View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
|
addiemon
Joined: 06 Mar 2013
Posts: 93
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 9:29 am
|
|
|
In before this story turns out to be Murakami's latest work, a performance art commenting on litigiousness in the world of art and the merciless struggle between the "haves" and the "have-nots"
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lemonchest
Joined: 18 Mar 2015
Posts: 1771
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 9:34 am
|
|
|
Breaking news: Takashi Murakami sues owl for infringing on copyright. The artist's lawyer asserts that it isn't possible a bird could evolve that way without prior knowledge of his client's work. An owl was not available for comment.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Touma
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2651
Location: Colorado, USA
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 9:46 am
|
|
|
I do not understand how that could be plagiarism. It is just an eye.
I swear that I have seen eyes like that on hundreds of cartoon characters from many different places and times.
There must be some artistic aspect to this that is beyond my comprehension.
Was that thing on the right side of the picture an example of Murakami's work? If so I do not see the similarity.
|
Back to top |
|
|
magvis
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 47
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:09 am
|
|
|
OMG! They're both...eyes! Someone must have copied it.
And this is why they should eliminate most lawyers. If they weren't bored from lack of work, they'd be doing something more constructive other than filing frivolous suits.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Oshawott
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 6773
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:11 am
|
|
|
So Mr. Murakami is doing legal battle against Kobe Anime Street simply for the reason that their eye logo "copies" his artistic features... I just can't see any similarities between them. Plus, even if they are there, was it really necessarily to claim copyright infringement over a generic logo?
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pokenatic
Joined: 24 Jan 2012
Posts: 593
Location: Neo Venezia
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:20 am
|
|
|
I honestly don't understand how those two eye designs are even close enough to be considered copyright infringement. Murakami ought to go on a suing spree if given how he can win this one.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kikaioh
Joined: 01 Jun 2009
Posts: 1205
Location: Antarctica
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:29 am
|
|
|
Plagiarism? You could make that logo in less than 30 seconds in MS Paint using mostly the oval tool. This is about the snootiest sort of legal case I've seen in a long time.
|
Back to top |
|
|
TarsTarkas
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 5991
Location: Virginia, United States
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:40 am
|
|
|
Guess he can rake in millions now suing anime companies for using anime eyes.
Don't see a case for plagiarism here, unless there was some insider whistleblowing that we don't know about.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Touma
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2651
Location: Colorado, USA
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:53 am
|
|
|
It occurs to me that perhaps I was being unfair to Mr. Murakami. As far as I know it is possible that the artist who drew the logo actually did copy it from a specific Murakami work.
But if that is the case then I would like to see a picture of the original.
I did a Google search and could not find a match. There were a lot of Muramami's drawings that had similar eyes, but that seems to me to be because they are so common.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pokenatic
Joined: 24 Jan 2012
Posts: 593
Location: Neo Venezia
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:11 am
|
|
|
Touma wrote: | I did a Google search and could not find a match. There were a lot of Muramami's drawings that had similar eyes, but that seems to me to be because they are so common. |
Same. I found that a lot of his eye designs are pretty similar to each other, but none that quite matched Kobe's logo aside from one or two details at most.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Haterater
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 1736
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:33 am
|
|
|
Really looking at the images in the article, I'm not buying it. They both look too different. Unless they copied from another image, it just looks like the artist is looking for some money.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr Adventure
Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Posts: 1598
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:51 am
|
|
|
I know Japan's copyright and trademark laws are more draconian then the US's, but those eyes lack any real similarities. The eyelashes are in different positions, and are different. The reflections in the pupal are completely different.
How is this even a case? (unless then images in the article aren't the infringed artwork in question)
|
Back to top |
|
|
albanian
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Posts: 133
Location: UK
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 12:00 pm
|
|
|
The whole point of Murakami's Superflat concept is that it is based, in part, on generic anime characteristics. Perhaps the entire anime community could band together and sue Murakami himself for plagiarism?
|
Back to top |
|
|
MagusGuardian
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Posts: 594
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 12:29 pm
|
|
|
wait what? it's an eyeball how can you copy right a freaking eye?
|
Back to top |
|
|
Usagi-kun
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 877
Location: Nashville, TN
|
Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 12:31 pm
|
|
|
This is obviously a conspiracy on the political and psychological level far beyond the scope of our understanding. It is not the eye itself, but all anime eyes that owe their form and conception to artists who watch over our commercial interests in anime fandom...
Stop putting flouride in my water, Murakami-san!
|
Back to top |
|
|
|