ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Today, a DD was awarded to a nice acrylic painting (below left) which was painted from my photo (below right) -
Just about the only thing I don't like about is the strong cyan tint, which seems to be more associated with the photo of the painting rather than then painting itself. Overall it's definitely one of the best derivative works I've yet to see based on my photos. I really enjoyed exploring how all the little details differed between the two.
Rpriet1 did not ask for my permission, or inform me of using my photo. A DA gallery moderator just messaged to ask whether I would like the deviation removed, and the DD revoked. I think most artists who've had their work "stolen" would be outraged, but for me the answer was a very unambiguous no. This is a complicated issue, and I think that the vast majority of the readers will disagree with me at this point, so let me explain my position carefully.
The concept of intellectual property, the way it exists today, is not legitimate. If you have ever downloaded an MP3 file, a movie, or some software without paying, yet you are outraged at art theft when it happens to you or someone close, then you are a hypocrite. I actually think that should cover the majority of the readers of these words.
Jonas Salk, the inventor of the polio vaccine, is one of my personal heroes. He could have been a multimillionaire via the specter of copyright law, yet he chose to pass it up and effectively released it without any rights reserved. He saved an untold number of lives - both by inventing the vaccine, and by releasing it the way he did.
Some of you may be aware of the patent battles currently being fought in the smart phone arena between companies like Apple, Google, and Samsung. It's a waste of time and money. Software patents (like some of the ones Apple holds) are stupid in general. Imagine being able to patent the following actions -
1) Walk up to a door
2) Put your hand on the door knob
3) Turn the door knob
4) Open the door
..and then suing the fuck out of everyone who does that and doesn't pay royalties. Yes, some of the patents they hold are really THAT pathetic in terms of software engineering.
So, who does intellectual property favor? Not me or anyone I know. I don't have the resources to navigate the convoluted judicial system and pay ludicrous lawyer fees. I don't have time to copyright every little piece of junk I can think of. Big corporations have those resources. They have legal departments, and file tens of thousands of patents per year. Just another example of big business in bed with the government pursuing policies which favor both of them at the expense of small businesses, and private citizens.
What would be the outcome of me getting the DD removed as "stolen" work from DA? Would I be any richer, more famous, or derive ANY benefit at all from it? Nope. The drawbacks for other deviants are clear - they would not get to enjoy a quality work of art. It would certainly be nice if the artist included a link to my deviation and thanked me for my work (which she did later, by the way), but let's get real here - my work is "stolen" all over the place on the Internet.
You can't stop it, you can't even meaningfully slow it down. The circulation of information happens at warp speed, and that's the main advantage of the world wide web. Trying to fight it is being a 20th century dinosaur, it's the paradigm of pathetic losers like RIAA who pick out citizens to be scapegoats where a single song download is valued at a year's worth of median salary. And guess what? The moronic government court system goes right along with it.
Should Paul McCartney be making tens of millions of dollars passively on royalties for a song he wrote 40 years ago? To think that this notion "promotes progress" in any sense of the word is nothing short of ludicrous. If you download his song "illegally", and get caught - a man with a gun sent by the government will come to your house and throw you in jail, ruin you financially, or kill you if you resist. This status quo is ridiculous.
Every time someone copies one of my photos, it does NOT make me poorer in any appreciable way. In fact, if I watermark, the sharing effect gives me more visitors and would end up being a clear net benefit to me as an artist trying to promote my work. That definitely changes my commercial possibilities, but not necessarily for the worse.
I think it's time to start a big discussion on phasing out the concept of intellectual property within the art community - especially for non-commercial purposes. It would lead to a flourishing of ideas, and more innovation and beautiful art - not less. Old tyrannical ideas of using force to punish for the act of sharing (or heck, even lying and pretending its your own work) should not be a part of the modern society. Just like lying is not a crime in the broader society, contempt or ridicule are sufficient societal pressures for people who use without attribution.
Does this mean you can "steal" my work? I can't stop you, and I probably won't even bother trying. However, so long as we live under the current stupid paradigm, if my work is used for commercial purposes then I may just sue you unless I get a fair cut
Just about the only thing I don't like about is the strong cyan tint, which seems to be more associated with the photo of the painting rather than then painting itself. Overall it's definitely one of the best derivative works I've yet to see based on my photos. I really enjoyed exploring how all the little details differed between the two.
Rpriet1 did not ask for my permission, or inform me of using my photo. A DA gallery moderator just messaged to ask whether I would like the deviation removed, and the DD revoked. I think most artists who've had their work "stolen" would be outraged, but for me the answer was a very unambiguous no. This is a complicated issue, and I think that the vast majority of the readers will disagree with me at this point, so let me explain my position carefully.
The concept of intellectual property, the way it exists today, is not legitimate. If you have ever downloaded an MP3 file, a movie, or some software without paying, yet you are outraged at art theft when it happens to you or someone close, then you are a hypocrite. I actually think that should cover the majority of the readers of these words.
Jonas Salk, the inventor of the polio vaccine, is one of my personal heroes. He could have been a multimillionaire via the specter of copyright law, yet he chose to pass it up and effectively released it without any rights reserved. He saved an untold number of lives - both by inventing the vaccine, and by releasing it the way he did.
Some of you may be aware of the patent battles currently being fought in the smart phone arena between companies like Apple, Google, and Samsung. It's a waste of time and money. Software patents (like some of the ones Apple holds) are stupid in general. Imagine being able to patent the following actions -
1) Walk up to a door
2) Put your hand on the door knob
3) Turn the door knob
4) Open the door
..and then suing the fuck out of everyone who does that and doesn't pay royalties. Yes, some of the patents they hold are really THAT pathetic in terms of software engineering.
So, who does intellectual property favor? Not me or anyone I know. I don't have the resources to navigate the convoluted judicial system and pay ludicrous lawyer fees. I don't have time to copyright every little piece of junk I can think of. Big corporations have those resources. They have legal departments, and file tens of thousands of patents per year. Just another example of big business in bed with the government pursuing policies which favor both of them at the expense of small businesses, and private citizens.
What would be the outcome of me getting the DD removed as "stolen" work from DA? Would I be any richer, more famous, or derive ANY benefit at all from it? Nope. The drawbacks for other deviants are clear - they would not get to enjoy a quality work of art. It would certainly be nice if the artist included a link to my deviation and thanked me for my work (which she did later, by the way), but let's get real here - my work is "stolen" all over the place on the Internet.
You can't stop it, you can't even meaningfully slow it down. The circulation of information happens at warp speed, and that's the main advantage of the world wide web. Trying to fight it is being a 20th century dinosaur, it's the paradigm of pathetic losers like RIAA who pick out citizens to be scapegoats where a single song download is valued at a year's worth of median salary. And guess what? The moronic government court system goes right along with it.
Should Paul McCartney be making tens of millions of dollars passively on royalties for a song he wrote 40 years ago? To think that this notion "promotes progress" in any sense of the word is nothing short of ludicrous. If you download his song "illegally", and get caught - a man with a gun sent by the government will come to your house and throw you in jail, ruin you financially, or kill you if you resist. This status quo is ridiculous.
Every time someone copies one of my photos, it does NOT make me poorer in any appreciable way. In fact, if I watermark, the sharing effect gives me more visitors and would end up being a clear net benefit to me as an artist trying to promote my work. That definitely changes my commercial possibilities, but not necessarily for the worse.
I think it's time to start a big discussion on phasing out the concept of intellectual property within the art community - especially for non-commercial purposes. It would lead to a flourishing of ideas, and more innovation and beautiful art - not less. Old tyrannical ideas of using force to punish for the act of sharing (or heck, even lying and pretending its your own work) should not be a part of the modern society. Just like lying is not a crime in the broader society, contempt or ridicule are sufficient societal pressures for people who use without attribution.
Does this mean you can "steal" my work? I can't stop you, and I probably won't even bother trying. However, so long as we live under the current stupid paradigm, if my work is used for commercial purposes then I may just sue you unless I get a fair cut
Thank you Gillette
So there I was, putting on my rape shoes, and practicing my sexual harassment pickup lines this morning. I just got done cyberbullying my coworkers. It was time to shave, I yelled at my wife to smile because I demand it, while pinching her butt right after she told me she didn't consent to it. Putting on the shaving cream and thinking about how I can get my son into a fight at the next BBQ, I replaced the worn Gillette brand Mach3 and began to chant "boys will be boys" as I started to shave. Then suddenly my daughter burst into the bathroom holding her phone. As I began to mansplain to her why she isn't smart enough to know my shaving time is
Haiti is a shithole country
OK so Trump called Haiti a shithole country, and apparently it made many people upset. The dictionary definition of shithole, Google says, is "an extremely dirty, shabby, or otherwise unpleasant place."
Anderson spends two minutes here saying how Haitians are tough people. Yes, that's true. Tough people live in shithole countries everywhere around the world. That's totally besides the point. A country is not a "collection of people rich and poor" blah blah. That's the Haitian people. The country is more (or in this case LESS lol) than its citizens. It's a nation with laws occupying a particular geographic location.
So what is this sleight of
And I get lost in the nothingness inside of me
(When this began)
I had nothing to say
And I get lost in the nothingness inside of me
(I was confused)
And I let it all out to find
That I’m not the only person with these things in mind
(Inside of me)
But all that they can see the words revealed
Is the only real thing that I’ve got left to feel
(Nothing to lose)
Just stuck, hollow and alone
And the fault is my own, and the fault is my own
Something in here's not right today.
Why am I so uptight today?
Paranoia's all I got left
I don't know what stressed me first
Or how the pressure was fed
But I know just what it feels like
To have a voice in the back of my head
Meryl Streep is an ableist ...
Watch Streep’s speech first below. I’d like to make two broad points about what she said.
… who disrespects disabled people
Some brief background information first. Serge Kovaleski, whom Donald Trump mocked is a successful high profile journalist who won The Pulitzer Prize. That is to say, he is vastly more successful than 99.99% of people in the world, regardless of their health status. He’s probably a millionaire, and is definitely a member of the elite. I don’t doubt his success and his ability to get things done in life.
Did Trump mock Kovaleski? Yes. However, as per this video - https://youtu.be/5aYFC_7Z
© 2012 - 2024 IvanAndreevich
Comments136
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Art theft is not a crime ? I cannot belive you actuallöy said that in public., I f I get you I will chop your hands of. Well hands-theft also is not a cime, you moron !!