Authorship
Out of context: Reply #4
- Started
- Last post
- 55 Responses
- Continuity0
Part of what made the whole situation between O'Shea and space150 was the technology involved. OpenCV, in particular, which O'Shea was reportedly heavily involved with, and which is open-source.
So, the complication arises not just from the seeming knocking off of an artist's idea, but also the fact the same artist was involved in developing software.
The Times Square piece knocks off both the concept and the execution, IMO. The agency's weak defense of sort of trying to get O'Shea involved at the beginning doesn't hold water. At the same time, they also use technology developed by the artists.
So, what it comes down to is the agency nicking someone else's work and adapting it for their use, both on an artistic and technological level (although something released under a BSD can't be stolen, as such; but acknowledgement would certainly have been the honourable thing to do).
There's a world of difference between being inspired by a certain work, and out-right aping it, which is what the space150 thing does. Ergo, I think the agency owes O'Shea much more than lip service on a social media website.
As for the director, I'd like to think creatives should and are honour-bound to not be complicit in the sort of thing that space150 did, and should counsel those who would do so otherwise. Clearly, though, that didn't happen.
- I agree with this.stewdio
- <<<utopian
- give acknowledgment because the software was released on a BSD license? ridiculous.kingsteven
- that came out wrong, i totally agree but O'Shea will now be known as the pioneer of this technologykingsteven
- I'd like to believe he's not to shabby at viral promotion having blogged about it for yearskingsteven
- a well placed comment is all it needskingsteven