Breaking Bad 12 Otto

New topics are added by clicking the "Add Comment" link on an art entry. Off-topic posts may be purged.
Forum rules
• Posts in this forum should directly relate to the artist, art, or artwork.
• Do not post ISOs or FS/Ts in this forum section. Please use the Open Market section of the EB forums for all secondary (resale) market activity.
• Do not post details of your order process, shipping status, or condition upon arrival in this forum section. Please use the item's Release Discussion thread for this activity.
Bickel

Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:26 pm

ColdSoreSuperstar wrote:a question -- what's the nature of this Morkaut fellow's work? Is it simply inferior
http://forum.expressobeans.com/viewtopi ... 32&t=81001

knock yourself out.
jrsheppa wrote:And I suppose AMC (who I assume holds any BB copyrights) could come after Otto to make an example of this sort of artist behavior, but 1. It would be really expensive and the potential earnings would not justify the expense and 2. This issue is really on the fence as to copyright violation. For example, unlike in the DMB/Phish litigation of late, Otto has not used BB titles or identifying markings other than the image of Walt. I gues what I'm saying is it wouldn't be a slam dunk case for AMC.
Serving a cease and desist wouldn't cost much...if the unlicensed prints have already sold out, lucky for the artists, but I would think that the people behind the Breaking Gifs series would be somewhat insulted if AMC didn't at least try to put a stop to it. I mean, regardless of how bad some of it may have been, there was some good stuff too, and in any case, a lot of work went into putting it all together.
User avatar
jrsheppa
Art Expert
Posts: 5422
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: The South

Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:38 pm

ColdSoreSuperstar wrote:soapbox away! I appreciate the perspective you're bringing to this.

a question -- what's the nature of this Morkaut fellow's work? Is it simply inferior -- or judged as such -- to the other artists producing bootlegs? Because shades of gray in terms of qualitative judgements of art when arguing the legitimacy of a print in the context of its legality -- now THAT is interesting. And wonky.
I think to me it is a balancing test with many factors (those listed below are not definitive, there are probably more that I am not thinking of):

1. Does the print add in some way (substantively or asthetically) to my enjoyment of the subject? (ie Morkaut's drawing sucks AND he's not adding anything to the collage format at all - it is 100% derivative of Stout)

2. Does the print detract from / cause damage to the interest holder? (measured objectively, often in a pecuniary manner) (ie will AMC lose money because of these print or will any AMC licensed artists lose money because people buy the unlicensed over the licensed print ----> I think this is unlikely, but not impossible I suppose)
Counter: There is an argument that the art will continue to add to the shows popularity and keep people interested / help get more followers to the show

3. How substantial is the infringement? If blatant, I might be less likely to purchase, but if it is questionable, then for the most part, no objection (the more you move from "art print" to "poster," the more infringement IMO)

Finally, I don't see it as an issue of morality as some people do. And if you just don't like the art, then thats okay too. There's some stuff out there that people are in love with that I am not a fan of at all like Emek (don't crucify me)

But to make an across-the-board argument that anything unlicensed should never be made, then wouldn't you have to throw out all of Moss' pokemon series and many recent art shows like Bottleneck's premium tv show (I don't think its licensed, but I could be wrong)?
User avatar
jrsheppa
Art Expert
Posts: 5422
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: The South

Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:42 pm

Bickel wrote:Serving a cease and desist wouldn't cost much...if the unlicensed prints have already sold out, lucky for the artists, but I would think that the people behind the Breaking Gifs series would be somewhat insulted if AMC didn't at least try to put a stop to it. I mean, regardless of how bad some of it may have been, there was some good stuff too, and in any case, a lot of work went into putting it all together.
True. I don't know, even if AMC takes no action, which I would be surprised if they did, its not going to stop people from trying to get them to license things. So in the end they are just spending money they don't have to, even for a C&D
User avatar
Sandmandan
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:38 pm

Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:39 am

Morkaut is now really popular and sells his prints fairly easily because of his lack of morals in the art community... copying stout and other artists. Why wouldn't other people do this? Why do we all make Otto more popular by giving his print so much attention? Why bring such attention to bootleggers? Why wouldn't a fan artist make a breaking bad print since they are all selling like drymounting hotcakes? It makes me want to pound out a half-hearted print of Heisenberg and charge $50 per pulled print. Why? Money. Why not? :)

MBW is the biggest ripoff of them all and people buy his "pop art" garbage for $500+ a hit. Banksy could take a fudge on anything and make it popular.

This has far more artistic value than MBW.
User avatar
jrsheppa
Art Expert
Posts: 5422
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: The South

Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:43 am

In the end, I just like the art work. Otto, keep up the great job and I think you are adding value to the art community, not detracting from it.

And if you think I have bad taste in art, you are entitled to that opinion and I am entitled to dislike you for it, so go drymount yourself.
User avatar
Sandmandan
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:38 pm

Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:48 am

jrsheppa wrote:In the end, I just like the art work. Otto, keep up the great job and I think you are adding value to the art community, not detracting from it.

And if you think I have bad taste in art, you are entitled to that opinion and I am entitled to dislike you for it, so go drymount yourself.
This
User avatar
downtown
Art Expert
Posts: 5892
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:38 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Tue Sep 11, 2012 6:33 am

kickdrum9
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:00 am
Location: Long Island
Contact:

Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:21 am

jrsheppa wrote:In the end, I just like the art work. Otto, keep up the great job and I think you are adding value to the art community, not detracting from it.

And if you think I have bad taste in art, you are entitled to that opinion and I am entitled to dislike you for it, so go drymount yourself.

Thank you very much, i appreciate the kind words...I am staying out of this argument though and not defending myself or the artwork, because in the end it doesnt really matter..if you like the poster, thats great, if you hate it, thats great too. Art is subjective, it always will be. Thanks for looking, thanks for buying, thanks for hating, thanks for the jealousy and envy, and thanks for sending letters to AMC asking them to cease and desist our project. Either way, its just art guys. We all have wayy more imortant things to worry about in this life than some ink and paper. Enjoy your day.
oTTo
User avatar
boxcarwilly
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:41 am
Location: Erie
Contact:

Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:17 am

kickdrum9 wrote: thanks for the jealousy and envy
I dont think anyone is jealous of you Otto. You've obviously missed all the points people were trying to make, constructive or otherwise.
And when you spam an artist forum, ie gig posters, you're going to get some backlash. You may have some collectors who are happy with this but when you peddle your stuff to other artists you start to get an actual perspective of where you stand. Aside from the ethical debate which is hazy at best all they really care about is whether or not the art is well executed or in some way profound. You're not really there yet. Sorry.
If you want to join the community of other artists over at GP then you could introduce yourself rather than trying to start out by selling something that already has loads of ethical controversy attached to it, then you can start to work on your skills.
Hang in there man and try to learn something from this. It's not always a positive sign to have your fellow artists speaking out against you. Maybe it's easy to deflect the criticism with silly comments like "thanks for the jealousy " but it does nothing for your development as an artist or a member of any extended community.
Peace out.
Lost my fudge tryin to act casual.
User avatar
ChefFerrari
Art Expert
Posts: 8313
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:00 am

Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:29 am

boxcarwilly wrote:
kickdrum9 wrote: thanks for the jealousy and envy
I dont think anyone is jealous of you Otto. You've obviously missed all the points people were trying to make, constructive or otherwise.
And when you spam an artist forum, ie gig posters, you're going to get some backlash. You may have some collectors who are happy with this but when you peddle your stuff to other artists you start to get an actual perspective of where you stand. Aside from the ethical debate which is hazy at best all they really care about is whether or not the art is well executed or in some way profound. You're not really there yet. Sorry.
If you want to join the community of other artists over at GP then you could introduce yourself rather than trying to start out by selling something that already has loads of ethical controversy attached to it, then you can start to work on your skills.
Hang in there man and try to learn something from this. It's not always a positive sign to have your fellow artists speaking out against you. Maybe it's easy to deflect the criticism with silly comments like "thanks for the jealousy " but it does nothing for your development as an artist or a member of any extended community.
Peace out.
Smartest thing I have read on here in days, well put
User avatar
Sandmandan
Art Connoisseur
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:38 pm

Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:19 pm

aea0313
New User
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:43 pm

Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:11 pm

Thanks Otto ordered the AP Red Blood and the set! Looking forward to them!
User avatar
ColdSoreSuperstar
Art Expert
Posts: 5026
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 1:00 am
Location: I don't even know anymore.

Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:44 am

boxcarwilly wrote:
kickdrum9 wrote: thanks for the jealousy and envy
I dont think anyone is jealous of you Otto. You've obviously missed all the points people were trying to make, constructive or otherwise.
And when you spam an artist forum, ie gig posters, you're going to get some backlash. You may have some collectors who are happy with this but when you peddle your stuff to other artists you start to get an actual perspective of where you stand. Aside from the ethical debate which is hazy at best all they really care about is whether or not the art is well executed or in some way profound. You're not really there yet. Sorry.
If you want to join the community of other artists over at GP then you could introduce yourself rather than trying to start out by selling something that already has loads of ethical controversy attached to it, then you can start to work on your skills.
Hang in there man and try to learn something from this. It's not always a positive sign to have your fellow artists speaking out against you. Maybe it's easy to deflect the criticism with silly comments like "thanks for the jealousy " but it does nothing for your development as an artist or a member of any extended community.
Peace out.
holy crap. Well said, sir.
not dead
User avatar
fredo
Art God
Posts: 26683
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:26 pm
Location: ENZEE

Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:26 am

Just caught up.

"AMC isn't losing any money on this, so..." holds no water. Copyright law aside, it's a matter of simple ethics: not yours = not yours to sell = you are stealing if you do. This applies as much to lifted/repackaged images other people put a ton of time/effort/money into creating as it does a repainted stolen bike; I don't see how a rational distinction can be made.

On the flip- buyers can play the impersonal, benignly non-ethical role of "the demand" all day long... or rationalize buying this stuff a thousand other ways. But in the end you and I are making the decision personally whether or not to purchase stolen/bootlegged goods.
just a foil for me today, thanks
User avatar
ColdSoreSuperstar
Art Expert
Posts: 5026
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 1:00 am
Location: I don't even know anymore.

Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:55 pm

fredo wrote:Just caught up.

"AMC isn't losing any money on this, so..." holds no water. Copyright law aside, it's a matter of simple ethics: not yours = not yours to sell = you are stealing if you do. This applies as much to lifted/repackaged images other people put a ton of time/effort/money into creating as it does a repainted stolen bike; I don't see how a rational distinction can be made.

On the flip- buyers can play the impersonal, benignly non-ethical role of "the demand" all day long... or rationalize buying this stuff a thousand other ways. But in the end you and I are making the decision personally whether or not to purchase stolen/bootlegged goods.
bingo! my stance.

But I'm starting to think that speaking to the "supply" side would be more effective in my efforts than the "demand" side. will probably focus more on GP than EB.
not dead
Post Reply