Artist's work submitted by fan to Madonna without permission

[Snow 1,582]

It has yet to be resolved. I don't think you saw my last post but when a post on tumblr gets so popular, the only way to stop getting notes for it, is to of course, delete it. The artist had 38,000 notes on that post, while most of their other artwork only got a few hundred notes. They more likely than not wanted to stop getting notes on that post to clear up notifications. 

And the credit on the post put on on Madonna's page (I checked a few hours ago) is still "given" to the incorrect "artist" (bessnyc4). It likely hasn't been resolved and the artist just gave up on trying to get her team to give credit.

Then its only his onw problem then IF he gave up, not Madonna's. She has no idea of this. So he should just post his thing again and contact media. As well as try to connect Madonna's team again. Eventually he will get hold of right ppl to resolved this. It's not that complicated. They WILL just remove The one insignificant pic, 'cause noone is getting money for this.

PProblem here is that its not really Madonna violating anything, its The second artist who submitted The modified work. He should resolve it with him.

This is just a simple misunderstanding?! How hard is it for ppl to get that. 

And for the hundred time, this is probably completely legal thanks to quotation right. Thats how millions of ppl do motage art like this. 

AND STOP THE BIASED HATE! HOW CONVINIENTLY YOU ALL IGNORE THE FACT THAT GAGA DID THE DAMN THING DURING MB!!!!! Jeesus christ!  Its just a mistake! Madonna would never do this on purpose you delusional haters! Next I think some should do a thread about how Gaga did this same and let's see how that goes.

[Snow 1,582]

Madonna stealing things and reusing imagery that has been done before? Wow, I'm shocked!!!!

That's because you're probably a sheep stan, who would lick her piss if she urinated on you. The artist however, isn't deluded by stan mentality like you, thus why he wishes to be acknowledged and isn't just satisfied with her using his work uncredited. Thank heavens everyone doesn't think like you!

to you especially, you have now completely in your hate ignoredcthe fact tga Gaga did The EXACT SAME THING during MB gan montage, using reworked image that uses Warhol art etc. Absolutely The same thing. So now go ahead and start you hating on her in same way!

[Snow 1,582]

The true queen

of stealing struggling artist's work for tour backdrop

well let's just let her break all laws then.

Just like Gaga then since she did The same thing.

[Guggenheim 73]

to you especially, you have now completely in your hate ignoredcthe fact tga Gaga did The EXACT SAME THING during MB gan montage, using reworked image that uses Warhol art etc. Absolutely The same thing. So now go ahead and start you hating on her in same way!

Yes, but do you have proof she never credited Warhol or anyone related to him still alive?

[Snow 1,582]

Yes, but do you have proof she never credited Warhol or anyone related to him still alive?

Oh jeez... And you can? Show thevreceipts.

People really need to Take a step back and realise what this is about. In plain and simple way she is showing a modified pic of a pic made partially of a art piece made by someone and she credited that artist who made the "new" art pic that was used. Thats what she needed to do. She isnt using the original art and therefore doesnt credit it, the original artist didnt do the picture used on the montage.

Its between the original artist and the one who made the modified art. Madonna has NOTHING to do with that. Get it through your head! The one who made The modified art work probably has every right to do so under The quotation right. He is using a picture of a painting (posted by the artist) which he modified to a new piece of art. So in reality there's no violation here and if there is, The two artists need to solve it. (And perhaps subsequently m need to take some action). But please understand how modified art works. Under certain conditions you can use existing art to create New under The quotation right. 

Anyway, Madonna credited The one who made The pic that is in The fan montage. Like she was supposed to do.

[bionic 40,675]

I heard that Madonna STEALS planes/ships and that she's actually the Bermuda Triangle. Can anybody show me evidence to the contrary?

[Guggenheim 73]

Oh jeez... And you can? Show thevreceipts.

People really need to Take a step back and realise what this is about. In plain and simple way she is showing a modified pic of a pic made partially of a art piece made by someone and she credited that artist who made the "new" art pic that was used. Thats what she needed to do. She isnt using the original art and therefore doesnt credit it, the original artist didnt do the picture used on the montage.

Its between the original artist and the one who made the modified art. Madonna has NOTHING to do with that. Get it through your head! The one who made The modified art work probably has every right to do so under The quotation right. He is using a picture of a painting (posted by the artist) which he modified to a new piece of art. So in reality there's no violation here and if there is, The two artists need to solve it. (And perhaps subsequently m need to take some action). But please understand how modified art works. Under certain conditions you can use existing art to create New under The quotation right. 

Anyway, Madonna credited The one who made The pic that is in The fan montage. Like she was supposed to do.

I can't, but I wasn't the one alleging she didn't by trying to equate her with Madonna, so the onus is on you to show receipts, which I'm sure you can't, so sorry! Unlike Madonna, we don't have anyone calling out Gaga for using their artwork without permission, so try again with that overdone move of trying to absolve Madonna by drawing a false equivalence with Gaga. You can write all the essays you want till kingdom come, it won't change the fact that this bothers you so much because it's Madonna.

[Snow 1,582]

I can't, but I wasn't the one alleging she didn't by trying to equate her with Madonna, so the onus is on you to show receipts, which I'm sure you can't, so sorry! Unlike Madonna, we don't have anyone calling out Gaga for using their artwork without permission, so try again with that overdone move of trying to absolve Madonna by drawing a false equivalence with Gaga. You can write all the essays you want till kingdom come, it won't change the fact that this bothers you so much because it's Madonna.

you didnt even read what I wrote. O.o You are wrong, Madonna is not using anyone's art uncredited. She credits The artist that made The pic. Thats it. For further explanation actually read my above post.

[Guggenheim 73]

you didnt even read what I wrote. O.o You are wrong, Madonna is not using anyone's art uncredited. She credits The artist that made The pic. Thats it. For further explanation actually read my above post.

I couldn't be bothered to, because it was mostly "bla bla bla, Madonna did nothing wrong because I'm a stan, bla bla bla", I only addressed the relevant part, which was you not having proof Gaga has done similar to Madonna with the TFM backdrop

[Snow 1,582]

I couldn't be bothered to, because it was mostly "bla bla bla, Madonna did nothing wrong because I'm a stan, bla bla bla", I only addressed the relevant part, which was you not having proof Gaga has done similar to Madonna with the TFM backdrop

How dare you call something blaah even without reading! I explained ALL FACTS needed. How childish! You have no clues of how copyright works so go educate youself. 

And the Gaga situation remains The same until proven othervice. Noone complaining is not proof. ;)

Again, MADONNA CREDITED THE ARTIST THAT MADE THE PIC! 

[GloZell Green 11,723]

Don't flip it around sis, you came in here to critique Madonna while Gaga's done the same thing... Have fans turn in artwork for a backdrop video. What a ****ty b---h Madonna is for giving her fans a chance to see their artwork on stage! Then you brought up Taylor, who has absolutely nothing to do with this but she's one of your faves so you just couldn't help yourself. I know a LOT about Gaga and her reference but you skipped over the part where I tell you that Gaga ALSO had real artwork featured in her fan backdrop. THAT was the point which you, as per usual, ignored in your reply. If you reply, please tell me the difference. That Madonna was "caught"? She's not even aware.

Bye yourself girlfriend.

But you literally started personally attacking me  Oh Gaga and her artwork. I mean, I've never heard of a case where Gaga used art from a struggling artist and used it without credit on her tour without responding, but hey, I might be wrong  Maybe her team deleted every post at the moment it was uploaded, so no one could see it. There's no evidence for any of our points  I'm still waiting for a response from her or her team, I'm probably wrong. Let's just wait for the case to clear so we know what happened, most likely a misunderstanding.

[Snow 1,582]

One more time, M credited The artist who's picture was used. She has NOTHING to do with what sources The artist used and are they legal (probably are under quotation right) This "problem" is between two artist, The one with The original painting and The one who used parts of it (which was used in The fan art montage). Until that issue is resolved, or injuction given, Madonna has done everything correctly and given credit where its due. To The artist who made The pic. End of story. No stealing on M's part.

[DSK 568]

 

Just like Gaga then since she did The same thing.

it's just a joke. I don't really care whether they steal things or not. That's the artist's problem. I just watch, laugh a little, move on with my life and hope they continue making good music for us to enjoy :b all the rest I leave for them to deal with.

[Rolodex of Hate 1,721]

Not that I'm trying to defend Madonna, but I doubt she had much of a say in what the background image would have been and if she did, she probably didn't think to check whether her team had suitably paid or credited the artist and just assumed it had all been sorted out by them

[Snow 1,582]

Not that I'm trying to defend Madonna, but I doubt she had much of a say in what the background image would have been and if she did, she probably didn't think to check whether her team had suitably paid or credited the artist and just assumed it had all been sorted out by them

but The artist who made The used work is properly CREDITED. O.o Madonna didnt use The original painting, but New modified art that uses parts of that painting.

For everyone's education, the piece of art Madonna used is actually a question of DERIVATIVE ART in copyright law and is perfectly legal. Its about creating New art using existing pieces of art. Totally legal and even also copyright protected. So this case is totally f.ING closed! NO CRIMES, NO MALICE, NO STEALING! just derivative art that has been properly CREDITED.

for more info, google "Derivative art" for example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work 

Pretty much every artist has used this in one shape of form. IIncluding Gaga (well The whole ARTPOP era is based on this)

IIm now mad to myself that I didnt remember The term and concept right away so this stupid thread could have been avoided...

NOw ALL have a SEAT, you got schooled!