Stolen AMVS

[Shui]

I think it's wrong to call an AMV made of AMVs and AMV should more like AMVMV if they change the song, if not then AMVV
no srsly if you don't have the patience to do your own clipping and cuts I just don't see it as respectable AMV on its own

[Corran]

if you don't have the patience to do your own clipping and cuts I just don't see it as respectable AMV on its own

You could say this about AMVs in general. Most of them are shit because people don't put in the effort, but every once in a while someone creates something interesting.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc.

When you sit down and view something, you have an understanding that nobody is claiming to have, themselves, produced the pieces. That's why you have attribution. You do, however, have the expectation they have produced the editing. That's why your name is on it, you added the effort. You did the work. A novelist doesn't need to own a paper mill to write a novel.

[irriadin]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc.

When you sit down and view something, you have an understanding that nobody is claiming to have, themselves, produced the pieces. That's why you have attribution. You do, however, have the expectation they have produced the editing. That's why your name is on it, you added the effort. You did the work. A novelist doesn't need to own a paper mill to write a novel.

I concur.

[Ileia]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc.

When you sit down and view something, you have an understanding that nobody is claiming to have, themselves, produced the pieces. That's why you have attribution. You do, however, have the expectation they have produced the editing. That's why your name is on it, you added the effort. You did the work. A novelist doesn't need to own a paper mill to write a novel.

I can see your point to a certain degree, but it's more comparable to an artist making a collage, a musician making a remix, etc. With few exceptions, we make derivative works. I'm not saying that we don't deserve credit for what we've done or that it's okay for someone to claim that they did the work when another person did, just that I cannot personally justify asking anything more than just to be credited for editing it.

[Amerutox]

Thanks for replying Bored1, I did word poorly some things in my first post but it doesn't matter much now.

I must admit I was a bit afraid of getting ripped apart (and rightfully so) but you all seem very cool and even offered me some advice. I just had to apology at least, I'm sorry to bother you all (especially Bored1), I guess I was simply thinking differently at the time.

I'm gonna take PieandBeer advice, I made mistake and I will try to move on, I also added credits (a bit late I know) hopefully I did it right.

Alright, that's it from me, don't wanna bother you guys with my posts anymore, take care everyone.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc.

When you sit down and view something, you have an understanding that nobody is claiming to have, themselves, produced the pieces. That's why you have attribution. You do, however, have the expectation they have produced the editing. That's why your name is on it, you added the effort. You did the work. A novelist doesn't need to own a paper mill to write a novel.

I can see your point to a certain degree, but it's more comparable to an artist making a collage, a musician making a remix, etc. With few exceptions, we make derivative works. I'm not saying that we don't deserve credit for what we've done or that it's okay for someone to claim that they did the work when another person did, just that I cannot personally justify asking anything more than just to be credited for editing it.

Analogies can be as specific as you need them to be, yea. I like to think of it as all just pieces you didn't create from thin air, just different levels of complexity in your ingredient list.

I'm a software engineer, so I tend to think in layers already. I didn't all of a sudden not write code that's rigtly "mine" if it's a front end accessing an API to display data even if it's 7 or 8 layers removed from the instructions that are running on the CPU, none of which I wrote.

I don't have issue with how anyone wants to deal with their own attribution in such instances as this. I do take issue with the doublethink that it's somehow uniquely hypocritical in the instance of what we do, ignoring the fact that it's either equally hypocritical in ALL endeavors, artistic or otherwise, or not hypocritical at all.

Either way, my comments weren't directed at your statement, but more at what Corran said. I didn't quote because I didn't want it to be seen as a direct calling out.

[slimed]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc

as said above, these analogies aren't quite it. AMVs would be more akin to taking an already sculpted sculpture, and altering it. animation is the medium, but the anime itself is the product. and what we would be complaining about in this thread are the people who take sculptures and alter them from someone who had previously taken a sculpture and altered it in the same fashion. in addition, none of those analogies are illegal and the artists have the rights to the mediums or the product of the mediums.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Well, to be fair, most editors of live action (movies, TV, etc.) didn't shoot the footage themselves either. Just like a sculptor doesn't create the stone, the painter doesn't create the paint and canvas, the musician doesn't fabricate the instruments and production studio, etc. etc

as said above, these analogies aren't quite it. AMVs would be more akin to taking an already sculpted sculpture, and altering it. animation is the medium, but the anime itself is the product. and what we would be complaining about in this thread are the people who take sculptures and alter them from someone who had previously taken a sculpture and altered it in the same fashion. in addition, none of those analogies are illegal and the artists have the rights to the mediums or the product of the mediums.

That level of abstraction is purely in your mind. The individual elements are the finished products of others, used for a new purpose.

As to the last statement, I don't recall anyone bringing legality into it - as far as I can tell, this is purely a conversation about ethics. It's still a poor strawman, though. Collage and musical remix are still legally protected forms of art and their creators still have rights to them. There is literally no difference.

[irriadin]

as said above, these analogies aren't quite it. AMVs would be more akin to taking an already sculpted sculpture, and altering it. animation is the medium, but the anime itself is the product. and what we would be complaining about in this thread are the people who take sculptures and alter them from someone who had previously taken a sculpture and altered it in the same fashion. in addition, none of those analogies are illegal and the artists have the rights to the mediums or the product of the mediums.

I disagree. Anime is intended for long experiences. AMVs are much, much shorter and serve an entirely different purpose. You wouldn't sit down at your computer and think "I want to watch anime. But instead, I'll watch AMVs." (Or perhaps you would, but that's beside the point, because...) AMVs are a different medium. You get something different out of watching an AMV than watching the anime.