Webtoon Safe Playground Policy

Many cartoonists make the mistake of believing that there is a Webtoon Safe Playground Policy on another site in relation to their own. 무료웹툰사이트 This isn’t true. Every website has its own set of policies, but there’s not any such thing as a Webtoon Safe Playground Policy.

Cartoonists should not use the animations or their material to support products for business purposes, even though cartoonists who are being compensated for their cartoons shouldn’t endorse goods themselves. Cartoonists that wish to use their animations in promotional activities, but don’t want to utilize their cartoons to endorse a specific product, can utilize the phrases”free drawing” instead of”brand endorsement.” To do this, they must state clearly that the merchandise in question is not sponsored by them and does not have their acceptance. Oftentimes, this will save the cartoonist from some legal problems, such as having to change the animation or disown it.

It has come to our attention that a particular webtoon site has made some very specific claims which are not true and would imply that webtoons are “tainted.” On the webtoon website, an author goes on to say:

The writer is obviously being deceptive and trying to steer people toward something.

This writer states that webtoons have been”out of TV.” In fact, that statement is true, as most webtoons come from movies, but not all webtoons are movie versions of comic books. Most webtoons are completely original webcomics.

Lots of webtoons include animated commercials or infomercials, which can be completely inappropriate for kids. Additionally, you are free to read the comic and see exactly what it is about, so long as you do not purchase the product being promoted.

When we began investigating this claim, we discovered it on a site that was posted by an advertiser on a different animation writer’s site. Webtoon’s Content Rules on cartooning already stated that webtoons couldn’t contain advertisements or another kind of advertising, even if the ad was inserted to the comic, yet this author just wanted more proof to back their claim up. We also discovered that the blog stated”clearly” and that we could read the entire post.

We decided to see what we could find regarding the comic book. First, we heard that the article didn’t contain any ads. Next, we discovered there wasn’t any commercial inside the comic and the comic had no expiry date. Then we checked the site itself to see if the writer had a disclaimer or copyright announcement.

The article’s writer’s name was Sue Pierce, and the blog’s domain was blogsofcelebrities.com.

Today, we’re seeing posts from authors using more”sales-type” language and mentioning names, brands, and products. We also notice that authors are starting to refer to their websites as”branded.”

We’ve also been concerned about the manner Webtoon handles user opinions, so we chose to have a closer look at this specific webtoon. We wanted to understand when Sue Pierce was stating that she’s tried some of those sponsored webtoons and that she knew that there were not any problems with the sponsored websites. We searched the Web to see what these stories were, because we desired to confirm her promises, but we couldn’t locate any.

Although we believe Sue Pierce should have made it clear that this statement isn’t a Webtoon Safe Playground Policy, we think that additional cartoonists who don’t understand the gap between webtoons and real books should read the principles, which can be explicitly stated on every webtoon’s Webpage, prior to making any promises about the quality of their functions. Of their very own brand.