artRaver 3,188 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 She still could've gave some type of credits to the original artist. ✿ cherry blossom girl ✿ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow 1,582 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 She still could've gave some type of credits to the original artist. erm no, ofcourse not. The credit belongs to The one who made the (Derivative) art, not The source of that. It would defeat The whole purpose... It just doesnt work that way. She has done absolutely nothing wrong. As an example, think of ARTPOP cover art. Its made and credited to Koons, eventhough it uses parts of other art works. Its a perfect example of derivative art. :) that how it works and its perfectly ok. CanCan we now move away from stupid hate and negativity please :) on all sides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayla 7,595 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Edited the title since saying Madonna STOLE that person's work is a little bit of a stretch. :) Tried to make it more accurate to cut back on the flaming. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil R 1,084 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 The artist who made The used work is properly CREDITED. Madonna didnt use The original painting, but New modified art that uses parts of that painting.Thank you. This issue is between BessNYC and the artist in the OP, I wrote it in page 6; but now it's page 16 and people are still attacking (probably because of hatred).The artist in the OP should have known that too. Well, maybe he knows but he chose the other way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow 1,582 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Thank you. This issue is between BessNYC and the artist in the OP, I wrote it in page 6; but now it's page 16 and people are still attacking (probably because of hatred).The artist in the OP should have known that too. Well, maybe he knows but he chose the other way.yeah, and like I said in couple of my last posts, this is a matter of derived art, so I am pretty sure BessNYC has a right under that to create New art using parts/modifying existing artwork. Perfectly legal and done everywhere. Hence there really isn't an issue here. (The original artist probably also figured this out). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfonso 1,202 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 didnt the good sis Madge compensate the struggling artist? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlioncourt91 765 Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Firstly, most of the artwork on the backdrop comes off her Instagram submitted by fans who have made this. The fact so many Monsters here are already willing to throw stones and calling her various names are simply showing their hate for Madonna.Should she get permission to use it for future shows? Yes.Should she compensate said artist? Yes.Should she blamed for posting fans artwork? No.End post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow 1,582 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Firstly, most of the artwork on the backdrop comes off her Instagram submitted by fans who have made this. The fact so many Monsters here are already willing to throw stones and calling her various names are simply showing their hate for Madonna.Should she get permission to use it for future shows? Yes.Should she compensate said artist? Yes.Should she blamed for posting fans artwork? No.End post.Actually no, she doesnt need permission NOR has to compensated The original artist. She didnt use her work. She needs permision from The artist who made The derivated art piece used in The montage. And she has done that. So she has done nothing wrong. Please check couple of posts above that explain The situation and The derivated art in copyright law. :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlioncourt91 765 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Actually no, she doesnt need permission NOR has to compensated The original artist. She didnt use her work. She needs permision from The artist who made The derivated art piece used in The montage. And she has done that. So she has done nothing wrong. Please check couple of posts above that explain The situation and The derivated art in copyright law. :) My mistake for not being too familiar. However, I am defending Madonna in this situation compared to endless "reductive" and "thief" posts above. I swear, this place jumps on the woman any chance they get. She could be Gaga's baby's godmother and they'll still bash her for things that happened years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow 1,582 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 My mistake for not being too familiar. However, I am defending Madonna in this situation compared to endless "reductive" and "thief" posts above. I swear, this place jumps on the woman any chance they get. She could be Gaga's baby's godmother and they'll still bash her for things that happened years ago. haha yeah, unfortunately true... I hope one day The hate will end on all sides. :)And no I didnt mean that you were not defending her, I just corrected you now that we have finally resolved The issue. :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.