I don't understand...
- Started
- Last post
- 67 Responses
- mowax0
"Good artists copy. Great artists steal" – Picasso.
- horton0
did people actually think ISO50 designed that image?
i'd think you'd have to be living in a cave for the last 50 years to not recognize it as a copy of the original communist poster.
its not like he was trying to hide it or anything. even used the same "6bEM" title on top.
if nobody owns the reproduction rights on the image and its +25 years old, i believe its fair game.
as for whether i think it's commendable business for a designer to be selling these as a branded promotional poster, or worth the $$$:
answer = no.
- canuck_II0
I think public domain is more than 25 years.
Either way it's more ethical to email someone a question about their work, than tear them a new arse on newstoday, especially when they are not around to defend the piece.
Happens too much around here.
- ********0
Who owns che guevara's face?
- Mimio0
//Urban Outfitters skt.
- horton0
hey canuck are you agreeing that public domain is anything more than 25 years, or are you saying my info is wrong and you think its more than 25 years?
does that make sense?
i'm not claiming to know for sure.. 25 years is just a number that i often hear people claim as public.
would like to know the facts.
- mrdobolina0
In america.
- horton0
Who owns che guevara's face?
skt
(Mar 7 06, 09:24)yeah perfect example of similar situation.
- mrdobolina0
This artwork was commissioned originally by a government that no longer exists, wonder what that has to do with it.
- skelly0
I'm sure an anonymous poster from the 30's is public domain. Even more so if the poster site is selling originals. There's no reason to believe they have any reproduction rights if they only deal in selling originals.
I agre a lot of stuff on NT should be dealt with through email, but the original poster seemed to be asking an honest question about ownership.
- horton0
oh i also just realized its a promo poster for this "Command Collective" / music / events... so it's not even a ISO50 Design promo piece.
if you're going to attack this, consider all of Frank Kozik's work, the history of rock posters in general, umm.. Andy Warhol, etc etc.
- Phillip0
Exactly Skelly,
I just wanted to know about the actual copyright of the piece.
It was clear to me in the first place that Scott (ISO50) didn't designed the poster...
I'm still is biggest fan!!!
- enjine0
i don't think the orignial was an attack, per se... i think he was just bringing up a question that affects us and all of our work.
i totally dig ISO50's work and this doesn't change my mind about that...
- algorithm0
please dont use Koziks name in the same sentence as Iso50s...
- Mimio0
So philip for a second there you were confused and actually thought he had paid some Bolshevik designer (who's probably dead) for the rights to reproduce this image?
lol...alright...this is just ridiculous.
- enjine0
Mimio, the designer doesn't always own the rights.
- Mimio0
So he called the Soviet Labour Party then? or the Hermitage Preservation Museum?
either case..it's a ridiculous scenario.
- ********0
"Good artists copy. Great artists steal" – Picasso.
mowax
(Mar 7 06, 09:13)Fuck that and fuck Picasso. Who the fuck died and made Picasso a philosopher....just paint the pretty pictures and leave the big words to someone smart.
- Mimio0
The actual meaning of that quote is lost on most people.
- ********0
Here are the facts:
1) ISO is a really good designer
2) That poster isn't "inspired", its as close to a rip as you can get with there still being a pubic hair of gray area.
3) The original post and question was a good one and in no way was an attack or "over the top" or "harsh" or "unwarranted". Public question and debate is healthy. Unless, of course, you want to live in a world where you aren't free to speak your mind and question and debate without fear or consequence of being ridiculed or banished.
4) Picasso, a hell of a painter but really kind of the "George W Bush" of his error when it came to philosophizing.