Bought/Thought 3/26

[BrianWilly]

Look, I think you guys are talking about two different things. That Avengers cover is a blatant example of some using someone else's work in the exact same manner that it was produced. That, to me (and apparently the magazine) is unacceptable.

Guys like Ross, Land, etc who are using models, pictures, movie clips whatever as reference is a whole different story. I don't feel that is "swiping."

No, using someone else's footage of models, pictures, and movie clips is still considered swiping intellectual property. You can't just turn on your DVD, pause it at four minutes in, copy that image, change some details like hair color or clothes wrinkles, and call it original. That's still stealing. Much less for images straight from magazines. I don't know how much that would apply to Ross, since as far as I know he takes all his own pictures, but Land? His theft is gratuitous.

Not in my definition of it.

Your definition of it is unfortunately incorrect. Copyright laws exist for just this reason.

 

[iloveclones]

BLUE BEETLE #25: After over 2 years, this title has forged itself into a great little superhero book thanks to the efforts of Giffen, Rogers, & Albuquerque, but in terms of sales, it has always struggled.

This is the second time in so many days that I've heard this kind of comment about BB. I might have to check it out. The only other DC I get is Booster Gold, which I think is fantastic. BB might make a nice companion title. Any trades on this one yet?

 

[RockSP]

No more swiper talk for a moment!

 

[iloveclones]

No, using someone else's footage of models, pictures, and movie clips is still considered swiping intellectual property. You can't just turn on your DVD, pause it at four minutes in, copy that image, change some details like hair color or clothes wrinkles, and call it original. That's still stealing. Much less for images straight from magazines. I don't know how much that would apply to Ross, since as far as I know he takes all his own pictures, but Land? His theft is gratuitous.
Your definition of it is unfortunately incorrect. Copyright laws exist for just this reason.

Well, if it's so obvious, maybe you can point me to the lawsuits against Land that he lost. I mean, if it's that obvious, surely the courts would have decided on it by now. My definition is solely for me, and as far as I know, the courts agree. Feel free to prove me wrong...

 

[BrianWilly]

Well, if it's so obvious, maybe you can point me to the lawsuits against Land that he lost. I mean, if it's that obvious, surely the courts would have decided on it by now. My definition is solely for me, and as far as I know, the courts agree. Feel free to prove me wrong...

This is Marvel's own policy regarding what is and isn't a swipe. You can define it however you like in your own personal definitions, except that it wouldn't be correct.

But of course Marvel is never going to call out or sue Land. He makes them money. As long as he makes them money, they're not going to call attention to a controversy. And yet even they had to step in and print this letter before the snowball rolled too far down the hill.

 

[iloveclones]

I failed to see the lawsuit part.

 

[BrianWilly]

You need to see an actual lawsuit before you can read Marvel's own statement? They just told you what the definition of a swipe is. It's different from your definition. The end. The very fact that these artists aren't getting sued and won't be getting sued for this sort of plagiarism is exactly what's so frustrating about this situation.

 

[Dread]

party pooper...

Obviously it didn't last.

BrianWilly's got a strong point. Marvel won't even listen to their own stance on the issue in the name of protecting one of their stars. That is why I compared it to baseball and steroids. Everyday FANS knew for over a decade that they existed. How could you not, seeing players accomplish in their late 30's and early 40's what they couldn't in their youth, bulking up when the body usually is losing or maintaining muscle mass, players getting bigger and bigger every year? It seemed everyone knew but the owners, who turned a blind eye collectively because it made them money and successful stars. It is only what it got TOO oblivious that one or two players fell and there hopefully will be changes made. Swiping may be something similar. It will have to be someone big, bigger than Greg Land, to begin the brake-down process.

 

[BrianWilly]

Oh yeah, and remember the controversy a couple years back from when a House of M image looked too much like the king of Spain? I don't remember if that was any of the artists we're talking about now, but if I recall correctly, that was pretty much what prompted Marvel to release that letter above: fear of legal action.

 

[Darthphere]

That was Peter Mayhew.

 

[Egotastic]

So...where's the Quesada swipe?

 

[Darthphere]

So...where's the Quesada swipe?

I'm still searching. Though, I may have gotten that confused with something he did when he was on Daredevil where he drew someone's pic into an issue after winning a contest.

 

[Egotastic]

I don't even remember that. But yeah, unless you can provide me with me proof, Quesada has never swiped.

Or been caught swiping.

 

[Dread]

Oh yeah, and remember the controversy a couple years back from when a House of M image looked too much like the king of Spain? I don't remember if that was any of the artists we're talking about now, but if I recall correctly, that was pretty much what prompted Marvel to release that letter above: fear of legal action.

In all honesty, that is the only reason why any business or politician pretends to follow the rules. And to some degree normal people. Not because they're in any way statesmen or honest or have integrity above selfishness, but because they don't want their asses sued or in jail.

It sucks, but it is life.

Or maybe I am just cynical.

 

[iloveclones]

You need to see an actual lawsuit before you can read Marvel's own statement? They just told you what the definition of a swipe is. It's different from your definition. The end. The very fact that these artists aren't getting sued and won't be getting sued for this sort of plagiarism is exactly what's so frustrating about this situation.

Yes, I do. How about some of these "victims" sack up and defend their "art."

Look, you can get the vapours all you want, but it doesn't bother me (the fact that they do this). I will continue to buy the comics irregardless of whether or not they're "swiping" if I like the product. If it's getting Marvel or their artists in trouble, well, that's their problem. Get better lawyers.

And realize, I'm playing severe Devil's Advocate here. As I've said many times: I think this technique leads to very static storytelling. But I don't exactly lose any sleep over the free exposure these stars and magazines are getting.I mean, please, who around here ever heard of that magazine before? And Topher Grace, for God's sake? His agent most likely paid Land to trace him.

 

[Dread]

And I see Corp took his sig from DAMAGE CONTROL #3. Nice.

 

[Dread]

This is the second time in so many days that I've heard this kind of comment about BB. I might have to check it out. The only other DC I get is Booster Gold, which I think is fantastic. BB might make a nice companion title. Any trades on this one yet?

There are 3 trades that collect the first 18 or so issues I believe. Amazon has them all listed under a simple book search for "Blue Beetle". Vol. 3 came out last month.

 

[RockSP]

And I see Corp took his sig from DAMAGE CONTROL #3. Nice.

^^Dang, I didn't even know issue 3 came out. My shop didn't have it.

 

[Dread]

^^Dang, I didn't even know issue 3 came out. My shop didn't have it.

Bummer. Go pick it up elsewhere.

 

[RockSP]

That's the plan.

 

[Darthphere]

I don't even remember that. But yeah, unless you can provide me with me proof, Quesada has never swiped.

Or been caught swiping.

The seeds of doubt have been planted.

 

[Darthphere]

You know what forget about it, I found the column, it wasn't a swipe it was under his swipe file but not a swipe. It was those Wolverine: Origins covers he did.

 

[BrianWilly]

Yes, I do. How about some of these "victims" sack up and defend their "art."

Look, you can get the vapours all you want, but it doesn't bother me (the fact that they do this). I will continue to buy the comics irregardless of whether or not they're "swiping" if I like the product. If it's getting Marvel or their artists in trouble, well, that's their problem. Get better lawyers.

And realize, I'm playing severe Devil's Advocate here. As I've said many times: I think this technique leads to very static storytelling. But I don't exactly lose any sleep over the free exposure these stars and magazines are getting.I mean, please, who around here ever heard of that magazine before? And Topher Grace, for God's sake? His agent most likely paid Land to trace him.

That's a pretty insipid assumption. First of all, Topher doesn't own any rights to that photograph; the filmmakers do, so if his agent did tell Land to trace it, he's legally culpable as well. Secondly...so, did every single other of the hundreds of actors and models that Land has traced tell him to do it as well?

The fact is that no matter how many quotation marks you put around the word, it is still cheating at best and outright theft at worst. This is the fact, it's not an opinion up for discussion. It is completely ludicrous that these "artists" (see I can do it too!) are being paid money in a highly competitive industry to manufacture stolen material. As if it doesn't speak lowly enough of the "artists," it sure says a lot about the company willing to pay these "artists" for this "art" and peddle to the masses.

You can buy it if you want. You can like it if you want; no one but you can decide that, and of course there's no accounting for taste. But don't try to sugarcoat this. Don't try to pass it off as some innocuous, legitimate method that people are getting offended over for no good reason. Don't try to paint the Lands and the Macks as just blameless, misunderstood victims that we're blowing out of proportion. It's theft, and the "artists" who steal are thieves that are getting paid over the real artists who create their own material. It's as simple as that.

 

[iloveclones]

I didn't with Mack. I said point blank he should be banned at Marvel. I think his one example is egregious enough. Which is why, surprise, surprise, he's being sued. (Or was threatened. I didn't really hear of this story until a page or two ago.)

I think with the others, it's more vague. If you don't see it that way, that's fine. I'm not going to spend time on a shades of grey speech.

I doubt many here would get as bent out of shape about downloading music or making a cassette tape (for us oldsters). Those activities were always considered illegal (if not always enforceable.) And illegal in the same, exact way - copying copyrighted materials. But hey, those people weren't making a profit, so no harm, no foul, right? I guess there are levels of theft.

In the end, I would let the market work it out. This kind of art (IMO) isn't as good as naturally produced artwork. I always felt Mack only got jobs because of Bendis. And the more Marvel is slappled with lawsuits (by people who are actually offended) the more they'll crack down. And if they're not offended, well, what's the problem?

 

[Egotastic]

I'm not really seeing the distinction between Mack and Land based on your reasoning. I mean, copying/tracing from copyrighted material is all the same to me, be it screencaps or magazine photos.