Moroder's video - what the hell is that
category: general [glöplog]
And the comments on the page of the Creators Project, some of them pointing out the copyright infringement, magically disappeared...
well, happily this was caught quickly.
And someone actually reached out nicely on the thread, unlike last time.
(I think we all know which last time I mean)
knl's comment to okkie made me laugh uncontrollably.
And someone actually reached out nicely on the thread, unlike last time.
(I think we all know which last time I mean)
knl's comment to okkie made me laugh uncontrollably.
Quote:
And the comments on the page of the Creators Project, some of them pointing out the copyright infringement, magically disappeared...
My mistake... They are still there.
instead of naming, shaming and lighting torches it would be wise to make a good impression and use this 'incident' to ASDs and the demoscenes benefit...
well.. they make money out of ASDs hard work without giving something to ASD is just plain wrong..
Quote:
Speaking objectively here, they did get some credit as a mention and link in the original article. Less literally you probably mean it wasn't enough. Even so, I feel sentiments like wysiwtf's are the better way to go. Metaphorically running around yelling and screaming about it isn't necessarily the best way to get this resolved, especially since ASD is already in contact with some people related to the issue. First impressions can last a long time, and though this may not be the first, it might be for those particular people. A bad impression could squash future collaborations even under good terms or cast the demoscene in a negative light.by _Chucky_:
well.. they make money out of ASDs hard work without giving something to ASD is just plain wrong..
Quote:
Speaking objectively here, they did get some credit as a mention and link in the original article. Less literally you probably mean it wasn't enough.
It's not about not giving enough credit, it's about blatantly lying about the amount of work done.
Either way, it's being sorted out so I don't know why we're even discussing this anymore (:
with credit, the Moroder thing becomes outreach
there, two hyperactive threads become one
there, two hyperactive threads become one
Quote:
Speaking objectively here, they did get some credit as a mention and link in the original article.
Objectively, Moroder's agency, label and distributor are claiming the rights to and intending to make profit from works by ASD with out proper permission. A passing nod to them in an article in Vice is irrelevant. The article is not a contract.
OK, thread posted by upset person. Both parties have each other's email address. So they can get a room and settle it.
And we sceners have a choice of letting it go at that, or letting that pent up pesky-media-industry hate and cynicism flow. What's it gonna be, huh, huh??
Vote simply by commenting below. ;)
And we sceners have a choice of letting it go at that, or letting that pent up pesky-media-industry hate and cynicism flow. What's it gonna be, huh, huh??
Vote simply by commenting below. ;)
as the musicindustry calls downloading a mp3 as "stealing" and sue people for it. even BUYING laws that makes our freedom restricted. they should not "steal" aswell and make money of others hard work.
if I download a mp3, listens to it and maybe delete it.. I haven't stole anything.
if I take someothers work, put it out as my work (with a lame text telling I got some "help") and makes money out of it.. THAT is more stealing.
also on youtube. they even claim to have the RIGHTS to it.
so. being silent is imho wrong. they can't follow their own damn rules..
if I download a mp3, listens to it and maybe delete it.. I haven't stole anything.
if I take someothers work, put it out as my work (with a lame text telling I got some "help") and makes money out of it.. THAT is more stealing.
also on youtube. they even claim to have the RIGHTS to it.
so. being silent is imho wrong. they can't follow their own damn rules..
You do not understand how large conglomerates work, that's all.
well, at least they have a good case with navis' face in the video :D
Quote:
Jai Lewis contacted Amusic and somehow he misunderstood him
I think that's 1) impossible to state with 100% certainty, especially when "a misunderstanding" suddenly becomes hugely advantageous to one of the parties involved, and 2) it's impossible to state, so stop speculating. :)
Quote:
they did get some credit as a mention and link in the original article.
Eh, no. Stop that defeatist thinking right this moment. "Someone else made this with some help from the people who ACTUALLY made _all of it_" is not fucking "getting credit".
Quote:
Metaphorically running around yelling and screaming about it isn't necessarily the best way to get this resolved, especially since ASD is already in contact with some people related to the issue.
It's indeed a good thing that there is a channel of communication open between the parties, but that's not the same as people shouldn't be allowed to be angry/outraged/annoyed/kicking and screaming about this. The last time something this blatant happened, a few people kicked and screamed and wouldn't you know it: it helped a lot. People usually won't back down if they don't feel the heat, and what little heat ASD fans and demoscene followers can gather is most likely appreciated. Unless Amusic or Navis tells us otherwise, that is.
Quote:
A bad impression could squash future collaborations even under good terms or cast the demoscene in a negative light.
Someone steals a whole demo and pretend they directed it and release it as a music video for a commercially well-known artist and you're worried people reacting to it will cast the demoscene in a bad light?! Please adjust your priorities.
Quote:
I would appreciate discretion on behalf of giorgio at this point.
Quote:
now, ask for Moroder to give you a track for your next demo.
yes please!!!
Quote:
I think that's 1) impossible to state with 100% certainty, especially when "a misunderstanding" suddenly becomes hugely advantageous to one of the parties involved, and 2) it's impossible to state, so stop speculating. :)
I agree with you. Of course, it's also irrelevant if that was or not the case because it's clear that Jai Lewis didn't put proper credit (even worse, he pretended to be the director of those video sequences taken from Spin).
This whole thing is very comical. It's like Timbaland's case again. Soon there will be youtube video replies and side by side video comparisons. :D
Sounds to me as a wrong move from the guys who released the video. I just watched it on Youtube over here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u5c-Qndqio
And if I did not know that demo already, I obviously would now be thinking that they indeed created all those effects. So, it seems to me like a gross misrepresentation of authorship. More offensive yet because almost all the video is simply a copy of the demo, just removing the credits part.
So, not screaming but just telling, that looks to me like unfair use, most probably forming a clear case for reparations.
I am not a lawyer though, so this is just my opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u5c-Qndqio
And if I did not know that demo already, I obviously would now be thinking that they indeed created all those effects. So, it seems to me like a gross misrepresentation of authorship. More offensive yet because almost all the video is simply a copy of the demo, just removing the credits part.
So, not screaming but just telling, that looks to me like unfair use, most probably forming a clear case for reparations.
I am not a lawyer though, so this is just my opinion.
I think I've been misconstrued! :P Well, not quite, I'm not exactly sure I could have written something that wouldn't have someone poking at it unless I joined the outrage. However don't get the last part there wrong, I do think that people should get proper credit for things they have done and I'm not condoning claiming someone else's work as their own.
However aMUSiC did say:
I didn't know I had set out any priorities there. I think like most else here, that proper credit should be given and that you should be held accountable for taking someone else's work without getting requisite permission and giving attribution as required/negotiated. It seems quite obvious that both sides were not on the same page as to what would be done with the work.
My thought then when writing it, and perhaps I am wrong, was that people would see less that the director had perpetrated a lie and more how people responded to it. How does the sibling thing go? It's not usually the one who does the original wrong that gets caught, but the one who retaliates for it? Though calling someone out for taking someone else's work as their own just by itself is hardly an attack, so I am not attempting to conflate the two. Just my thoughts ... not everyone on the internet is exactly reasonable in making logical arguments backed by facts and intelligent responses, and I think it's likely more people may know who Giorgio is vs ASD. So it would be easy for the many uninformed who see the video and the responses to get the wrong idea/opinion.
Quote:
I wasn't trying to be, and in the oneliner I admitted Shifter was indeed correct, as the article is just one location to view the video and it will be promoted elsewhere there's no association between the video and those who created the original work it is almost completely based on. I didn't post so here as I'm not really looking to ensure I have the last word in this thread (and likely won't anyway). At the time I had nothing else to add to the thread.by gloom:
Eh, no. Stop that defeatist thinking right this moment. "Someone else made this with some help from the people who ACTUALLY made _all of it_" is not fucking "getting credit".
Quote:
Well I won't deny that this sounds and was written like you have interpreted. However the last part I think is more where my weight lies: both parties are already talking about it and I don't mean to suggest that people shouldn't be able to respond how they like. Certainly some responses got us to where we are now, agreed.by gloom:
It's indeed a good thing that there is a channel of communication open between the parties, but that's not the same as people shouldn't be allowed to be angry/outraged/annoyed/kicking and screaming about this. The last time something this blatant happened, a few people kicked and screamed and wouldn't you know it: it helped a lot. People usually won't back down if they don't feel the heat, and what little heat ASD fans and demoscene followers can gather is most likely appreciated. Unless Amusic or Navis tells us otherwise, that is.
However aMUSiC did say:
Quote:
Which isn't an explicit "please quiet down" but they have said something on it.by aMUSiC:
Obviously it's hard to contain any outburst on twitter, but we are in touch with Giorgo's rep and we're sorting it out.
Quote:
"Oh no, we shouldn't take anything from the demoscene in the future. They might not let us get away with stealing it!" (I am joking, in case someone feels like taking things out of context.)by gloom:Someone steals a whole demo and pretend they directed it and release it as a music video for a commercially well-known artist and you're worried people reacting to it will cast the demoscene in a bad light?! Please adjust your priorities.
I didn't know I had set out any priorities there. I think like most else here, that proper credit should be given and that you should be held accountable for taking someone else's work without getting requisite permission and giving attribution as required/negotiated. It seems quite obvious that both sides were not on the same page as to what would be done with the work.
My thought then when writing it, and perhaps I am wrong, was that people would see less that the director had perpetrated a lie and more how people responded to it. How does the sibling thing go? It's not usually the one who does the original wrong that gets caught, but the one who retaliates for it? Though calling someone out for taking someone else's work as their own just by itself is hardly an attack, so I am not attempting to conflate the two. Just my thoughts ... not everyone on the internet is exactly reasonable in making logical arguments backed by facts and intelligent responses, and I think it's likely more people may know who Giorgio is vs ASD. So it would be easy for the many uninformed who see the video and the responses to get the wrong idea/opinion.
Quote:
by Starchaser:
I think it's likely more people may know who Giorgio is vs ASD. So it would be easy for the many uninformed who see the video and the responses to get the wrong idea/opinion.
Quote:
by imerso:
And if I did not know that demo already, I obviously would now be thinking that they indeed created all those effects.
Quote:
It seems quite obvious that both sides were not on the same page as to what would be done with the work.
I dislike how this makes it sound like both sides are equally to blame. Clearly, that's not the case.
Quote:
I think it's likely more people may know who Giorgio is vs ASD. So it would be easy for the many uninformed who see the video and the responses to get the wrong idea/opinion.
Clearly. For those who us who remember the Timbaland case I think it's even more fair to say that the vast majority of onlookers knew who Timbaland was, and almost nobody knew or cared who any the actual artists who's copyright was infringed upon was. As is the case in almost all of these cases. The point is that it shouldn't be a part of the argument which party is more well know than the other, because it's completely and utterly irrelevant for the legal argument.
Further more, I think it's very sad to see a potential co-op from a known artist with someone in the demoscene as enough of a positive to just take this whole thing laying down. Do you see the scene being hunted down by musicians and artists wanting to work with sceners? No? That's because we're not, because nobody knows we exist. Does that make it any more okay to steal from "us"? Of course not. Is using work without crediting it or having an agreement in place that controls the use of the work "stealing"? In the spirit of the law; yes it is.
Quote:
That wasn't the intention. It is quite possible they understood what ASD meant and took [massive] liberties with the spirit of ASDs response to the original request. I do not mean to suggest that ASD is at fault for what has happened here.by gloom:
Quote:by Starchaser:
It seems quite obvious that both sides were not on the same page as to what would be done with the work.
I dislike how this makes it sound like both sides are equally to blame. Clearly, that's not the case.
Quote:
I'm not saying it has any standing. Facts don't change because of popularity. I was stating how it would be viewed by others.by gloom:
The point is that it shouldn't be a part of the argument which party is more well know than the other, because it's completely and utterly irrelevant for the legal argument.
Quote:
I don't disagree.by gloom:Further more, I think it's very sad to see a potential co-op from a known artist with someone in the demoscene as enough of a positive to just take this whole thing laying down. Do you see the scene being hunted down by musicians and artists wanting to work with sceners? No? That's because we're not, because nobody knows we exist. Does that make it any more okay to steal from "us"? Of course not. Is using work without crediting it or having an agreement in place that controls the use of the work "stealing"? In the spirit of the law; yes it is.
Just checked that clip, and indeed, damn.. They just stole the whole damn demo, cut it up and recomposited.
"with the help of", the article says.. But well, that's VICE for you :)
I suppose ASD needs to get paid and properly credited, plain and simple. And this "director" may rethink both his personal code of ethics and line of work. Perhaps if we check out other stuff there's even more stolen content from god knows where.
"with the help of", the article says.. But well, that's VICE for you :)
I suppose ASD needs to get paid and properly credited, plain and simple. And this "director" may rethink both his personal code of ethics and line of work. Perhaps if we check out other stuff there's even more stolen content from god knows where.
http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D7u5c-Qndqio&start1=&video2=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DiIZy7mWLi08&start2=&authorName=
Side by side comparison... It's simply the demo played in a different order. I bet Vangelis told Moroder to rip spin as a payback for Fairlight ripping Vangelis.
Side by side comparison... It's simply the demo played in a different order. I bet Vangelis told Moroder to rip spin as a payback for Fairlight ripping Vangelis.
Quote:
However aMUSiC did say:
Quote:Which isn't an explicit "please quiet down" but they have said something on it.by aMUSiC:
Obviously it's hard to contain any outburst on twitter, but we are in touch with Giorgo's rep and we're sorting it out.
I'm merely stating a fact here. It is very positive that there was an immediate response on behalf of Giorgio Moroder regarding this issue and I'm hopeful that it will be sorted out. I'm trying to maintain a neutral stance for the moment and as such I did not ask either for discretion on anyone's behalf nor I urged for an outcry. Prior incidents with the demoscene and plagiarism are definitely a factor to remember and stay on the cautious side, but until there is a clear indication that a resolution to this is along the way, let's not crucify anyone just yet.
If things however go sideways, I'll be the first one to yell "release the kraken" =P
