Opinion the copyright control of society

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Misty, Jan 10, 2019.

Tags:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    If I see a song, that I really, really, like, I should, as an artist, be allowed to use that song.

    Why is Warhol allowed to use Cambell's soup w/o permission but we, as game artists, cannot use great licensed tunes? It above all should be as an art despite EA's attempts to make it not so.

    As a law abiding citizen, I continue to obey and adhere to copyright rules and laws. But the anarchist in me is very upset. Why? Because I am not allowed to express myself as an artist in this corporate and consumerist world. Why should I be forced by the corporate boot to put in music that does not truly fit my grand artistic vision?

    If my game succeeds I will gladly, gladly pay royalties.

    Also, I don't think that mere commoners should be allowed this ability, but true and grand artists. Because of this I don't see it really proliferating or becoming that much of an issue. I don't consider most modern art to be true art I am talking about the legit.
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2019
  2. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    Spoken like someone who has never created anything of worth and released it to the world.

    Your grand artistic vision has no worth to anyone else until you do the work to bring it to fruition. If you cannot do the work yourself, you either need to pay someone to do it, or pay for the rights to use work they have already done. If that is not an option for you, you have to settle for work which falls under the various licences allowing you to use it for free. If this option does not suit you, too bad. The world does not owe you aid in your "grand artistic vision".
     
    The Sorcerer, JeffJ and Nocturne like this.
  3. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    You are being rude, negative, and American, so reported. Sabrina literally made a post complaining about how toxic the internet is, like 2 days ago, and here you go, like literally fulfilling the prophecy. Words cannot describe.
     
  4. Jabbers

    Jabbers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    205
    Warhol didn't "use" Campbell's soup-- he painted it as an everyday object to provoke thought. This is creation in the name of art. He did not take a Campbell's soup can from the shelf of a shop and claim it as his own because he really liked it. Whether or not Warhol painted the can, it isn't going to step on Campbell's business in selling soup. However, taking music from someone without paying them is sapping from their hard work, so you yourself do not have to spend time or money having music made, and if you seek to use music from another game, you are taking from a competing product. The producer of that content may also not want to have their bespoke soundtracks associated with random media, as this will water down the impact and value of the original work, and detach its identity from the product it was made for.

    Warhol was not making a product for mass online distribution, either. He wasn't sending a free can of Campbell's soup to everyone who accessed his art at the cost an detriment of Campbell Soup Company. But if Campbell was able to stop artists drawing their soup cans, Warhol may have done it anyway. Artists are often willing to break law to fulfill a vision (e.g Banksy), although I'm not sure taking someone else's music is artistic.

    Misty on Misty

     
    JeffJ, chance, Nocturne and 1 other person like this.
  5. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    Your OP insults every person who is working to thrive on their creative talents, as well as the system in place to protect them, all because you feel entitled to the use of work you had no participation in. Beyond appalling, and you have the audacity to call others "rude/negative/toxic".

    I am not American, and what on earth are you insinuating with that comment anyway? Surely not something "rude" or "toxic", right?
     
  6. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    Utter nonsense.

    Warhol made millions from his copyright infringements. His art wasn't even good and even EA games and Activision is literally more artistic than him. And he is probably even more famous than CEOs of ea and activision.

    If I a game dev uses a music it's not going to step on anyone's business. Maybe it will even increase their business. Because 2 things, said I would gladly pay royalties, but with the toxic attitudes of the internet you are putting me in a bad mood. Second, free advertisement. Like Pringles advertising lootboxes.





    Fake news and libel.

    Its not possible to be racist of Americans, since Americans are not a race.
     
  7. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    What's appalling is your attitude. Can't even discuss anything calmly in this day and age without people raging and flaming at me. That's the state of this so-called society I suppose.

    And nice over-dramatization too. Can't even share my views without being accused of "insults every person who is working to thrive on their creative talents". What a joke. It's like that scene in the movie where the protagonist walks into a nunnery and the nuns rage and throw tomatoes over nothing.

    How dare I show opinions contrary to the norm, if you have any opinion that isn't exactly the norm these outraged people come out of their caves and flame.
     
  8. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    Do you know what defines "toxicity" in the context of a discussion board on the internet? Reacting to opinions contrary to your own not with reasonable, rational responses, but immediately jumping into drama, accusations, "everyone's out to get me!", nonsense. Just like you always have done.

    You chose to release your bold, preposterous stance to the world, and I replied to you with a dose of reality, since it's apparent that you do not understand why it's an insult to claim rights to work that is not yours. That is not "raging" or "flaming" at you, it's simply telling you something you didn't want to hear. You could have replied with arguments to support your initial points, but what a surprise, you chose your usual circus routine.
     
    Jabbers and Siolfor the Jackal like this.
  9. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    How dare you play the victim.

    You literally insult me as an artist and say I've never made anything great. Then you make these ridiculous accusations accusing me of insulting all artists. That's incredibly offensive.

    Well let's see these great works of art and games you have made, show us all. Since obviously you know better than me because of based on what you said of course.
     
  10. Jabbers

    Jabbers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    205
    Wrong, you just need more anime in your life.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  11. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    1) I didn't try to "play the victim". I am merely appalled.

    2) I did not say you've never made anything great. I implied that those who have will generally understand the value of copyright, and would not appreciate people using their work without permission. It's not always the case, you can release great works and be glad to have other people use your work freely, but that is up to the person who made the work, not the person who feels entitled to benefit from it without permission.

    3) You did insult all artists. You told them that their rights don't matter.

    Do you think I find any value in showing you my work, so I can listen to all the insults you've already prepared? The merit of my work has no relevence to any of the arguments I've made, this is just you looking to get a swing in.

    I saw your post in the other thread, babbling on about being called the anti-christ, which never happened, literally or implicitly. It is clear that you choose to hear what you want to hear, ignoring what's actually being said and making things up in its place.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  12. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    You took a thread that was perfectly pleasant and turned it negative. And now you are acting like you are innocent and blameless.

    You obviously don't even respect me as a person because, you post really hurtful and insulting things then cannot fathom how it makes me feel. It's like a bully who shoves a nerd in a locker, then when the nerd gets mad the bully says "What...it was all fun and games! Stop overreacting!"

    Well I'm not overreacting at all, you are just flaming and insulting my threads. This is what you literally said "Spoken like someone who has never created anything of worth and released it to the world."

    And you cannot even fathom, how that is rude and insulting...you cannot even fathom why I would get mad...Words cannot describe.

    Then you have the nerve to say "It is clear that you choose to hear what you want to hear, ignoring what's actually being said and making things up in its place." FYI anti-christ is a figure of speech, a metaphor, it was obvious. But again, toxic 2019 where everyone nitpicks everything, can't even make a metaphor without getting flamed.

    I never insulted all artists, you are under a victim-delusion where you try to justify all your insults and accusations. I simply have a different and more enlightened view of things than the norm, mainstream just doesn't get it and wants to regulate and shame. It wouldn't be so bad if this wasn't the norm throughout humanity, time and time again free-thinkers are always bullied and shamed...you would think 2019 would be different but no, still the same repetitive system where free-spirits get bullied and shamed for disagreeing with the norm.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2019
  13. Bearman_18

    Bearman_18 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2018
    Posts:
    159
    Misty, discrimination based on ethnicity is clearly against the community guidelines. You have demonstrated it with your behavior towards Americans.
    It's unwise, then, to throw around the word "reported."

    If I make decent music, it's not unreasonable to desire payment up front before someone uses it. Why? I made it, it's mine. if I tell you to get off my private property, do it. Being an artist doesn't entitle you to anymore rights. It's genetic.

    That's all I have to say on this thread.
     
  14. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    Americans are not an "ethnicity". Americans are not a race. I'm not allowed to use the word "American" as a pejorative...wow sjws have hit a new low. America is a country that was founded on rape and pillaging, with the highest levels of obesity. The political correctness has gotten so extreme I can't even use the word American as a pejorative...not to mention the dude wasn't even American. Like when can we, as a species, grow up out of this insane political correctness and just speak freely and make jokes about Americans? I feel like I'm stuck in daycare and nannies and have to walk on eggshells at all times and quit frankly, I'm sick of it. It's like I'm being wrapped in a web of stifling political correctness and being mentally suffocated, like webs are growing out my insides like spiderman. Like if I say one little thing I get a mob raging at me and telling me how wrong I am. The country that acts like Hostess cupcakes are a national treasure...I'm not allowed to make fun of them...how PC and sjw can you get...this is a tyranny of the mind...One thing America did get right though is freedom of speech, a precious commodity in this day and age...

    My anger is really high right now...if people were more courteous then I could debate these kinds of points and issues, and show you that I see things more reasonably...so it's going to take some time for me to calm down before we can discuss this in a rational manner.
     
  15. SamSam

    SamSam Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2018
    Posts:
    67
    Most of the answers here seem to consider private property as natural and its existence as obvious, but it is not. This is a belief that structures society today, but other ones exist, even into our main systems which are based on private property. Creative Commons for instance.

    I might be wrong, but maybe the point of Misty was to say that a system based on other beliefs about property could be more virtuous in some ways.
     
    Misty likes this.
  16. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    These are the kind of posts I like. Sane rational and not hostile. Why aren't there more posts like SamSam? If I was President I'd nominate SamSam as a national hero.

    Also, I notice SamSam even had to resort to making their posts grey and soft-colored, in order as a defense mechanism to potential hostiles. It shouldn't have to be this way.
     
    SamSam likes this.
  17. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    And that could have been a potentially compelling discussion to start, except he instead made a topic about being entitled, as a "true and grand artist" and not a "mere commoner" to the rights of the work of others as a means to achieve success, which he would then allegedly use to pay royalties to the artists whos work he used to get there.

    The problem with this, is that financial success would not be possible for an indie dev to ever achieve, because in this scenario, where protected works are no longer protected, if your game had any potential to generate substantial revenue, it would simply be stolen and released by bigger fish who have the ability to reach an audience that you do not. And, in this scenario, that would be totally okay because those bigger companies are not "mere commoners", and therefore allowed to do this.
     
    SamSam and Siolfor the Jackal like this.
  18. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    No, because had you allowed me to speak, without making presumptions and being hostile, you would have known my full plan, and none of what you said here would make sense.

    1. I consider big business to be neither commoners nor artists, so I don't consider them "true and grand artists." Except for maybe Nintendo and a few others.
    2. I highly doubt big companies would want to steal music from indie games. And if they did, then they would follow my ideas and the indies would get rich from the royalties obviously. The only problem is if people hijack my ideas and implement them wrong, then blame me when it doesn't work out when they never fully did my ideas correctly in the first place.
    3. This was mainly about music. Not about game ideas. Big companies ALREADY steal game ideas from small fries. And the small fries get nothing. So under MY RULES these small fries would be getting rich! The standard system does nothing to stop big companies from hijacking ideas anyway!
    4. The ideal system would be top down. Big companies make great games, small fries use the music from those games to make more great games, everyone wins, big companies get paid small fries get paid, and most importantly
    5. Creative and mental freedom. Humanity unfettered by shackles. Free minds and visionaries to freely follow their dreams no longer oppressed by the boot of mankind, free to pursue truly artistic visions without the shackles of the mundane.
     
  19. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    If only this was a discussion board, where it is literally impossible for me to prevent you from speaking.

    1. In this scenario, who decides who is a commoner, and who is an artist? You? How exactly does this process of making the distinction even work? Furthermore, why should "true artists" even have this right and not "mere commoners"?

    2 & 3. I didn't imply that companies would want to steal music from indie games (though there isn't any reason to doubt that anyway). My point was that they would steal your entire game since is it established that in this scenario, it is okay to use other people's work. Not just game ideas, but your entire life's work potentially.

    Despite music being the example you gave in the first post, you didn't state that these proposed rules should apply only to music, and that should not have been presumed because there's no conceivable reason to make any distinction between music and other creative works in this context.

    So now that it's clear that you were only talking about music, why are you making this distinction? Why should it be okay for you to use someone else's music, but not okay for someone else to use your entire game, or any other creative works?
     
    Siolfor the Jackal and Jabbers like this.
  20. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    Again another metaphor, can't use metaphors online I guess. When you act hostile and aggressive it makes the other person to frustrated to speak clearly.


    Uhhh...this has already been going on for centuries and people like you have been cool with it. Ie I discussed this earlier with Warhol. Warhol is arbitrarily deemed as an "artist" and allowed to violate copyright. Even though his art is garbage and litterally worse than EA games and activision.

    It's all about status quo. Like...people go along with status quos no matter how absurd, but when someone Woke questions the plan, they all go crazy and tell them to stick to the status quo. Who questions the status quo? Nobody.

    This thread was talking about music. Nowhere did I say anything about stealing an entire game. Thats not even copyright violation, thats just piracy, bootlegging, etc.

    It should be obvious. If I want to put a classic 90's song in my game, then often it is neccesary. Why should my game be demonitized for existing? Because certain artistic concepts need certain songs to carry an idea across. Without the song in it, the game would litterally not be the same. It would be watered down, missing it's identity. So, as a poor person, I'm expected to suddenly get a million dollars just to license a song? That is scammy. I should just use the song, because that is what is needed to carry the atmosphere. And obviously if my game makes a profit, some of that profit ought to be given, fairly, to the artist. Not for the artist to scam me about it and charge me my life savings and make me a financial slave, just so they can sit on their throne and laugh hahaha at how rich they are.

    Humanity is living in the bad years. The unenlightened times. People like to say hahahaha and laugh at the poor and say they are better. They dont like to share. I dont believe in communism where people are forced to be equal. But I don't believe in an economy where the poor are squashed down by the boot of society. Enlightened people would say hey, my song is a spiritual thing. It is a spiritual thing and meant to benefit all. Not just to make me say hahaha at the poor. And if they make a song they ought to be rich. But not so rich that they squash the poor. Understand?
     
  21. Smiechu

    Smiechu Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2017
    Posts:
    626
    Lol...
    Yeah... make your perfect game using stolen work. Than someone comes, steals your perfect game and you cry how it is unfair!

    I see the therapy is finished with no results. It's even worse then before...
     
    The Sorcerer likes this.
  22. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    Did you even read what I just said?

    Or is your only goal here is to flame, poke holes, and try to find problems.

    I've literally already addressed all of your arguments earlier, and proved your arguments are not valid.
     
  23. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    I didn't imply you talked about stealing an entire game. You talked about using someone else's music for your own personal gain, and I made the point that there is no distinction to be made between doing this with music, and doing it with an entire game.

    "If I want to put your entire game as a mini-game in my larger game, why shouldn't I be allowed to?" There is no difference. You are simply not entitled to other people's work, regardless of how necessary you feel it is to enhance your own work. It is as simple as that.

    Do you think it would be acceptable for some movie director to take scenes from another director's movie, and include it in their own, because it "would literally not be the same" without them?

    Or for an artist to use another artist's landscape painting as the background for their own painting?
     
  24. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    No distinction in your mind, but again you weren't trying to argue from a sane and rational perspective, but rather just an attempt at hostility, similar to the bible story of angry people who always criticize and mock the messiah and have ever nothing nice to say.

    Second, the music is also for the gain of the entire society, the entire world...The whole planet is missing out from creative individuals who are limited by shackles and chains. All because a society arbitrarily decides that video games are not "true" art. Yet crappy art by Warhol is? How is this rational?


    It already IS like that. Minigames and concepts are ALREADY stolen by corporations all the times, and that's under our current system.

    Yes. Obviously it is only fair if the profits are given also to the original artist.
     
  25. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    Again, I was talking about entire products, not merely concepts. If a corporation is taking an entire product without its creator's permission and including it in their own, they risk repercussions, and rightfully so.

    How would this system operate? What if the original artist refuses to receive those royalties? Does the other artist just go ahead and use the work anyway? In which case, the system is simply "I'm using your work, whether you like it or not". If not, then the system is more like the one that is already in place, where permission is required.
     
    Siolfor the Jackal likes this.
  26. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    1,006
    Where does the topic ever say anything about entire products? Maybe that's how your mind operates, but it's not anywhere in reality. In reality it says on the first line: Music. Second line: Music. Third line also: Music. Nowhere does it even give a hint about anything else.

    Not sure. I guess exceptions could be made, if the artist claims to have severe distress due to some legitimate reason. For instance, if a music is used in a deer hunting simulator, and the artist really, really likes deer, then maybe they can file a C&D. But no, Mr. Moneybags filing a complaint in a gravelly rich person voice (like a 1920's robber baron voice) saying "my money, my art, my profits, my microtransactions" does not count as a reason.
     
  27. flerpyderp

    flerpyderp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2018
    Posts:
    178
    As I have said multiple times now, there is no distinction in this context between music and other creative works. If you are going to argue that it's okay to use other people's music, you have to either a) also argue that it's okay to use other people's games, or you b) have to give a convincing argument for why it's okay to use music, and not other creative works.


    It is simply a system which would be impossible to implement without endless complications.
     
  28. Nocturne

    Nocturne Friendly Tyrant Forum Staff Admin

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2016
    Posts:
    6,668
    Another Misty "I AM RIGHT AND EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG TOPIC". Closed. And Misty, this forum is not your private ranting ground. ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice