3 ms·
This is the double edged sword of copyright, sometimes you want the artist to have control, sometimes you don't.
by wilg 10mo ago
This is the double edged sword of copyright, sometimes you want the artist to have control, sometimes you don't.
- wavemode 10mo agoPeople generally always want the artist to have control. What people don't want, as in this case, is for a corporation to have control of the artist's work, and exercise that control mercilessly, thus actually reducing the reach and impact of the artist's work. (Often, unknowingly to the corporation's own detriment. Having your cars appear in a game is literally free marketing, why refuse that?)
- TylerE 10mo agoThe engineers at the car company that designed the body in the first place are also artists.
- wat10000 10mo agoThey have as much control over this as I do, i.e. none at all.
- lenkite 10mo agoProbably copyright needs to be amended to belong to an individual or a team that comprises not more of 5 people. No corpos can hold copyright or if they do, they must upfront declare the individual/team that holds it.
- wilg 10mo agoThe artist is allowed to be a group of people, or sell their art to another person or group of people, who then get the same control.
- LorenPechtel 10mo agoThe problem is not a matter of artist control. Rather, it's a problem with how license agreements are handled--license agreements for product-breaking things with timeframes should generally not be permitted. It's a version of planned obsolescence.