What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
299 Comments
- Lanfearz, on 10/12/2007, -9/+212I don't understand why people think they can get away with this. But truth be told the author doesn't pick the cover. so it wouldn't make sense to sue him
- neonic, on 10/12/2007, -7/+208Simple solution really, just goto a bookstore and tape a picture of goatse on it :)
- markdr123, on 10/12/2007, -4/+158Because they probably thought no-one would ever know.
There are a lot of good photos on the net y'know. - Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -6/+134@Lanfearz
You got me there. So many people stole my work and put it on their myspace and blogs I had to shut down my web site. But truth be told I could catch every one of them because their website shows up on my recent visitors. And the worse thing is when I approached people about removing my work they got angry at me like I was the bad guy, some really ridiculous things where said, but I digress. Bottom line is that the average person dose not see art as work, or a product so they feel no remorse to steal it. - dvgrhl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+81@raynar
That's an incorrect analogy. A correct one would be taking those mp3's and reselling them as your own. No one is mad that the publisher downloaded the picture. It's that the publisher used that photo in a product they were selling without permission. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -22/+91"I don't understand why people think they can get away with this."
Now lets apply that to music, videos and tv program copyright...
This is a bad case, and i hope the guy gets compensated, but i never get suprised by the sudden outpouring of grief at copyright infringment when it comes to photos/art but not for anything else.
I know the argument is complicated because of such issues as DRM, but it has got a little polarised. - JaredRR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+64re: markdr123... he meant that the publisher usually handles cover art. They did for my book... I did get to approve it when it was done, but I had no contact with the artist. If my publisher had stolen the image, I never would've known.
- Loonacy, on 10/12/2007, -9/+65@vaguelyrandom "but i never get suprised by the sudden outpouring of grief at copyright infringment when it comes to photos/art but not for anything else."
There's a huge difference between sharing something and trying to claim something someone else did as your own work. - digitaloxygen, on 10/12/2007, -7/+62"in soviet russia, press fuk u!"
- darkyoshi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+56So if I punch you in the face and take your money, you should be happy that it'll bring somebody enjoyment?
- icedragon4, on 10/12/2007, -1/+43Unfortunately, this is common. Where is the photographer from and where is the book published? American copyright laws probably don't apply.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+44"There is a HUGE difference between stealing copyrighted material and selling it"
I will start by saying i am completely with everyone on the fact this photographer needs to be compensated, but the above comment is a good example of the problem.
You cannot 'steal copyrighted material'. By its very nature copyright infringement is copyright infringement, stealing doesn't come into it. If laws surrounding theft and burglary were sufficient to cover it, the copyright statutes would never have come into being in the first place.
There is no legal difference (other than the level of compensation) in infringing work by unauthorised copying of a music track via a p2p network, and by infringing copyright by unauthorised copying of a picture you found on the web to use on a book cover.
That was the very point of my original comment - because on digg they really are seen as completely different. Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but they aren't. Like it or not. - Lumiras, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38considering that they've stolen this artist's work, it should probably be fukupress.com
- NetJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36Anything you create (at least in the US) is automatically copyrighted by you unless you state otherwise.
- jcaino, on 10/12/2007, -2/+36ufukpress.com
what a domain name... - JimJones, on 10/12/2007, -5/+36no, they are not international. teh mpaa has brainwashed j00.
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -18/+46@vaguely
You are 100% right and most Diggers somehow think that stealing a copyrighted photo is wrong, but are probably downloading the latest movie off BitTorrent as they type. I find the hypocrisy quite humorous. - refreshments, on 10/12/2007, -2/+28The photographer lives in Vienna, apparantly. Here's the book online ->http://ufukpress.com/modules.php?name=Katalog&op=tampilbuku&bid=21
The photographer's original shot is here ->http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/32323253/ - VesperDEM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+25More importantly, what can the artist do? He probably can't afford to sue the publisher. So his work is taken and he can't do anything about it.
Not long ago, there was a couple of folks who created a flash video with music and put it up on the web. Some company in Australia stole the flash animation and music, changed the art and used it as a commercial. I'm sure it was dugg not long ago. The content creators there are trying to defend their work, but they are not having much luck so far. Hopefully for them, the publicity will help fix the problem.
This artist is probably out of luck unless he has a lot of money stashed away somewhere. - FunnyMan3595, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25*****. Copyright is there by default. It's only non-copyrighted if you explicitly release it to the public domain.
- Pic0, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26watermark, no more than 640x640 and quality no more than 60% orginal
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27People think they can get away with this because the concept of copyright isn't taught in High School or earlier, nor much of the surrounding morality so they have no clue that they are doing something wrong. The closest thing is plagiarism, and that isn't expanded upon beyond copying from someone else for submission as schoolwork. Morality in general isn't taught in American public schools, as well. If it isn't academic or the trades it isn't taught. The teaching of life skills in American public schools does not exist. Don't know about private or schools outside the U.S. though.
- ricosalomar, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29@vaguelyrandom
There is a HUGE difference between stealing copyrighted material and selling it (which the book publisher in question is doing), and making an unlicensed copy of a protected work for personal use (which music/movie "pirates" are doing). In fact, there is really no comparison. - Klowner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+24I built this nice house for my family to live in, and this guy came along and murdered them and then moved in.
I figure, hey, at least he liked the house I made.. - smartalecks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25@basscadet
The cover isn't even real! The cover used on ufukpress is not in any edition/publication of Flowers for Algernon!
Again:
_THE BOOK COVER ON THIS SITE (UFUKPRESS) IS NOT USED IN ANY PUBLICATION/BOOK/EDITION OF FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON (NOT EVEN "EAST ASIAN"). IT IS A GRAPHIC THAT THEY MADE._
I am not saying it is right that they stole it even for a purpose as trivial as this but _please_ get your facts straight! - Bewildebeast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21Copyright is automatic - you don't have to register it (at least in the US or UK)
Edit: And even if that wasn't the case, there _is_ a copyright notice: "©2006-2007 *gnato" - icedragon4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20@ refreshments
He needs to find someone familiar with Austrian copyright laws. The photo was taken in Austria and is governed by their laws. Most people on Digg are American, I doubt anyone here can help him. - smartalecks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19the description, translated from indonesian:
---
"The Stupid Genius"
Charlie, a floor sweeper, was born with IQ 68 and always was his material of friends's joke, until at one time the experiment that was meant to increase human intelligence changed him into a genius.
But afterwards, Algernon, a mouse that beforehand the success through the same experiment, experienced the decline in intelligence drastically and finally died.
Will the same thing happen to Charlie?
---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowers_for_Algernon
^^ by Daniel Keyes (at least they aren't stealing the novel)
Also, this site is powered by PHP-Nuke, if anyone wanted to know... - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -12/+29Sure it's ok when allofmp3 violates copyright, but when it's your picture, it's a different story.
- moronpatrol, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20hahaha
i just find it odd to all of a sudden click on digg and find everyone screaming bloody murder about
copyrights all of a sudden - flink405, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Book publisher:
Jl. Warga No. 23 A Pejaten Barat, Ps. Minggu,
Jakarta Selatan 12510
INDONESIA
Phone. 021-7976587, 021-79192866
Fax. 021-79190995
Email. info@ufukpress.com
http://ufukpress.com/modules.php?name=About
I gues their name ("ufukpress") kind of sums it all up. - speezer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+151) Steal the book
2) Scan it & post it online
3) ??? - Ryosen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15@adam192
Yes, because only books sold by an American-based bookseller have any relevance in the world. - dvsbastard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13What good is having your work published, if you are not being appropriately credited for it?!
- aboyd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@ JimJones
That's not true. The Berne Convention has been signed by over 100 countries. It includes text mandating the respect of copyrights in all countries which have signed the law. I'm not sure if Austria is a signatory, but if they are, then the laws cross country borders, and the publisher is in deep poop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_convention - stusb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11insert beavis and butthead laugh here
- hobgobbler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11smartalec is right, this whole post is *****. It's just something a web designer whipped up. The book isn't sold with this cover. We're all idiots.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12But they say that if they squint really hard at Russian copyright law there's a little loophole that allows them to do what they're doing and make minuscule payments to the proper copyright agencies!
- devlo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Actually, under international intellectual property law (that is, all countries who abide by it, Vienna being part of one of them), if the Owner has proof of ownership which dates prior to the the Illegal usage, he doesn't need to register anything, it is copyrighted automatically. All he has to do is get a good lawyer who deals in property rights management and then confront the bastards!
diggless is missing one part in his sentence "in the US you have a copyright as soon as you push the shutter, but registering it gives you a sturdier leg in court."
This is actually true for most countries who abide by either U.N or E.U. and then some... - mv10, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Free Pub for the book
- Woofcat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8They are very international, http://www.wipo.int/members/en/ If the country that published the book doesn't do anything about it and if the artist had unlimited resources he could get it done.
But then again, just because it is the law doesn't mean it gets enforced. - zeklown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Ha ha ha,
Next time someone breaks into your house, your fault. You should have had better security! - MacGyver2210, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11"Anybody seen the new Camry and a BMW 5 series next to each other? The rip off is so obvious..."
Yes, because Toyota is a little unknown company in Indonesia with a $5 budget for car design, so they sent someone with a sketch pad to Europe to rip off BMW's design.
Quit yer Asian bashing you milktoast redneck...I'm sure this happened because they couldn't (or didn't want to) pay for royalties on an image, whether for use on their website advertising or on their actual book cover. Has absolutely nothing to do with their race. - karbonx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+104) PROFIT!!!!!
- bieber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Why's The OtherGuy being dugg down? If you create a work, of your own volition, using your own equipment, copyright is completely yours. Registering it with the copyright office and/or displaying a copyright notice strengthens your legal footing, but the absence of either does NOT mean the absence of copyright.
- v0lrath, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Just playing devil's advocate here but:
I'm sure about 99% of diggers would not download music that somebody else created (and here's the key part) and then SELL IT FOR PROFIT.
On the same note, I don't think anyone here would have a problem using his art as their desktop wallpaper. Maybe that's why they have a problem with this and not downloading music for personal use? It's not exactly comparable... - preston, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Consider contacting the Electronic Frontier Foundation at http://www.eff.org/. I periodically donate money to them so they can take on lamers like this. From what I understand they are very strategic about the cases they take, but if they choose to help you it probably wouldn't cost you much, if anything. It's worth emailing them at the very least. Good luck.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10haha, definately
"im gonna steal this movie and show it to all my friends, and then bitch when someone steals a deviant art kids photograph!" - chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Wait, so every digger here, every single one who has probably downloaded a song or a movie is suddenly claiming the moral high ground and claiming this is wrong? Hilarious.
- greekgoat91, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I'd hire Jackie Chiles
-
Show 51 - 100 of 299 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is