User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 3:53:33 PM EDT
Bit ironic here since Metallica was all about copyright laws when they sued Napster 16 and a half years ago...
Now it seems, while it's wrong to take their music for your own use, it's perfectly OK to take a fan's photo and manipulate it for your video... without paying or even naming the photographer who owns the copyright. Metallica Accused Of Using Photographer’s Image Without Permission In ‘Murder One’ Video 
Bit surprised it hasn't been posted yet to be honest. I searched for "Metallica" in the thread titles, going back 30 days and only found one thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:02:28 PM EDT
[#1]
You're on private property when at a concert and by paying for a ticket I'm sure you're agreeing to a bunch of legal shit.
I don't see how Metallicas lawyers wouldn't have this all already covered where any images taken at the concert belong to them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:02:54 PM EDT
[#2]
They lost me as a fan after the Napster thing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:04:23 PM EDT
[#3]
It's hard for me to care if someone uses a picture of themselves without permission.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:12:25 PM EDT
[#4]
2 different images i see
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:13:15 PM EDT
[#5]
Lars downloaded it on Napster.
ETA: I had no problem with Lars' crusade against Napster making their catalog available public via file sharing network. GD is one of those places where torches and pitchforks come out when some crappy little gun site copies the bolt-face logo, but where the life's work of a business like Metallica's being taken by millions without compensation of any kind is perfectly legit. In fact, it's not only legit, it's outrageous that Lars Ulrich or the band overall would say "hey we own that and we don't want this website providing a way for everyone to get around paying for it". Anyone who thinks they had a right to take possession of their music without paying for it might as well join one of the progressive groups marching outside of Trump rallies. That kind of "it should be free for me to take" crap is the definition of a communist/anarchist peckerhead. The only purpose of Napster was to publicly provide, without charge or other compensation to the rightful owners, copyrighted commercial goods via a shared distribution network. Utilizing this service to take possession of goods in this manner and without proper compensation to the owners, is stealing. End of story. I'm sure we're going to see plenty of moral and intellectual gymnastics to try to get around that simple fact but a valid argument for why getting all this music for free wasn't a clear form of theft cannot be made. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:17:55 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
2 different images i see It looks like they took the original image and heavily 'shopped it. That doesn't necessarily make it "theirs" however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:18:53 PM EDT
[#7]
Metallica is like a fortune 500 corporation.
I'm sure they're lawyers are on this. Notice it says "Accused", not found guilty. With all the Metallica hate here, it sounds like hippies wanting something for free instead of paying for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:19:18 PM EDT
[#8]
I'm not sure that it will fly in Europe, but here I'm fairly certain they did enough with the photo to at least have a great shot at fair use since it's transformational. They clearly has been altered to have a cartoon type look to it. They've added a ton with the lights, and from what the article says, it's animated in the video. I'm 90+% sure that's transformational, and fair use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:20:37 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They lost me as a fan after the Napster thing. Yeah, free everything for everyone. Feel the Bern! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:20:58 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It looks like they took the original image and heavily 'shopped it. That doesn't necessarily make it "theirs" however. Furthermore, since the photograph was of a live performance, the photographer could get on a slippery slope there too. I doubt he could get an attorney to take this case on contingency. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:22:50 PM EDT
[#11]
"...not about giving s— away for free or not, but about whose choice it was. If I wanna give my s— away for free, I’ll give it away for free. That choice was taken away from me.” -Lars
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:24:16 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They lost me as a fan after the |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:24:37 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Very true, but when you animate it and use it in a music video. Furthermore, since the photograph was of a live performance, the photographer could get on a slippery slope there too. I doubt he could get an attorney to take this case on contingency. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It looks like they took the original image and heavily 'shopped it. That doesn't necessarily make it "theirs" however. Furthermore, since the photograph was of a live performance, the photographer could get on a slippery slope there too. I doubt he could get an attorney to take this case on contingency. If I remember, video and photography is not allowed at their concerts. Everyone does it though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:26:00 PM EDT
[#14]
Lars is a douche bag..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:36:00 PM EDT
[#15]
Different images. Left arm and leg are positioned differently.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:36:45 PM EDT
[#16]
He certainly can be. But not because he didn't want his life's work and his organization's source of income distributed to the entire world for free. There's no question that it's reasonable to want to stop that. Unless you're in favor of stealing anyway.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lars is a douche bag.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:52:17 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Metallica is like a fortune 500 corporation. . Somewhat off topic, but I was driving through the Design District in Miami when I saw a billboard with what looked like Metallica on it. I couldn't believe it, so I had to double back and sure enough, it was an ad for Brioni.  Attached FileCapitalism trumps counter-culture, I suppose. Story |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:57:03 PM EDT
[#18]
Getting old is a hell of a thing
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Somewhat off topic, but I was driving through the Design District in Miami when I saw a billboard with what looked like Metallica on it. I couldn't believe it, so I had to double back and sure enough, it was an ad for Brioni. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/82869/images-1-118094.JPG Capitalism trumps counter-culture, I suppose. Story Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Metallica is like a fortune 500 corporation. . Somewhat off topic, but I was driving through the Design District in Miami when I saw a billboard with what looked like Metallica on it. I couldn't believe it, so I had to double back and sure enough, it was an ad for Brioni. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/82869/images-1-118094.JPG Capitalism trumps counter-culture, I suppose. Story |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 4:57:04 PM EDT
[#19]
Is this one of those threads where people bitch about capitalism and copyright laws because they were stopped from getting free shit?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:01:04 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He certainly can be. But not because he didn't want his life's work and his organization's source of income distributed to the entire world for free. There's no question that it's reasonable to want to stop that. Unless you're in favor of stealing anyway. Quote HistoryQuoted:
He certainly can be. But not because he didn't want his life's work and his organization's source of income distributed to the entire world for free. There's no question that it's reasonable to want to stop that. Unless you're in favor of stealing anyway. Quoted:
Lars is a douche bag.. +1 Reminds me of the "who buys porn anyway" thread/comments. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:02:47 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is this one of those threads where people bitch about capitalism and copyright laws because they were stopped from getting free shit? Yeah, a lot like those "cable cutting" threads where people ask for alternatives and everyone chimes in to tell them how they can just watch everything they want for free illegally, but its okay because "your car is still in the garage." |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:02:52 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Bit ironic here since Metallica was all about copyright laws when they sued Napster 16 and a half years ago... Now it seems, while it's wrong to take their music for your own use, it's perfectly OK to take a fan's photo and manipulate it for your video... without paying or even naming the photographer who owns the copyright. Metallica Accused Of Using Photographer’s Image Without Permission In ‘Murder One’ Video http://oi64.tinypic.com/2hh1ycl.jpg Bit surprised it hasn't been posted yet to be honest. I searched for "Metallica" in the thread titles, going back 30 days and only found one thread. The language on the back of a concert ticket includes reference to the fact that all images from the show belong to whoever contracted them - whether the venue or the producer or the band. The next time you buy a concert ticket, read it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:05:50 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The language on the back of a concert ticket includes reference to the fact that all images from the show belong to whoever contracted them - whether the venue or the producer or the band. The next time you buy a concert ticket, read it. Right. Most of the time, even when you technically own the photos, the band can do whatever they want with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:08:32 PM EDT
[#24]
Different images. I'm sure Hetfield strikes that pose about 87 times per concert.
Lights in the background are different, leg positions are different, and his left hand is on different frets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:08:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's hard for me to care if someone uses a picture of themselves without permission. After all their antics about IP/DIGITAL RIGHTS good suit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:13:11 PM EDT
[#26]
What, exactly, was wrong with the "antics" opposing the distribution of their property for free?
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After all their antics about IP/DIGITAL RIGHTS good suit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's hard for me to care if someone uses a picture of themselves without permission. After all their antics about IP/DIGITAL RIGHTS good suit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:15:32 PM EDT
[#27]
Ironic indeed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:15:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After all their antics about IP/DIGITAL RIGHTS good suit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's hard for me to care if someone uses a picture of themselves without permission. After all their antics about IP/DIGITAL RIGHTS good suit. What’s more, Käck says he didn’t sign any agreement with Metallica before photographing them, which if signed may have given the band the right to reproduce any photos taken of them at that particular show. “I have signed few of those agreements but not that time,” Käck says. I'll bet ten dollars the image ownership statement was on his ticket. If it was a U.S. venue, I'd bet $1,000, but I don't know where it happened so I don't know how they deal with the issue there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:17:57 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lars downloaded it on Napster. ETA: I had no problem with Lars' crusade against Napster making their catalog available public via file sharing network. GD is one of those places where torches and pitchforks come out when some crappy little gun site copies the bolt-face logo, but where the life's work of a business like Metallica's being taken by millions without compensation of any kind is perfectly legit. In fact, it's not only legit, it's outrageous that Lars Ulrich or the band overall would say "hey we own that and we don't want this website providing a way for everyone to get around paying for it". Anyone who thinks they had a right to take possession of their music without paying for it might as well join one of the progressive groups marching outside of Trump rallies. That kind of "it should be free for me to take" crap is the definition of a communist/anarchist peckerhead. The only purpose of Napster was to publicly provide, without charge or other compensation to the rightful owners, copyrighted commercial goods via a shared distribution network. Utilizing this service to take possession of goods in this manner and without proper compensation to the owners, is stealing. End of story. I'm sure we're going to see plenty of moral and intellectual gymnastics to try to get around that simple fact but a valid argument for why getting all this music for free wasn't a clear form of theft cannot be made. This. Bunch of hypocrites around here |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:19:08 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Metallica is like a fortune 500 corporation. I'm sure they're lawyers are on this. Notice it says "Accused", not found guilty. With all the Metallica hate here, it sounds like hippies wanting something for free instead of paying for it. Not me. I just found it ironic that they'd complain about copyright laws & theft, but then do it themselves. As for wanting their music for free... I have none of theirs to begin with anyway. *shrug* |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:22:23 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not me. I just found it ironic that they'd complain about copyright laws & theft, but then do it themselves. As for wanting their music for free... I have none of theirs to begin with anyway. *shrug* Go buy a concert ticket and read it. It will clearly say that all images of the show belong to X, with X being either the venue, producer, or band. You can't steal something that you already own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 5:25:32 PM EDT
[#32]
Go to hell Lars!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 6:02:32 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're on private property when at a concert and by paying for a ticket I'm sure you're agreeing to a bunch of legal shit. I don't see how Metallicas lawyers wouldn't have this all already covered where any images taken at the concert belong to them. Copyright starts with the creator, and for it to transfer there must be a written agreement signed by both parties. Simply putting some shit on your ticket doesn't change that in the least. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 6:08:48 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Go to hell Lars!!! Everybody loves to pick on Lars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 6:11:49 PM EDT
[#35]
Metallica tries way too hard to stay relevant. Their music fucking blows. I wish they'd go away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 6:45:04 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not how it works....that's not how any of this works. Copyright starts with the creator, and for it to transfer there must be a written agreement signed by both parties. Simply putting some shit on your ticket doesn't change that in the least. If you shoot a movie, I can buy a ticket, record the whole thing, and then I can sell copies. How cool is that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 6:46:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not how it works....that's not how any of this works. Copyright starts with the creator, and for it to transfer there must be a written agreement signed by both parties. Simply putting some shit on your ticket doesn't change that in the least. This. They don't "own" your photos just because you took them at a concert - even if they put that on the tickets. The only thing they really can do legally is kick you out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:08:35 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. They don't "own" your photos just because you took them at a concert - even if they put that on the tickets. The only thing they really can do legally is kick you out. It's a derivative work. Look that up. The U.S. Copyright Office has a nice page about it. Metallica owns the images, not some guy in the audience. Let me make this perfectly clear: When your high school buys the rights to perform a play at the school theater, they bought the right to perform the play as the script was written. If they change anything, even a single word or stage direction, the owner of the work can shut it down. MTIShows did it to Little Shop Of Horrors and Samuel French did it to Neil Simon's Rumors. If you were ever in a high school play and wondered why the director insisted that you do exactly what the script said, now you know why. It's theirs. It's not yours. Metallica owns the performance. The guy who took a picture of the performance has no rights at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:12:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you shoot a movie, I can buy a ticket, record the whole thing, and then I can sell copies. How cool is that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:17:28 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a derivative work. Look that up. The U.S. Copyright Office has a nice page about it. Metallica owns the images, not some guy in the audience. Let me make this perfectly clear: When your high school buys the rights to perform a play at the school theater, they bought the right to perform the play as the script was written. If they change anything, even a single word or stage direction, the owner of the work can shut it down. MTIShows did it to Little Shop Of Horrors and Samuel French did it to Neil Simon's Rumors. If you were ever in a high school play and wondered why the director insisted that you do exactly what the script said, now you know why. It's theirs. It's not yours. Metallica owns the performance. The guy who took a picture of the performance has no rights at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:24:14 PM EDT
[#41]
The photographer would have to prove to me that he has zero pirated anything before Im gonna give a shit about his claim.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:27:35 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Metallica tries way too hard to stay relevant. Their music fucking blows. I wish they'd go away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:29:32 PM EDT
[#43]
Photographs are essentially worthless these days.
Throw him $10 and an autographed hat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:31:13 PM EDT
[#44]
"They" didn't do shit. The people who edited the video did.
I'm sure they will make it right, like the time they supposedly sued a band for using their trademark to advertise cover performances. Feel the Bern. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:37:19 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To the best of my knowledge, a photograph of a performance is NOT a derivative work. I looked it up. Please feel free to show me otherwise. Quote HistoryQuoted:
To the best of my knowledge, a photograph of a performance is NOT a derivative work. I looked it up. Please feel free to show me otherwise. The performance is covered by a form PA, the same as your play script or the set of stage directions and camera angles for Mel Brooks' Silent Movie. https://www.copyright.gov/forms/formpa.pdf Examples of derivative works include musical arrangements, dramatizations, translations, abridgments, condensations, motion picture versions, or “any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted.” Derivative works also include works “consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, or other modifications” if these changes, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship. https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf A derivative work is a work based on or derived from one or more already existing works. ... Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, an adaptation of that work. The owner of a copyright is generally the author or someone who has obtained the exclusive rights from the author. In any case where a copyrighted work is used without the permission of the copyright owner, copyright protection will not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully. The unauthorized adaption of a work may constitute copyright infringement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:47:18 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The performance is covered by a form PA, the same as your play script or the set of stage directions and camera angles for Mel Brooks' Silent Movie. https://www.copyright.gov/forms/formpa.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To the best of my knowledge, a photograph of a performance is NOT a derivative work. I looked it up. Please feel free to show me otherwise. The performance is covered by a form PA, the same as your play script or the set of stage directions and camera angles for Mel Brooks' Silent Movie. https://www.copyright.gov/forms/formpa.pdf Examples of derivative works include musical arrangements, dramatizations, translations, abridgments, condensations, motion picture versions, or “any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted.” Derivative works also include works “consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, or other modifications” if these changes, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship. https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf A derivative work is a work based on or derived from one or more already existing works. ... Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, an adaptation of that work. The owner of a copyright is generally the author or someone who has obtained the exclusive rights from the author. In any case where a copyrighted work is used without the permission of the copyright owner, copyright protection will not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully. The unauthorized adaption of a work may constitute copyright infringement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:50:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, I read that form. Still not seeing what you're seeing. I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not sure if you are either, but I did make a living for many years photographing bands during performance of their music...and it's my understanding that when a band performs, the copyrighted material is the music, and a photograph is not infringing on the music....even if by extension you are arguing that copyright protection of the music extends to the performance itself, a photograph of the musicians is not a derivative of the music - or the performance. I didn't see it in the article, but I wonder if he took it from the pit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:51:30 PM EDT
[#48]
Alrighty then
The OP must be guilty too Is metalica the bolt face of rock? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:51:59 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's hard for me to care if someone uses a picture of themselves without permission. It's hard for me to care about a band who is upset over people who pirate music when there is so much technology used to make a musician sound better than he/she really is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/1/2017 7:55:36 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Photographs are essentially worthless these days. Throw him $10 and an autographed hat. LOL |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
