do like josh budich did when george lucas slapped him with a cease and desist. make it anyway and accept a set donation amount for each poster via email/pm and send em to us with none the wiser your happy and all these folks drooling over this poster like i am, are happy IMO.heartstrand wrote:knocked out a couple of the blocks of colour from the motorbike and changed the wheel style to try and even out the white space
Iron Giant (Work In Progress)
- piratesprayer
- Art Expert
- Posts: 3733
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 4:36 am
talkingdeads wrote:My nipples just did a back flip!
- Hellraiser
- Art Expert
- Posts: 2016
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:38 pm
This has been an interesting thread to follow.
It's good to see the Mondo guys handing out advice and making people aware of the studios current stand.
One thing I am very interested to know the answer to is the following question:
Tim's work is quite often an example of the above. He did an American Werewolf in London print with the two characters walking away from the Slaughtered Lamb with the wolf on the horizon (my favourite print of his for what it's worth). Do Nakatomi have to have a licence to produce this? He also did a Ghostbusters, Blade Runner (more than one), Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and more print that did not include the title of the movie but are quite obviously for each particular one.
I think it would be nice to have an understanding of what is crossing the line in these cases. I mean if Nakatomi have the licences for all these films then great. But if not, is the way they do things ok for people like Heartstrand to go ahead and mimic?
Edited to say: in response to the post I have quoted, didn't Mondo have an issue with briging out a Die HArd poster due to the ffact they couldn't licence Bruce Willis's likeness?
It's good to see the Mondo guys handing out advice and making people aware of the studios current stand.
One thing I am very interested to know the answer to is the following question:
Do Nakatomi have the licenses to all the films that Tim Doyle does prints for?I'm wondering where exactly the line is with regards to legal grounds for infringement. Like say is it as simple as using a persons likeness, the actual title and font of the movie, credits etc. Can you make a movie/art print based on a movie without using any of those but still use recognizable imagery from the movie?
Like could I get sued for making a print based on Near Dark simply because I drew a picture of a blacked out van driving through the desert even though it doesn't have any of the characters pictured or actually say Near Dark anywhere but it's still obvious that that's what the piece actually is? Is the fact that it would be presented as "Sapien has a new Near Dark print available" enough to get in trouble?
Tim's work is quite often an example of the above. He did an American Werewolf in London print with the two characters walking away from the Slaughtered Lamb with the wolf on the horizon (my favourite print of his for what it's worth). Do Nakatomi have to have a licence to produce this? He also did a Ghostbusters, Blade Runner (more than one), Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and more print that did not include the title of the movie but are quite obviously for each particular one.
I think it would be nice to have an understanding of what is crossing the line in these cases. I mean if Nakatomi have the licences for all these films then great. But if not, is the way they do things ok for people like Heartstrand to go ahead and mimic?
Edited to say: in response to the post I have quoted, didn't Mondo have an issue with briging out a Die HArd poster due to the ffact they couldn't licence Bruce Willis's likeness?
- ironjaiden
- Art Expert
- Posts: 7980
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:57 pm
- Location: Hollarado
- Contact:
Don't take legal advice from poster artists, especially a dude that named his company after a fictitious one from a movie.
- Hellraiser
- Art Expert
- Posts: 2016
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:38 pm
Very good point!ironjaiden wrote:Don't take legal advice from poster artists, especially a dude that named his company after a fictitious one from a movie.
Sorry to piggy back into this thread... by the way, I love the Iron Giant poster. Amazing work! But I too have a question regarding licensing and everything discussed in this thread.
I have been working on (and just completed) my first poster. My initial plan was to get a small batch screen printed, mainly because I want to see it "finished". And most screen printers seem to have run minimums of 50... atleast the few I've researched did. However, based on the general consensus of this thread, this is a risky proposition due to legal reasons. I'm not one for risk, so I had pretty much decided I wasn't going to screen print it. Perhaps I would just have a giclee print made for myself.
Here is my question - Does Mondo accept unsolicited work for consideration for a poster they would release? Personally, I think the poster turned out extremely well, and it's definitely right up Mondo's alley. However, I know it is not a license they currently have (or atleast announced). Before debuting the work on EB, what are people's views about sending an e-mail to Mondo to see if they would be interested? I'm sure it's a 1 out of 1000 shot anything would come of it, but I thought it might be a good starting point.
Or alternatively, has anyone has any success with going direct to studios with their work and seeing if they wanted to release a limited edition poster for one of their films? This is kind of the opposite route of going to the studio and trying to obtain the license, which I understand can be prohibitively expensive. In this case, the studio still retains the license, and the poster would have just been done by a "free-lance artist".
I'm open to any thoughts / suggestions.
Thanks!
I have been working on (and just completed) my first poster. My initial plan was to get a small batch screen printed, mainly because I want to see it "finished". And most screen printers seem to have run minimums of 50... atleast the few I've researched did. However, based on the general consensus of this thread, this is a risky proposition due to legal reasons. I'm not one for risk, so I had pretty much decided I wasn't going to screen print it. Perhaps I would just have a giclee print made for myself.
Here is my question - Does Mondo accept unsolicited work for consideration for a poster they would release? Personally, I think the poster turned out extremely well, and it's definitely right up Mondo's alley. However, I know it is not a license they currently have (or atleast announced). Before debuting the work on EB, what are people's views about sending an e-mail to Mondo to see if they would be interested? I'm sure it's a 1 out of 1000 shot anything would come of it, but I thought it might be a good starting point.
Or alternatively, has anyone has any success with going direct to studios with their work and seeing if they wanted to release a limited edition poster for one of their films? This is kind of the opposite route of going to the studio and trying to obtain the license, which I understand can be prohibitively expensive. In this case, the studio still retains the license, and the poster would have just been done by a "free-lance artist".
I'm open to any thoughts / suggestions.
Thanks!
Email or PM me anytime you'd like. Cheers.jb518 wrote:Sorry to piggy back into this thread... by the way, I love the Iron Giant poster. Amazing work! But I too have a question regarding licensing and everything discussed in this thread.
I have been working on (and just completed) my first poster. My initial plan was to get a small batch screen printed, mainly because I want to see it "finished". And most screen printers seem to have run minimums of 50... atleast the few I've researched did. However, based on the general consensus of this thread, this is a risky proposition due to legal reasons. I'm not one for risk, so I had pretty much decided I wasn't going to screen print it. Perhaps I would just have a giclee print made for myself.
Here is my question - Does Mondo accept unsolicited work for consideration for a poster they would release? Personally, I think the poster turned out extremely well, and it's definitely right up Mondo's alley. However, I know it is not a license they currently have (or atleast announced). Before debuting the work on EB, what are people's views about sending an e-mail to Mondo to see if they would be interested? I'm sure it's a 1 out of 1000 shot anything would come of it, but I thought it might be a good starting point.
Or alternatively, has anyone has any success with going direct to studios with their work and seeing if they wanted to release a limited edition poster for one of their films? This is kind of the opposite route of going to the studio and trying to obtain the license, which I understand can be prohibitively expensive. In this case, the studio still retains the license, and the poster would have just been done by a "free-lance artist".
I'm open to any thoughts / suggestions.
Thanks!
- ironjaiden
- Art Expert
- Posts: 7980
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:57 pm
- Location: Hollarado
- Contact:
Well there yah go.mcnail wrote:Email or PM me anytime you'd like. Cheers.jb518 wrote: Here is my question - Does Mondo accept unsolicited work for consideration for a poster they would release?
Ok now I'm a little confused. This is your online store correct? If so then why on earth are you concerned about the possible infringement going on with this Iron Giant piece? You've got about a billion dollars worth of lawsuits on sale right now. I'm not trying to pick on you but it almost seems nuts that there was even a conversation about whether or not you're allowed to release something. Clearly not a major concern of yours. And here I was embarrassed about my silly bootlegs from last year. You got balls my man, hope it all works outheartstrand wrote:Can I just reiterate how much I appreciate the advice in this thread and the respect I have for the people giving genuine advice over small minded comments.
- heartstrand
- Art Connoisseur
- Posts: 793
- Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:21 pm
there's a thread on all those here somewhere as well, It's not like I've hidden them in any way at all.
I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
I wouldn't say that, I think you just happened to be in the middle when the discussion of legality regarding movie posters got a little serious.heartstrand wrote:I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
- jimmysleftbrain
- Art Connoisseur
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:08 pm
- Location: Austin Texas
Yeah, I think its a pretty cool print. It kinda feels like the whole copyright conversation started because you're doing an unlicensed piece of art for a property that Mondo paid a significant fee for. There's all kinds of other art happening for bands and films that are also unlicensed, but the Mondo guys read all this fudge. If you were making a JP print, I'm sure a similar conversation would happen. Keep making art, just not any that Mondo has a license for. That's pretty much what this thread has taught me. In all seriousness, some nice bits of advice here from some seasoned vets. drymount ladies, get money.itsame wrote:heartstrand wrote:there's a thread on all those here somewhere as well, It's not like I've hidden them in any way at all.
I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
FWIW - i can't speak for everyone, but from what i've read in here i don't think anyone is saying you're a bad guy. just some friendly banter on a fiery topic
- ironjaiden
- Art Expert
- Posts: 7980
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:57 pm
- Location: Hollarado
- Contact:
Not in the least. It's just completely odd that you seem so receptive to legal advice about this poster but at the same time operate with reckless abandon with pretty much the rest of Hollywood's output. It's a discussion you entered willingly so don't be surprised if we wind up looking at the whole picture.heartstrand wrote:there's a thread on all those here somewhere as well, It's not like I've hidden them in any way at all.
I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
Like I said earlier I put out a handful of unauthorized movie posters myself last year so my advice isn't coming from way up high. I just don't wanna waste the energy if you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Makes sense right?
- jimmysleftbrain
- Art Connoisseur
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 7:08 pm
- Location: Austin Texas
Jesus, thats a lotta paper. You might hear back on that.ironjaiden wrote:This is your online store correct?
- heartstrand
- Art Connoisseur
- Posts: 793
- Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:21 pm
point taken, I've taken everything down.ironjaiden wrote:Not in the least. It's just completely odd that you seem so receptive to legal advice about this poster but at the same time operate with reckless abandon with pretty much the rest of Hollywood's output. It's a discussion you entered willingly so don't be surprised if we wind up looking at the whole picture.heartstrand wrote:there's a thread on all those here somewhere as well, It's not like I've hidden them in any way at all.
I somehow seem to be being painted as the bad guy here and it wasn't what I intended at all.
Like I said earlier I put out a handful of unauthorized movie posters myself last year so my advice isn't coming from way up high. I just don't wanna waste the energy if you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Makes sense right?
now can we both look forward to this year?