Page 24 of 33

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:30 pm
by guryter
Reasons in this thread to not care regarding copyright infringement;

Yeah but I'm a huge fan.
Yeah but it's a screenprint.
Yeah but I want it.
Yeah but it'll be public domain in 44 more years.
Yeah but it was barely profitable.
Yeah but I have a tattoo of it.
Yeah but it's not a direct trace.
Yeah but you're just butthurt.
Yeah but I read these growing up.
Yeah but you all flip art.
Yeah but you all own unlicensed art.
Yeah but we'll be doing more C&H but it'll be more exclusive.
Yeah but this was a passion project.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:37 pm
by statik
I seem to remember a certain Bottleneck gallery show with two 3D C&H paper shadow boxes in it that quite a number of people on here wanted. Why has Ferguson's CH art avoid the lynching? Raid71's parody image? Moss's papercuts? Englerts, have you seen the size of that massive ISO list? I can't even fit it in a single screenshot. What's your stance on street artists that do C&H murals? I seen some pretty sik ones personally. Are you going to go up to them and preach your bullshit to them as well? What about a kid holding a Hobbes plush? Will you tear into the parents for giving their kid a pretty unique playmate? I rather they have that than half the fudge that kids are into today. I can easily keep going.

You keep hiding behind Watterson's article and it's grown very tiring. I don't need him or any of you to confirm what my true intentions are. You call that disrespect and all I can do is laugh when I look at the kind of webpage we're on here. Artists wishes... don't claim to know anything about that when you strive for the flip of the so called artists you claim to respect. Let's get one thing straight here, NO ONE IS INNOCENT. The only difference between me and you is I can admit that. I also see the difference between a small run commission and something that is mass produced. You guys would explode if a open edition existed. Though I suppose that article is the only grounds left you have to stand on since your false accusations of tracing fell apart.

As someone said mentioned earlier you really do come across like a bunch of christians claiming to know exactly what Bill meant by what he said. The same reason I will never be one because you're all insane. I feel bad for you that you get so tied up in this red tape that it blinds you to what this really should be about. The love of art.

For the record I hope to God a C&H movie or animated cartoon is never made. I never want to hear them have a voice, something that should be left to one's own imagination. That I will agree on.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:38 pm
by lujborg
35mmpaul wrote:Do you guys yell at people with calvin and hobbes bumper stickers?

And where do you guys fall on parody images? Are they thieving kittens as well?

JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S OK.

jesus drymounting christ, what are you 2?

that's not a rational argument :lol:

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:41 pm
by tulip1637
statik wrote: Image

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:43 pm
by punch
statik wrote: For the record I hope to God a C&H movie or animated cartoon is never made. I never want to hear them have a voice, something that should be left to one's own imagination. That I will agree on.
I'm surprised you guys are not trying to make one.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:45 pm
by statik
tulip1637 wrote:
statik wrote: Image
The only bitch in a dress here is you avoiding valid questions behind the typical animated gif. Grow the drymount up.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:47 pm
by GR8Dane
I know Doyle is bad, but this fudge takes the cake.....

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:52 pm
by tulip1637
statik wrote: Grow the drymount up.
go on another tirade about your favorite childhood comic. please make sure to make it all about you.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:52 pm
by 35mmpaul
lujborg wrote:
35mmpaul wrote:Do you guys yell at people with calvin and hobbes bumper stickers?

And where do you guys fall on parody images? Are they thieving kittens as well?

JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S OK.

jesus drymounting christ, what are you 2?

that's not a rational argument :lol:
So everything you own and want in your collection follows copyrights?

My questions are merely to show examples as to where you guys draw a line and where you don't. I don't think for one second you will be convinced. I'm showing you that there is a massive grey area in this conversation where you are trying to make it black and white.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:53 pm
by glenn1
statik wrote: Let's get one thing straight here, NO ONE IS INNOCENT. The only difference between me and you is I can admit that.
What have you admitted?
statik wrote:Though I suppose that article is the only grounds left you have to stand on since your false accusations of tracing fell apart.
It doesn’t have to be traced. A big difference between some of the examples you listed and this one is that this is obviously drawn to looks as close to BW art as possible.
statik wrote:You guys would explode if a open edition existed.
This seems to be a reoccurring theme. You guys want everyone to be jealous, which is probaly why this “private” commission was put on EB in the first place (other than for flips). If you would have kept it private, then no one would be criticizing it and the artist wouldn’t have his name out there for the EB creeps to go after.

Personally, I don’t care if people want to make some fan art. I just find all of these entitled self-justifications funny.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:53 pm
by shoeless
Is this not a forum for discussion? Is it more of a "Look what I have and you don't!!!"

Neener neener

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 6:04 pm
by tourist504
MoviePosterEmpire wrote:
Diabolos80 wrote:sold=merchandise. Losing some momentum now...
But it's not really sold if people are pooling money to commission art. If the art already existed, you'd be buying art, but you're paying to create art. You could argue the same for the printer, that you're paying for a service and not merchandise.
From the EB page for this print:

"Original Price
$40.00"

Yep. Merchandise.

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 6:06 pm
by TKuczynski
Can we stop calling commissions 'private'?

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 6:10 pm
by GiantBoyDective
thread picking up steam

Re: Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2016 6:10 pm
by Diabolos80
35mmpaul wrote:My questions are merely to show examples as to where you guys draw a line and where you don't. I don't think for one second you will be convinced. I'm showing you that there is a massive grey area in this conversation where you are trying to make it black and white.
But Mr. Watterson drew this line, which is defined by the absolute lack of merchandise, period. Sure plenty of other licenses have lines, but that's usually because there are official profits on the other side of it. Not so in this case.