|
Reader Comments
|
|
What else would we expect from a record company calling itself "CLONE?"
|
By
zoegrfx
November 13, 2009
|
|
This album is nowhere on amazon, so at the very least we can be happy and assume he's probably not profiting much on this album.
|
By
mistake
November 13, 2009
|
|
Expose them, as you are doing.
|
By
ehalperin
November 13, 2009
|
|
Designers and illustrators could deluge DJ Dompteur Mooner with letters of complaint. That might not change a thing, but at least he'd be reminded over and over that he's a thief.
Here's his MySpace address:
http://www.myspace.com/djmooner
|
By
elwoodhsmith
November 13, 2009
|
|
It's a shame.
|
By
jmsgd
November 13, 2009
|
|
This is such a great example of why designers need to advocate outside the industry. The accessibility of the internet has dramatically changed the intellectual property landscape so much more than anyone realizes. Deterrents like tougher copyright laws and better enforcement aren't really much of a match for the ease of information accessibility. So maybe DRM-like tactics are the way to go? The problem with that approach is that it simply shifts the burden to audiences, which will create an anti-IP backlash (as it already has for the record industry).
Since the unscrupulous thieves will take what they want - barring better and more extreme enforcement to (possibly) serve as deterrent - I think the only legitimate answer is for designers to reach outside the industry and advocate for better copyright and IP education. We're messengers, right? So why isn't there a focused effort to educate the expanding internet-using population about copyright laws and IP issues? Why not focus less on the thieves, and more on the ignorant? I would love to see what those numbers look like (how many infringements are due to malicious use vs. lack of legal understanding?).
It's tough, because designers themselves don't really have a handle on copyright. The laws are so convoluted that it's not exactly an easy message to grasp. let alone summarize and share.
And then there is always the flip side: what about those folks who genuinely believe IP should be shared? That's a tougher nut to crack, certainly.
|
By
Roughstockjess
November 13, 2009
|
|
I have to say that although the first emotion to experience over this is anger/outrage, I think we should also step back and acknowledge that in the current image-accessible internet world we live in, not everyone understands that using a photo without permission is illegal or unjust. It sounds ridiculous for most of us, but that just may be the case.
Thanks elwoodhsmith. I sent Dompteur an e-mail through myspace. I didn't have a myspace account, but thought it was important to create one just for this. Here's what I wrote:
The artwork that was used on the cover of "music for espionage" was lifted from the 1985 Italian magazine cover of Panorama. I'm not sure who did your cover, or if they were even aware of copyright laws, but beyond the legal ramifications, it's not what true artists do to each other.
Who knows... you may have been able to obtain the rights by contacting the original artist. They may have been honored that you selected their artwork. Either way, I'm not sure about you, but I wouldn't feel good knowing that I've cheated someone out of at minimum, an acknowledgment.
As for mistake's comment - I wouldn't necessarily agree that since it's not on Amazon, it may not be bringing in profits.
|
By
chattenoire
November 13, 2009
|
|
As a designer, DJ and someone heavily involved in the electronic music industry, this makes me sad and angry. To make matters worse, until today clone was a label I respected. I would be willing to donate a small amount of money to assist artists fight plagiarism cases like this one. I'm sure I'm not alone...
|
By
kristinachilds
November 13, 2009
|
|
@Mistake: it's rare that music meant for DJs will be sold on Amazon. We tend to get our music in places you've probably never heard of, not to mention Clone is based in NL, not the US and most sales will fall in Eurpoe. I don't want to believe the label knew anything about it... i'd LIKE to believe they hired out an artist with faulty values and assumed everything was on the level. but who knows?
@chattenoire: a humanistic viewpoint for sure, but i find it hard to believe that anyone above the age of 13 would think it's legal (or acceptable) to swipe art on the internet and claim it as your own.
@no one in particular: i still think it would be great for a foundation to exist that helps artists fight plagiarism... assuming one does not exist already. i would most definitely donate to a charity of that nature
|
By
kristinachilds
November 13, 2009
|
|
Definitely a tough legal issue.
Another example: I worked for a social expressions company designing new product. We carried a popular home decor line featuring an animal. I was directed to create a character of the same animal for paper goods that would tap that market. I was very diligent in my design because I AM aware of copyright laws and kept all my original sketches. Our print line was very popular--the rep from the decor line even ordered items for her personal use. Then we received a cease-and-desist from her company. Because the home decor line was very good for our catalog, my company settled with them and agreed to pay THEM royalties for what I created.
|
By
mitsuegraphics
November 15, 2009
|
|
Mirko, I had a similar thing happen to me a few years ago. It was an image of mine that was used in another country on a CD. My attorney Ed Greenberg went after them and we were satisfied with the settlement. According to the Berne Convention you should be able to sue, and any US attorney should be able to take on your case on a contingency basis, so it shouldn't be too painful financially. There is justice!
Best
Anita
|
By
anitaekunz
November 25, 2009
|