4 ms·
A24 Is Copyright Striking Backrooms Artwork Older Than the Movie
- GenericDev 3mo agoAllegedly Kane Parsons is stepping in and stopping this nonsense https://kotaku.com/backrooms-director-kane-parsons-a24-copyright-strike-wallpaper-2000717053 https://kotaku.com/backrooms-director-kane-parsons-a24-copyr...
- add-sub-mul-div 3mo agoHe's signing on to become part of the A24 slop machine now. I'm not as intrigued by his story as I was at first. He's doing their damage control.
- sandspar 3mo ago"Yesterday we were made aware of an automated claim submitted to Redbubble on behalf of A24 and Backrooms movie. We immediately began the process to reverse it and reinstate the listing." It was a bug and has been resolved.
- Retr0id 3mo agoUnless they can explain what they've changed to make sure it never happens again, it's not resolved.
- happytoexplain 3mo agoThis is pointlessly hostile and counterproductive. They expressed a positive position and intention, which is wildly more just (as in justice) than what we get from the vast majority of producers in any medium, and is ten times more practically significant than whether or not they have a mechanism to prevent false positives from happening even ephemerally.
- makeitdouble 3mo agoTo parent's point, A24 is expressing respect for the community, but with no further commitment to do anything about it. We use to point the finger at youtube channels uploading whole movies with a "no copyright intended, this isn't my work" as an expression of no ill intention in the description. I'd see this case as basically equivalent in regards to what they say their intentions are, and what they're actively doing.
- underlipton 3mo agoAnd yet not even half of what we deserve, which is the neutering of the ability of these automated systems to crush fair use and the enabling of them to actually help small creators who are having their rights trampled.
- Stevvo 3mo agoAs far as I can tell, the whole point of the backrooms meme is pointlessly hostile and counterproductive petty arguments about ideas of what "backrooms" means and who owns those ideas.
- Hizonner 3mo ago"Counterproductive" is when you enable feckless idiots to do whatever they want if they say "aw shucks" enough.
- fhdkweig 3mo agoReminds me of the notices Microsoft sent to various universities many years ago regarding the sharing of StarOffice and OpenOffice on bittorrent/Kazaa/etc networks because the contained the string 'Office'. https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1kdkk2/microsoft_censors_openoffice_download_links_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/1kdkk2/microsof...
- xgulfie 3mo agoRedbubble's automated claim system is generally very corporate-sided. This has happened many times with other ideas in the commons like the words Thor and Loki. Bad claims only get resolved when people with a following complain loud enough online. Your follower count is your capital.
- sleepybrett 3mo ago... on redbubble.
- add-sub-mul-div 3mo agoThey got caught and made up an apology. And the fact that people believe it is why there's never any fear from companies about trying these things.
- denkmoon 3mo agoThe fact that there are no consequences for the bad behaviour is why the companies do not fear engaging in bad behaviour. Like they give two hoots about people believing their apology outside of mitigating further consequences.
- unethical_ban 3mo agoDo you think they thought they wouldn't get caught?
- King-Aaron 3mo agoI like how this bug seems to pop up repeatedly every time big companies discover something they can monetize
- hresvelgr 3mo agoBackrooms is a cultural artefact that was created in the commons. The idea of any degree of ownership is nonsensical and it's ludicrous they tried.
- api 3mo agoI once heard Hollywood described as a network of law firms that happens to make movies. It's the most litigious industry on Earth, or one of them. They don't just sue you and I. They sue each other constantly, battling over royalties and residuals and rights and IP theft (which does happen in Hollywood of course). I love good film as art but the industry seems certifiably insane in lots of ways: litigious, nepotistic, backbiting, full of sex abuse and other nastiness. I have sympathy and respect for anyone (actors, actresses, writers, etc.) who love the art enough to deal with that crap.
- underlipton 3mo agoI feel like there should be some sort of direct "judicial review" by non-attorneys. The only reason stuff like this is possible is because we're governed by lawyers; they've captured law and shaped it towards their ends, and away from its utility as dispute resolution so that people can get back to non-law, non-dispute life.
- sterlind 3mo agoit's called a "jury."
- underlipton 3mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voir_dire#United_States
- gamblor956 3mo agoMost lawmakers are not lawyers.
- m4rtink 3mo agoI'm not sire we need mainstream movies from popular shared universes if it comes to this...
- autoexec 3mo agoThese companies hire out third parties who are very aggressive and often use half-assed automated systems with no oversight to find "infringing" content. They don't care about the accuracy of their notices. They know most people won't know how to combat this or won't risk the fallback from the platform if they try to fight it. The platforms themselves make their process convoluted and automated because they don't want to pay a person to deal with the flood of DMCA notices or the complaints from their users who are getting screwed over by them. It's very telling how often these things only get resolved once it's publicly posted about on social media. Support shouldn't be something users can only get if their complaints get enough likes/views/upvotes on other platforms. The companies carelessly sending out DMCA notices just want big numbers they can put in reports to the people paying them. "Look how many takedowns this month! Your copyrighted works are so popular and everyone is trying to steal from you! Better keep paying us for protection!" Actual DMCA notices are sent "under penalty of perjury" and with a "good faith belief" of accuracy, but nothing happens when they do this shit anyway. Platforms can act on any request even if it's not a proper notice under the law just because it's easier for them. Until copyright holders start seeing severe consequences for abusing copyright law this is just going to continue because it's profitable for them to screw over the artists whose works get attacked.
- MadnessASAP 3mo agoThat's why most platforms have been forced to adopt non-DMCA takedown procedures (available only to large corporations of course). This way they are able to get rid of "infringing" content without the responsibilities or accountability of a DMCA notice. And of course without having to provide any rights to the original poster.
- MYEUHD 3mo agoFor those who did not bother to open the article: > UPDATE: 2026/07/18 10:51 EST > A24 Responds > In an official response posted to the Backrooms movie Instagram account, A24 explained, "As Kane Parsons has made clear, Backrooms is one part of an infinitely bigger ecosystem, rife with creatives who have every right to tell their own version of the story. Yesterday we were made aware of an automated claim submitted to Redbubble on behalf of A24 and Backrooms movie. We immediately began the process to reverse it and reinstate the listing. A24 makes no claim of ownership over the yellow wallpaper, the original post referencing it, or any of the community works that have since been built around it. We will continue to support the artists who, like Kane, were inspired by it."
- conartist6 3mo agothank fuck someone still has morals
- michaelmrose 3mo agoEvery fake automated action should generate a real fine paid to the party they screwed over even when or if it's reversed.
- ameen 3mo agoI don’t see why this isn’t the norm, if you build something “destructive”, you absolutely need to compensate those affected by those actions.