M4A4 | Howl becoming Contraband?

[thewhaleman]

Drama unfolds.

http://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffen...ator_of_the_original_griffinart_wrote_a_blog/

 

[HappySticks™]

 

[Fork Included]

from a brief glance, it seems the image in question is very similar but not a 100% copy. So this would be a modification/remix and would have to go before a court to receive a decision.

ie, too much work for some guy that did this in 2011 and really doesn't give a fuck

ie, this is why CSGO is aids and the FPS scene will never be the same again

 

[thewhaleman]

from a brief glance, it seems the image in question is very similar but not a 100% copy. So this would be a modification/remix and would have to go before a court to receive a decision.

ie, too much work for some guy that did this in 2011 and really doesn't give a fuck

ie, this is why CSGO is aids and the FPS scene will never be the same again

The guy who made the skin is walking away with like 40 thousand dollars ( rumored amount made within the first 80 days ), while the guy who made the original drawing gets nothing. If I trace Mario, I can't sell that drawing on a commercial scale. If the guy does take legal action, he'll need a lawyer which ain't cheap, and if he loses well GG. Shitty situation is shitty. I assume the only reason valve isn't taking any serious action is because the skin maker has like 10+ skins/stickers ingame, which would then need an investigation into each one of them, and could turn into a clusterfuck.

 

[Fork Included]

If you trace Mario, Nintendo will go after you ass because they can.

Just like Disney is trying to shit on Deadmaus for his logo similarity.


But we're talking about an obscure picture of a griffon. The question is, did the copy-cat artist use the fame and brand recognition of the original work to profit? I hardly doubt it, if anything, he brought more fame to the original artist.

 

[thewhaleman]

I mean if we are getting all legally and what not, I have background in art vs legal system since I had to do a paper dealing with copyright claims in the art world while I went to art school.

Rogers vs Koon was a court case about this image vs this sculpture

Courts ruled in favor of rogers ( the photographer ) and not in favor of the Jeff Koons ( the cunt ), just because it is adapted into a new medium and changed, doesn't mean anything, it's a blatant rip off, and against the law. I hope the original artist takes him for everything. He has 10 days before valve just doesn't care anymore, I wish him the best of luck.



EDIT: Should say I never studied anymore art vs legal system cases after this one, so I could be talking out of my ass.

 

[OG buckshot jr]

Valve has no say in this. Valve is only involved from their shit mmarket perspective, which courts could enforce anyway. The original artist has as long as he wants to pursue this. Plagiarism, copyright and the like sometimes takes years to discover.

 

[Fork Included]

do you have access to the case notes? I briefly googled Rogers vs Koon and it seems the issue is intentional copying for the sake of monetary gain.

I'm sure that the devil is in the details. The defendant would have to prove that his work wasn't a blatant ripoff. This would be done in a court. And I'm sure there are other copyright cases that would favor the ripoff artist if presented properly.

 

[Fork Included]

then you have things like % of work copied, I looked at the different comparisons and it looks like he only copied a small portion of the entire image. I'm sure there's a loophole there.

 

[thewhaleman]

Valve has no say in this. Valve is only involved from their shit mmarket perspective, which courts could enforce anyway. The original artist has as long as he wants to pursue this. Plagiarism, copyright and the like sometimes takes years to discover.

What's happening now: after I knew about this skin I wrote to Valve by DMCA complaint form. Yesterday I've received the reply from them. They answered that Darksilver Zero has filed a counter-notice against my copyright complaint. All I can do now is "to take legal proceedings against him" during next 10 business days.

I was references when valve no longer gives a shit anymore, bad wording on my part...

do you have access to the case notes? I briefly googled Rogers vs Koon and it seems the issue is intentional copying for the sake of monetary gain.

I'm sure that the devil is in the details. The defendant would have to prove that his work wasn't a blatant ripoff. This would be done in a court. And I'm sure there are other copyright cases that would favor the ripoff artist if presented properly.

Basically it went down as the court decided that anyone would be able to tell it's a copy, so it's a copy. In the long and short of it. The problem is this case is one of the more popular cases to use as an examples, so you can't really rely on the information you find online because people like the mess with information. Like even my paper was based on some faulty stuff. Just using it as an example to show that the skin maker should be held responsible.

Should also be said as someone who relied on creating visual art to make a living, it peeves me a bit. So I have a bias...