I don’t know what depresses me more, the fact that this aggressively unfunny show lasted as long as it did and even got decent-ish ratings or the fact that there is so much outcry over this being cancelled while other legitimately good shows die quiet deaths every season with little to no fanfare.

I know, I can’t get outraged about this. I’d feel differently if they were selling them but this was clearly some keen junior who was only thinking about cool stuff for an event.

Not really.

i think it’s important to remember that ‘a billion dollar publisher’ is not a monolithic entity, but made up of people -- one or more of whom, quite plausibly, could have made a mistake. this is the same as leste calling people ‘demons’ -- they’re not demons, they’re not monoliths, they’re people, and people are…

i mean, *i* can see that, but having struggled to tutor college kids in how to cite quotes in papers without plagiarising, i can totally see how an inexperienced person might think ‘jean jacket party’ != promotional activity. and, frankly, in this brave new world of social media, where brands appropriate audience…

They did acknowledge it. They apologized, gave credit, and money. Obviously it shouldn’t have happened. But they weren’t directly making money off the items and the artists didn’t have to take them to court over it. When it was pointed out, they jumped on it. What more do you want?

We agree, they were trying to promote the brand, which while it leads to more money, is not commerce by itself. I agree they needed to get permission and pay the artists. No argument there. But they screwed up, apologized, gave credit, and gave restitution. What more should they do? Honestly, what else is there?

100%. This is how mafia and terrorist organizations do their dirty work. It’s fucking below the belt, only the lowest of the low do this shit.

I won’t argue that it isn’t systemic, but what other recourse needs to be given? I also agree they may be making a faceless intern the scapegoat. But what else can be done? Shut down the magazine? Public groveling? Credit was given and funds paid. While not an ideal situation, the artists should really focus on…

I can see that. When I went through college for graphic design we actually started a lot of courses reviewing fair use laws. Basically our professors drove home the point that inside the safety of an art class, Google and existing images are your play thing. Enjoy to your student-heart’s content. The SECOND you embark…

This! They couldn’t have kept me away from a Mists of Avalon movie.

I use the definition of commerce, in that money is exchanged for a good or service.

What possible benefit would there be to do it intentionally? They paid for pins and other items, why would they decide to screw people over on patches?

This is exactly what they want. They want people to lose hope that their kids will be educated and that they’ll ever be able to have a life here. They want them to pack up and flee in the night. They want to make sure these folks know that the American Dream™ is for whites* only.

Intellectual property is basically an entire area of law composed of nothing but grey area and variations on the phrase, “it depends.” What I meant was that people get the general concept that it’s okay to use/repurpose/reimagine other people’s art sometimes in some ways, otherwise we’d never have any art anywhere.…

would someone making their own jean jacket think to contact, say, the estate of the ramones, before drawing their logo on the back? while having the patches printed is different from hand-drawing, i can see how the re-purposing and the not-for-sale parts of this whole fiasco might muddy the fair-use waters a bit.

The Arthur story is ultimately soapy and melodramatic as fuck, too, but these morons keep wanting to ditch that part and, like you said, make it gritty. The dude has sex with his sister, fathers an illegitimate son, who then, years later, spills the beans that Arthur’s queen is sleeping with his favorite knight and…

Totally with you. I bet the interns/employees think internet publishing makes it fair game.

But I’ve had clients straight-up ask me to just crop an image they found on Google Image Search and use it in a campaign - like multi-million dollar companies. Cthulu-forbid you pay for a photoshoot or in-house creative…

I wish an actual lawyer would weigh in because I find copyright and trademark both very murky when nothing is being sold. Like I’m pretty sure if I got a group of friends together to do a jeans patch party and did something similar (say, used the Adidas Stella Sport image to make a patch and then posted pictures to FB…

I love King Arthur stories, and I had no desire to see this. A fan of Guy Ritchie (early work) but not a fan of Charlie Hunnam. Will someone please explain the giant elephants? Not everything needs to be changed. My favorite King Arthur film is Excalibur from the 80s.