum thread a quoted.

I just suggest that therw are multiple valid meanings of the word and that you shouldn't be so quick to ascribe to malice what can be explained with ignorance. Now can we please get back on topic?

I believe that was already resolved: Yes, unlicensed likenesses of characters under copyright constitute a violation of that. Didn’t really need to be asked at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...