Bugs in Your Nightmares

2nd June 2012

Photoset reblogged from with 14,953 notes

chongthenomad:

mind-the-neurogasm:

avataraang:

THIS IS THE BEST.

EVERYONE STOP SCROLLING AND ADMIRE THIS PERFECTION.

I’M DYING

DYING

ON THE FLOOR

This needs to happen.

Tagged: legend of korracosplaylok

Source: jazztea6

1st June 2012

Photoset reblogged from It can't rain all the time. with 11,492 notes

inkgallery:

panphobia:

adventure time mash ups

I love all except Dr. Who.

Source: panphobia

1st June 2012

Photoset reblogged from Mediaholic with 24,810 notes

soundlesswind:

noxi:

lifeinthefastlaine:

lifeinthefastlaine:

Maybelline “Confidence” ads. SO happy with how the colors in these turned out in printing and matting. To clarify, these are not real Maybelline ads, they were created for an advertising class.

EDIT: This is important. This means a lot to me. I legitimately believe a huge mistake was made today.

These ads were a part of my portfolio into the advanced advertising program at my school. About half of the people who apply get in. I got into the first two creative classes, intro and intermediate, and I was confident I would get into advanced… especially after I posted these on tumblr and in a matter of a few hours got THOUSANDS of notes with people saying that they loved them, most people even believing they were real advertisements and not something a 21 year old student made for class.

The only reservation I had was that my portfolio was being judged by two older men. Two men who have never worn makeup in their lives. Two men who would probably not even begin to understand what this campaign means. Two men who have never been under societal pressures to wear makeup, but then being told they’re insecure for doing so.

Those reservations might have been founded, as evidenced by the fact that I did not get in. I was rejected. I got over 5,500 notes on these ads in 24 hours, yet I was rejected for not being good enough. I can’t finish the program, and I have to figure out where to go from here.

Now to the good stuff: Tumblr is amazing. Everyone who has reblogged this, whether your comments were negative or positive, is amazing. I find it truly astounding that these have gotten so much attention. These, which are advertisements selling you something, something people inherently dislike. I am humbled, shocked, and grateful. This is the first time since I’ve been in advertising that I felt like I was doing something right… that maybe, just maybe, I could make it in this industry and make a positive change.

Those dreams were squashed today. I cried, and I complained. I’m angry — but not at myself like I thought I would be. I feel they made a mistake. I refuse to believe that I’m in the bottom 50% of the people who applied. I deserve to be in that program, and I know it. Thousands of people can’t be wrong that this is a good idea. An idea that MEANS something, and idea that resonates with many people. 2 older, conventional men can absolutely be wrong when it comes to judging what makes a good makeup ad.

Here’s where you come in. Let’s make them regret their decision. Reblog this, like it, comment on it, whatever. Let’s get this attention… so much attention that they can’t ignore it. While the decisions are most likely final, I want to make them think twice. I want them to look back, and believe that they fucked up. If it doesn’t even benefit me personally, I want them to think about how fair a panel of 2 male judges is when it comes to evaluating work done by women, for an audience that consists of predominantly people who identify as women.

So let’s do this. They fucked up; I deserved to be accepted. I know it, and I have a feeling you guys know it too.

these are really good ads, wow, I thought they were real :o

Love the gold one. \( o )/ You go, girl.

Source: lifeinthefastlaine

30th May 2012

Video reblogged from Only Posts With Ten Thousand Notes with 27,131 notes

10knotes:

A dog guarding his masters bike….So cute. You guys have to watch it. OMG and the ending. 

Follow this blog, you will love it on your dashboard

Source: twiggy114

29th May 2012

Video reblogged from DarkChibiShadow with 166,112 notes

videohall:

Wow that’s amazing, I thought it was fake after seeing them draw on the paper. That alone is ingenious.

Source: videohall

27th May 2012

Photoset reblogged from with 1,836 notes

lexxercise:

softowl:

All right, I have received permission to post these pictures.  Thanks to the person at Anime North who sent me these.

This was the booth in question.  As you can see they were selling ugly, poorly made HS bootleg items, plus lots of others (Adventure Time, etc).

Let me be really clear here: I don’t like it when people sell their fanart prints or handmade fan items, but I can understand.  This, however, is an act of pure scumbaggery.

This is apparently the “company” selling these items.  I urge everyone out there not to buy from them at any convention they may attend, and to ask others to do the same.  Don’t support thieves.  

I wanted to reblog this as a follow-up to my previous signal boost, seeing as though the offending vendor has been identified, along with some supplemental discussion inspired by related posts. I’m sorry I can’t hide this wall of text under a Read More tag, but this is an image post and thems the breaks.

Distribution Rights

Most everyone who follows me has likely read my post on US copyright law with regards to creative intellectual property.

While things like fanart and cosplay are difficult to pass definitive judgment on for a variety of reasons, copyright law is crystal clear on the distribution of the original property itself. By law, the creator of the content is the only entity who can distribute said content in any way, shape, or form.

The creator doesn’t have to make some sort of public statement forbidding this kind of activity. This isn’t an “I can do it unless I’m told not to” scenario. Their content is automatically protected by copyright law the moment it appears in a fixed medium. It’s theirs. Forever. Unless they license, sell, or give away said rights.

The products above don’t even fit a single criterion of the Fair Use clause. The images on the products were lifted directly from the comic itself, put on mass-produced items almost completely unaltered, and are being distributed for commercial purposes. The audacity is pretty astounding.

(Incidentally, this is also largely what is wrong with scraping/content aggregation apps and sites, even the free ones. Unless those responsible for offering these services received explicit permission from the artists whose work they feature ahead of time, they are violating the artists’ exclusive right to the distribution of their content.)

Fair Use (Within the Comic)

I can’t count how many times Andrew has been “called out” for copyright infringement of his own, both with regards to images used within the comic, as well as songs released on official albums. I can’t blame those who are unacquainted with copyright law for being genuinely confused, and genuinely wanting to know why “x” is wrong but “y” is okay.

Online, the comic falls into the same nebulous grey area all photomanipulations, collages, and otherwise altered imagery and content fall under. Since the images themselves didn’t appear on any commercial products, it would have been difficult to argue the legitimacy of their use. I mean, you could do it, but that would be taking most blogs, galleries, forums, news/media sources, and search engines to task as well.

Which people still do, I guess, but that treads dangerously close to the same line of thinking that brought about policy proposals such as SOPA and PIPA. You have to temper this kind of legal interpretation with the concepts promoted by the Fair Use clause, which takes into consideration the nature of the derivative work, its purpose, and its impact on the source.

That being said, Fair Use will always, always be a confusing grey area. It is vague in its guidelines because it is a subjective concept that, from a legal standpoint, can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. In court. That being said, the closest you can get to such a determination without actually having to be taken to court is through legal advisement. From a lawyer.

Which they have.

As a reminder, licenses were purchased by Andrew for the tracks that covered existing songs. They are strictly on the up-and-up. They have also consulted with their legal adviser on the subject of printing and selling the comic, which contains digitally altered photographs, celebrity likenesses, and brand names. As such, it can be safely assumed the books are on the up-and-up as well.

I could go into the minutia of how each celebrity/brand representation constitutes parody, and how the photographs pulled from the internet are edited to the extent that the substantiality of the original content is likely negligible, not even taking into consideration the fact that they may be available for such use through creative commons or public domain, and how photography is probably the most legally confusing form of art because copyrighted and privately owned content is photographed all the time SO WHO REALLY OWNS THE RIGHTS TO IMAGES CAPTURED BY A CAMERA?? but A) it’s not my comic, so I don’t know the particulars of every image used and B) I’m not a lawyer, nor have I spoken to theirs, so I could speculate all I want but it would all be legally and objectively irrelevant!

Nonprofit vs Non-Commercial vs Free

There has also been, and continues to be, confusion on the matter of what counts as “selling” products based on copyrighted property. Not making a profit on an item you have sold, i.e., selling something at the cost of materials, does not have anything to do with being nonprofit, which refers to charitable and educational services, nor is it non-commercial, which refers to the use of something in a way that explicitly does not involve commerce (often in the context of a nonprofit).

The minute money or its equivalent is exchanged, the use becomes commercial. Notice my inclusion of “or its equivalent”; the exchange of a service for a service (say, an art trade) or any other sort of bartering (services for items, items for other items) falls under the definition of commerce.

Free is the only free, but even that comes with legal restrictions. As another tumblr user aptly put it:

…if you don’t have a license that explicitly permits noncommercial usage, it is not even legal to give something away for free if it’s covered by someone else’s copyright. Music piracy is the obvious example. You’re not gonna make money uploading your Beatles albums to The Pirate Bay, but it’s still illegal without explicit permission from the Beatles.

To be fair, in this context, most creators are about as equally concerned with the private bartering of fan-made items and private art commissions as they are with fanart itself, but it all comes down to the point I made at the beginning of my post, which is the exclusive right of the creator to control the distribution of their intellectual property.

If you’re not sure they’re okay with it, ask before you do it. If they say no, don’t do it.

It’s not personal, it’s their right.

Source: softowl