00:00
00:00
CoolDrMoney
What a great guy !

Age 36

Drifter Bum

A Good School

Providence, Rhode Island

Joined on 1/14/05

Level:
18
Exp Points:
3,486 / 3,600
Exp Rank:
15,312
Vote Power:
6.01 votes
Art Scouts
1
Rank:
Police Lieutenant
Global Rank:
5,400
Blams:
733
Saves:
930
B/P Bonus:
14%
Whistle:
Normal
Trophies:
11
Medals:
1,004
Supporter:
2y 10m 10d
Gear:
3

See the difference between that toothbrush and content online is that toothbrush is in your house bathroom for YOU ONLY (For most families anyway...). And that content online you put up for the public to view and that includes criticize. Commentary on games and videos have been going on for years. As long as we give credit and or don't claim the footage as our own, I honestly fail to see why that gives someone the rights to sue or strike that person. It's just commentary or a better example might be parody or a remix of a video. A copyright claim twords things like that just looks like to me, anyways, a poor sport who can't handle a little criticism. I honestly wouldn't care if someone remixed or spoofed one of my videos. But what does that matter? That's just what I think. Let's face it: there's no real justice to these arguments.
All I can say is....
In the world, there's good sports and there's wimps.

It's not even really about that. I'm sure that Winger themselves would be fine letting me use their music but it doesn't matter. An out of touch, mass corperation owns the rights and would rather put restrictive boundaries on artists than take a chance of losing lose a cent of profit.

If the kinds of copyright laws that are in action today existed when Duchamp was an artist, there would be no "modern" art.

DROID, there is a difference between commenting on a video someone puts up and taking said video and using it in your own work. CoolDrMoney here wants to basically use a song in one of his animations and claim it to be "commentary". That is ludicrous. It is completely irrelevant that some people make video commentaries on other videos... this is absolutely not the same thing. He's just trying to circumvent the rules in order to basically use a copyrighted song in his animation.

The toothbrush thing is absolutely relevant. The toothbrush is MY property, I can do whatever I want with it. I can let my family use it, I can let you use it. It is mine to decide what I will do with it. I bought it, it belongs to me. My intellectual property has the same rights applied to it, I can let you use it if I choose, I can let my neighbor use it if I choose, I can let everybody use it freely if I apply the proper licensing to it. The song in question is copyrighted in such a way that you need permission to use it, whether it be given or paid for. How do people not understand such a simple concept?

Just because it's easier to steal and transfer does not mean it's okay to do so. The ease of use(or abuse) has nothing to do with it.

I can't speak much for the music thing. I was just adding on to this little conversation.

I think my biggest mistake was thinking I could have a reasonable discussion on newgrounds. Of course your mind is already made up. You deserve to be able to use someone else' work without their knowledge or permission. You deserve anything you wish for just because you exist. Fuck working for what you need or want, that's for chumps, it should just be given to you without any hassle. Because we all know that's exactly how the world works....

Dude, you're completely missing the point now. I'm going to try this again and be as civil as possible.

I deserve to be able to have a dialogue with another artists work through my art. That is my right as a human being and it is everyone's right. Other artists have been doing it for centuries. You can see rival artists paintings in the backgrounds of a number of artists as well. I want to comment on the song through a video and that's all. The piece is effectively ruined if I can't. I have to scrap it and that's one less thing that will be seen by anyone. It is censorship and it is stifling. This is my point of view.

Should I need to ask for permission to express my ideas about a given artwork through my own artwork? I shouldn't have to. That's just how I feel.

Dude... it's a fucking Winger song from 1988. Anything you have to say about it has already been said. You should have to pay to use the song. No one cares about your ridiculous "artistic vision" or whatever delusion you hold yourself under.

There is nothing more to it than you can't use it without permission. It's so fucking simple. The only parallel I draw from your Duchamp reference is that your opinion belongs in his toilet, along with his "art". Which was actually anti-art and it was meant to make a statement about how ridiculous people like you are.

You clearly don't understand Duchamp and you also don't understand what I'm saying and it doesn't seem like you care. If this is really the kind of dialogue you choose to engage with me then you shouldn't be having a discussion with me.

I have already taken care of that though so don't worry. Opinions are welcome but not if they're misinformed and refuse to be open to other opinions. I have tried to be understanding of where you're coming from also while explaining my point of view. Rather than take the same approach, you cover your ears with your hands and just keep shouting at the top of your lungs. There's no room for people like that here.

Would we allow Lady Gaga to take a shit on a Picasso piece just because she can or thinks it's cool? Probably in this day and age...

In all honesty as stupid as that idea sounds, she has every right to do that in my opinion.

Anyway it took me all day but I've figured out a way to circumvent this even if I'm not granted permission so the cartoon will be made.

Are we talking an the original picasso piece, or just a copyrighted one?

Good luck with the cartoon btw

Thanks

And no, I would be against her doing that to the original work. It's an incredibly profound piece of artistic history. Like I said I'm against the current copyright laws but there should be limits.

It's the labels and Metallica.

i have the same problem when listening to music that inspires me to make stuff...
shit's tough but it's still bullcrap you cant use it if your not banking on it.

good topic.

You have to admit, Metallica really took some initiative to take down free distribution of their music on Napster. But labels care too. I guess there are good arguements on both sides though

you really should have like, a private video uploaded and sent to the original band, they might just give it their blessing.

but what do I know.