2 ms·
So once my paints get “too” good (I.e. indistinguishable from a photo) then all of a sudden my benign art has transformed into a violation of the law? Or is now
by matt-attack 3y ago
So once my paints get “too” good (I.e. indistinguishable from a photo) then all of a sudden my benign art has transformed into a violation of the law? Or is now “problematic”?
Btw that’s how photorealistic paintings already are.
- alexb_ 3y agoActually, once your painting gets to any amount of recognizability at all for someone's image/likeness, it is a violation. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say the internet has made us forget that these laws already exist because nobody has been enforcing them.
- matt-attack 3y agoSo you’re saying there are drawings I can make that somehow “violations”? Think about that. There’s a drawing I’m not allowed to draw. Like WFT. Talk about dystopian.
- nickthegreek 3y agoYou are not allowed to draw children in sexual acts in many places in the world. In some countries, you cant even draw god. These artistic limits have existed for a long time, but normally people don't rub up against them.
- lakis 3y agoThese laws already exist right now. Here is an example. You can't make a painting at the dimension of a dollar bill that's so authentic that looks exactly like a dollar bill. That's called counterfeiting and it's illegal on every country in the world I believe (for their own money of course).
- Turing_Machine 3y agoThat's an entirely different thing from being prohibited from making any likeness of George Washington (even if the image shows him having sex with Martha, Thomas Jefferson, or the entire Continental Congress).
- Manuel_D 3y agoNo, it is not. Ones image and likeness is only protected in very narrow scenarios: namely advertisements. You can go paint politicians or celebrities all you want, as long as you're not having them endorse products or otherwise advertising things.