EA carpet bombs Etsy fan art

[crazyfills]

Oh hell companies carpet bombing left right and centre, SOPA, PIPA and the unbridled rage of anonymous. What is happening to the once great if not beautiful internet?

 

[alandavidson]

While this is interesting, I'd really like to see a source.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Errr....

Most fan art counts as "derivative work," and as such distribution rights fall to the original copyright holder. Fan art sites tend not to be shut down on good will, largely because they're usually not for profit.

I have to question this. Joe Hogan, a popular artist on DeviantArt, is an official Star Wars artist. However, he isn't commissioned by Lucasfilm to create stuff on DA. However, he is allowed to take profits from his sketch cards which use Lucasfilm licensed characters.

 

[soren7550]

I just checked my favorites in Etsy, and all my Mass Effect related items are still there. (good thing too, I really want these [http://www.etsy.com/listing/83674616/striped-single-stripe-pair-of-armwarmers] for my birthday)

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

I'll say it again: the copyright tyranny will only get worse until copyright is ABOLISHED.

That's stupid. So artists aren't allowed to make money off their hard work?
Copyright law might be a bit ridiculous sometimes, but it protects the little guy from big corporations as often as the opposite. Without it, companies would never have to buy scripts or artwork or music because they could just steal anything they see.

 

[Superbeast]

Legally they're indeed fully justified in hammering anyone making a profit from derivative works. No discussion there.

Opinion, however, has often very little to do with legal justification. EA was already wading in bad karma after that whole SOPA debacle, and now they're pulling a dickmove on people trying to sell things that (in our perception) in no way endanger EA's bottom line, and arguably provide free advertising.

However legal this may be, it certainly seems like a bad PR move to me. Now I would love to say that I can see the day that people stop putting up with ridiculous copyright stunts, but somehow I doubt that'll happen - unless there are another two or three SOPA-clones in the near future.

I believe that in American copyright law (or possibly trademark law) if you do not defend a copyright/trademark when you are aware of an infringement then you lose the right to defend it at a later date.

Whilst EA does not need the money from fan-art sales, nor does it seem (to most) to be moral to go after such small-fry, it would be needed in case another games developer steals character designs or suchlike in the future.

It sucks, but it is an illegal activity that also has negative consequences for the companies that don't pursue this.

 

[Radeonx]

EA games oficially didnt support sopa and then act like its passed and is now law got to love it

This has literally nothing to do with SOPA in any way.

 

[bjj hero]

Opinion, however, has often very little to do with legal justification. EA was already wading in bad karma after that whole SOPA debacle, and now they're pulling a dickmove on people trying to sell things that (in our perception) in no way endanger EA's bottom line, and arguably provide free advertising.

I will not lose any sleep about EA losing money but there is an argument that if I can get a good quality fan art version of something for less I'd could buy that instead of the licenced version. EA loses a sale. Businesses hate losing sales. You would need to be very nieve to not see this.

Its similar to guys selling "unofficial" merch outside of gigs. Get me an unofficial Avenged Sevenfold T-shirt outside the gig for £7 instead of £20 in the venue.

I see no issue with EA doing this and I am surprised its not happened sooner. Plus how much free advertising does Mass Effect 3 need?

 

[GrandmaFunk]

That's stupid. So artists aren't allowed to make money off their hard work?

This angle is brought up very often in copyright/IP debates and it never sits well with me.

The idea that there's a correlation between "hard work" and "deserving of payment" is completely detached from reality.

For example, I'm sure that lots of the artists on Etsy worked very hard on some of their pieces, even if they were inspired by someone else's IP.

And how many "hard working artists" never get any compensation for their work simply because a publisher hasn't chosen to market their work?

Does 'anonymous artist x' work less hard than the average pop star?

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

Now, to be clear. Fan art is legal to produce and sell as long as it is reasonably different from the source material.

Errr....

Most fan art counts as "derivative work," and as such distribution rights fall to the original copyright holder. Fan art sites tend not to be shut down on good will, largely because they're usually not for profit.

Etsy products that count as derivative works really have no right to sell and their sellers have no right to complain when they're shut down.

Yeah, look at Game of Thrones vs. Harry Potter . George R.R. Martin doesn't want anyone producing stuff based of off his work, while J.K. Rowling doesn't seem to care. Both are entitled to their choice of how their IP is used.

However, I would advise EA to look at the different fanbases: if you allow people basically to advertise your product for free, you will both broaden and deepen your base, allowing for much greater financial returns at no cost to yourself.

 

[BoredDragon]

When an animal feels threatened they will do anything to try to prove their superiority especially if their survival is at stake. SOPA proved that many of the movie and TV companies are realizing that the internet are making them obsolete and are trying to stop this process. Now with SOPA gone, they will be trying to find any other outlet to resist the conversion to the new modern medium.

 

[lacktheknack]

Really, its the artists' fault for not finding out the first thing about copyright law: ASK THE IP OWNER BEFORE PROFITING ON THEIR IDEAS.

EA isn't completely unreasonable, an official request would probably be granted with royalties. Not as ideal as keeping all the glorious monies to yourself, but hey, we complain when EA tries to keep theirs. It's their IP.

If you want all the money and none for EA, then draw aliens that AREN'T affiliated with Mass Effect. Or just ignore copyright, and risk this happening. Simple as.

And before the "COPYRIGHT IS STOOPID" replies come in, A. It doesn't matter, it's still there, and B. Imagine if you had some intellectual property that got you some money, then suddenly someone pulled a Chinese Knockoff on you and cut your income significantly, and there were no "draconian laws" to protect you.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

That's stupid. So artists aren't allowed to make money off their hard work?

This angle is brought up very often in copyright/IP debates and it never sits well with me.

The idea that there's a correlation between "hard work" and "deserving of payment" is completely detached from reality.

For example, I'm sure that lots of the artists on Etsy worked very hard on some of their pieces, even if they were inspired by someone else's IP.

And how many "hard working artists" never get any compensation for their work simply because a publisher hasn't chosen to market their work?

Does 'anonymous artist x' work less hard than the average pop star?

It's not about the amount of work; it about the amount of profit you can get. I direct you to The Asylum movie producers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Asylum. They specialize in making cheap and fast knock-off movies like Snakes on a TRAIN in order to capitalize on the buzz that a real movie makes. They often have very little to do with the actual movie, because copyright law prevents them from simply stealing everything.

But imagine if companies were allowed to do that. If an indie developer came up with something like Angry Birds or Minecraft , some unique or well-made game or concept, a megacorporation like EA could have it's vast army of programmers make their own version before the REAL owners could get their version out the door. Even if the original came out, no one would buy it because they already have one.

Copyright is not designed to help big companies profit indefinitely; it's supposed to protect small ones from being crushed instantly.

 

[Rodrigo Girao]

I'll say it again: the copyright tyranny will only get worse until copyright is ABOLISHED.

That's stupid. So artists aren't allowed to make money off their hard work?

Two mistakes.

1 - Copyright didn't exist until the 18th century, and artists certainly managed to make money before that. Some didn't, but then again, it's not different now.

2 - You assume that copyright exists for the benefit of the artist. The Copyright Clause [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause] is clear: it exists to promote science and arts. It is supposed to be an incentive to the creation of works that would end up in the public domain, freely accessible to all, in a few years. Copyright extensions violated the social contract: if it is meant for the benefit of the public, and there is no benefit of the public, copyright is ethically void.

Copyright law might be a bit ridiculous sometimes, but it protects the little guy from big corporations as often as the opposite. Without it, companies would never have to buy scripts or artwork or music because they could just steal anything they see.

How naif. Like they don't rip off the artists right now! [http://www.salon.com/2000/06/14/love_7/]

 

[Kalamala7]

Personally, I'm trying to get out of fan art. I've contacted several web comics and offered to do merchandise for them and give them 40% of the profits after material and posting costs. So far only had two takers though. Which baffles me because there's no cost to them. Posting and materials are all on me. If nothing sells it's me that's out of money.

It's because they see it as taking a risk because say they said yes to someone random and then they do very bad fan art. Then the Brand is shone in a bad light and hence people might not make as much money.

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

http://ppg.snafu-comics.com/ (a series that basically combines the universes of Nicktoons and Cartoon Networks old line up of original content)

Wow. Simply. Freaking. WOW! I grew up on classic Nick and CN, and I had never heard of this strip before you mention it, and it is quite possibly the most incredible thing I've ever beheld with these mortal eyes...

Thank you for this.

 

[Timberwolf0924]

Why is everyone hating on EA for that. I work on an aftermarket car store and BMW and Mercedes does the exact same thing. We used ot buy front chome tags from a distributor who made them at their factory. After BMW and Mercedes heard about it, they had to pull that line. Other manufactures haven't followed suit but you have to think. If EA is selling "Offical Mass Effect 3" Gear, from pendants, to necklaces, to ear rings, or shirts or panties with Tali's face over the *explict* then they should have the right to make other sites who are using images and characters that are main characters taken down. Yes offical costs more, and is more of a hassle to get, but still. EA has the right to, and if it is copyright, and there is a clear target, then it makes it so much eaiser to attack.

 

[Edible Avatar]

What if you drew a picture of copyrighted material, posted it to the public for public use, and then accepted "donations" for continued artwork?
I smell loophole

 

[GrandmaFunk]

It's not about the amount of work;

Why quote us if your response had nothing to do with the specific point he made or my response to it?

Everyone knows the issue is bigger than that one component, that's just the one we chose to focus on in those given posts.

 

[willsham45]

What a stupid move. Pissing off degicated fans is always a bad thing. Ok yes it could take some money away from EA but it is not like they are doing huge things If i am right in thinking the website usually sells things in small batches and one off products.