Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Coreyartus" data-source="post: 7689854" data-attributes="member: 5399">I don't understand how this is different than licensing.&nbsp; Licensing is legal--you just have to go through a legitimate process to get permission.&nbsp; A creative (or creative entity) deserves to have authority over how and whether their IP is being used by others.&nbsp; Period.&nbsp; You're suggesting a &quot;shelf-life&quot; to IPs that defaults to everyone but the creative entity because one can't be bothered to garner permission?The desire to have use of another's work doesn't warrant a creative person giving up their right to control that usage.&nbsp; That's childish.&nbsp; That's like saying, &quot;I want candy, and because I want candy I should get it regardless of whether the candymaker lets me or not.&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; It's their stuff--bottom line.&nbsp; They can determine how long they get to make profit with it--they made it.&nbsp; Honestly, I don't know why that's so hard to understand.&nbsp; One's desire to riff off of the work of others (regardless of how ingenious or clever the idea is or however they want to use it) doesn't trump the artist's creative control--regardless of how well they're capable of doing the controlling.&nbsp; The capacity to make profit or be expressive doesn't negate required permissions.&nbsp; It's called respect.&nbsp; Ask permission already.&nbsp; Earn permission.&nbsp; Prove you deserve that permission.&nbsp; Complete your due diligence and spend the money and time to find out who owns the imagery and ideas.&nbsp; That's what you do in a grown up, professional world.Otherwise create something of your own.&nbsp; Yeah, it's hard.&nbsp; It takes time, money, effort--just like they had to put in.&nbsp; It's supposed to.&nbsp; That's what makes it great.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Coreyartus, post: 7689854, member: 5399"] I don't understand how this is different than licensing. Licensing is legal--you just have to go through a legitimate process to get permission. A creative (or creative entity) deserves to have authority over how and whether their IP is being used by others. Period. You're suggesting a "shelf-life" to IPs that defaults to everyone but the creative entity because one can't be bothered to garner permission? The desire to have use of another's work doesn't warrant a creative person giving up their right to control that usage. That's childish. That's like saying, "I want candy, and because I want candy I should get it regardless of whether the candymaker lets me or not." It's their stuff--bottom line. They can determine how long they get to make profit with it--they made it. Honestly, I don't know why that's so hard to understand. One's desire to riff off of the work of others (regardless of how ingenious or clever the idea is or however they want to use it) doesn't trump the artist's creative control--regardless of how well they're capable of doing the controlling. The capacity to make profit or be expressive doesn't negate required permissions. It's called respect. Ask permission already. Earn permission. Prove you deserve that permission. Complete your due diligence and spend the money and time to find out who owns the imagery and ideas. That's what you do in a grown up, professional world. Otherwise create something of your own. Yeah, it's hard. It takes time, money, effort--just like they had to put in. It's supposed to. That's what makes it great. [/QUOTE]

Verification