Donkey Kong Poster Ethical Question

ponner1us
ponner1us Posts: 741
in The Porch
Not sure if it belongs here on the Porch, but really don't know where else to ask this, so here goes(mods,please delete if inappropriate):

Hypothetically, say that out of 20-25 PJ concerts you had attended, there were 2 that just really floored you (Borgata 05 and MSG II 2010), and say you just really wanted both posters but they were hard to find and way overpriced, found one and overpaid a little, can't find the other one and if you could, you couldn't afford it anyway. Hypothetically speaking, if you knew that the elusive poster could be copied, reproduced to look very good, but you made sure it was a little bit different so if you knew what the authentic one looked like you would know the difference, and had no plans on ever selling it, you just wanted to hang it on the wall, and the price was affordable, would it be ethical to have a copy made? I'm just interested in hearing opinions on this.

Flame away!!!
Journey Begins: 1992-08-15, Montage Mountain Performing Arts Center,
Scranton, Pennsylvania

Journey Ends:
«13

Comments

  • buck502000
    buck502000 Birthplace of GIBSON guitar Posts: 8,951
    but you would know in your heart of hearts it was not real and would know that every time you looked at it and feel that void.......that emptiness, go right ahead.
  • on2legs
    on2legs Posts: 16,108
    Slippery slope to start reproducing items like this... too much potential for people to abuse it and mislead people. So I would vote no.
    1996: Randall's Island 2  1998: East Rutherford | MSG 1 & 2  2000: Cincinnati | Columbus | Jones Beach 1, 2, & 3 | Boston 1 | Camden 1 & 2 2003: Philadelphia | Uniondale | MSG 1 & 2 | Holmdel  2005: Atlantic City 1  2006: Camden 1 | East Rutherford 1 & 2 2008: Camden 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 (#25) | Newark (EV)  2009: Philadelphia 1, 2 & 4  2010: Newark | MSG 1 & 2  2011: Toronto 1  2013: Wrigley Field | Brooklyn 2 | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore  2015: Central Park  2016: Philadelphia 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Fenway Park 2 | MSG (TOTD)  2017: Brooklyn (RnR HOF)  2020: MSG | Asbury Park  2021: Asbury Park  2022: MSG | Camden | Nashville  2024: MSG 1 & 2 (#50) | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore  2025: Raleigh 2


  • SVRDhand13
    SVRDhand13 Posts: 27,024
    I'd say it's fine. It's just a copy. Selling it or deceiving someone would obviously be wrong.
    severed hand thirteen
    2006: Gorge 7/23 2008: Hartford 6/27 Beacon 7/1 2009: Spectrum 10/30-31
    2010: Newark 5/18 MSG 5/20-21 2011: PJ20 9/3-4 2012: Made In America 9/2
    2013: Brooklyn 10/18-19 Philly 10/21-22 Hartford 10/25 2014: ACL10/12
    2015: NYC 9/23 2016: Tampa 4/11 Philly 4/28-29 MSG 5/1-2 Fenway 8/5+8/7
    2017: RRHoF 4/7   2018: Fenway 9/2+9/4   2021: Sea Hear Now 9/18 
    2022: MSG 9/11  2024: MSG 9/3-4 Philly 9/7+9/9 Fenway 9/15+9/17
    2025: Pittsburgh 5/16+5/18
  • arq
    arq Posts: 8,101
    edited October 2015
    If you really love Scarlet Johansen, but you are going out with a girl who looks just like her but it was a mole on her neck, would you dump her because it not the real deal, Knowing you would never score the real Scarlet? Those are the big questions in life.
    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it"
    Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?
  • october22
    october22 Posts: 2,533
    Who gives a shit?! Of course it's ethical! There's a fucking replica of Michaelangelo's David standing a few yards away from the original! Do what makes you happy, dude.
  • HesCalledDyer
    HesCalledDyer Maryland Posts: 16,501
    SVRDhand13 said:

    I'd say it's fine. It's just a copy. Selling it or deceiving someone would obviously be wrong.

    Agreed. If it's a replica and you plan on keeping it yourself with no intention of selling it I see no problem. Hell, even if you do decide to sell it, as long as you indicate it's a replica and price it accordingly, there's no issue.
    Star Lake 00 / Pittsburgh 03 / State College 03 / Bristow 03 / Cleveland 06 / Camden II 06 / DC 08 / Pittsburgh 13 / Baltimore 13 / Charlottesville 13 / Cincinnati 14 / St. Paul 14 / Hampton 16 / Wrigley I 16 / Wrigley II 16 / Baltimore 20 / Camden 22 / Baltimore 24 / Raleigh I 25 / Raleigh II 25 / Pittsburgh I 25
  • Suziemay
    Suziemay Posts: 11,168
    Why do you want the poster in the first place? If it's as a memento for the awesome show you went to, I don't think you'd be happy with a replica, no matter how good it is. I don't think you're violating any ethics by reproducing it if you don't make money off it, but I just don't think you'd feel good about it yourself. If it's for the artwork which doesn't sound like it is, then maybe that's an OK solution.

    I used to "need" every poster to every PJ show I've ever been to, until one of my best shows ever to date (Oakland 2013) had one of the worst posters I've ever seen and you couldn't pay me to put it in my portfolio, and thus the cycle was broken. Now for me the most important physical mementos of a show are my ticket stub, pictures and the bootleg

    :)
  • maverick
    maverick Posts: 1,262
    No no no. And I can't believe people think this is ok...
    1. You already know the proper moral answer - no. If you were confident it wouldn't be wrong, you wouldn't have asked the question. Deep down you already know
    2. And you know the proper ethical answer - no - which is why companies like Staples will or should refuse to make the copy.
    3. Heck I had trouble getting my daughters senior photo on her graduation cake since we didn't take the photo; we had paid a photographer a ton of money, by the way. The image we wanted reproduced was of a family member, not a limited piece of art that is bought and sold for market value, and the canvas was a cake that would be eaten and I had to argue with the store about it.
    Further, there are fakes that exist for a few posters from the past 20 years and it completely destroys the market for collectors of those posters. Showbox 2004, Phoenix 98 are just a couple that come to mind. Once people go this route trust is destroyed for trades and sales of these posters.
    If people go this route, entire collections will be deemed worthless, as people won't know what's real from a copy. This is a slippery slope and I hope people don't do this.
    Finally, and most importantly... How do you think the artists feel about this? Think they would be fine with it? I don't.
  • ldent42
    ldent42 NYC Posts: 7,859
    If you want to get a photocopy of the poster made to hang on your own wall, there's nothing wrong with that. I mean it's your wall. It might not be "fair use" but you're not profiting off the artwork so I see no issue. If it doesn't sit well with you, buy another poster/artwork by the same artist and donate it to Wishlist or OYR or something of that nature.

    If you were ever going to try to sell or trade the copy as an authentic Kong, that's where you get into unethical territory.
    NYC 06/24/08-Auckland 11/27/09-Chch 11/29/09-Newark 05/18/10-Atlanta 09/22/12-Chicago 07/19/13-Brooklyn 10/18/13 & 10/19/13-Hartford 10/25/13-Baltimore 10/27/13-Auckland 1/17/14-GC 1/19/14-Melbourne 1/24/14-Sydney 1/26/14-Amsterdam 6/16/14 & 6/17/14-Milan 6/20/14-Berlin 6/26/14-Leeds 7/8/14-Milton Keynes 7/11/14-St. Louis 10/3/14-NYC 9/26/15
    LIVEFOOTSTEPS.ORG/USER/?USR=435
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    maverick said:

    No no no. And I can't believe people think this is ok...
    1. You already know the proper moral answer - no. If you were confident it wouldn't be wrong, you wouldn't have asked the question. Deep down you already know
    2. And you know the proper ethical answer - no - which is why companies like Staples will or should refuse to make the copy.
    3. Heck I had trouble getting my daughters senior photo on her graduation cake since we didn't take the photo; we had paid a photographer a ton of money, by the way. The image we wanted reproduced was of a family member, not a limited piece of art that is bought and sold for market value, and the canvas was a cake that would be eaten and I had to argue with the store about it.
    Further, there are fakes that exist for a few posters from the past 20 years and it completely destroys the market for collectors of those posters. Showbox 2004, Phoenix 98 are just a couple that come to mind. Once people go this route trust is destroyed for trades and sales of these posters.
    If people go this route, entire collections will be deemed worthless, as people won't know what's real from a copy. This is a slippery slope and I hope people don't do this.
    Finally, and most importantly... How do you think the artists feel about this? Think they would be fine with it? I don't.

    Let's not get too crazy. He's not talking about charging people to view his reproduction. He's not talking about making quantities of the poster. He's not talking about re-selling. This is something for personal use and enjoyment.

    Do any of you who feel this is unethical use a DVR? Ever ripped a CD to MP3s to put on your iPod?

    I think this is a non-issue as long as it is strictly for personal use.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Bladamus Maximus
    Bladamus Maximus Paris TN Posts: 277
    Definitely don't think it's unethical. Me personally, I would make the reprint/copy a little smaller. That way, it's obvious it's a "fake", but you still have a decent representation of the original.
    05-06-95 (EV with Mike Watt, Foo Fighters) Chicago
    07-09-95 Milwaukee
    10-07-96 Ft. Lauderdale
    06-29-98 Chicago
    09-22-98 West Palm Beach
    07-19-13 Wrigley Field
    10-14-14 Memphis
    04-26-16 Lexington
    08-20-16 (Wrigley I)
    08-22-16 (Wrigley II)
    08-18-18 (Wrigley I)
    08-20-18 (Wrigley II)
  • ponner1us
    ponner1us Posts: 741
    What if it is not for resale, as a memento of a show that was great, and is an obvious fake to anyone who knows anything about posters? Such as a black background instead of white?
    Journey Begins: 1992-08-15, Montage Mountain Performing Arts Center,
    Scranton, Pennsylvania

    Journey Ends:
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,304
    It may be a little more unethical if the artist was still selling the print, but that is not the case. The artist is not being harmed in this case (at least directly).
  • rival.
    rival. Chicago Posts: 7,775
    hilarious. we are talking about ethics surrounding a rock band's concert poster.

    do what you want.

    unethical would be selling one on ebay for a cool $529, advertising it as mint when it was far from it. which is the exact thing that happened to a member just the other day.
  • rival.
    rival. Chicago Posts: 7,775
    maverick said:

    No no no. And I can't believe people think this is ok...

    :lol:

    people need to get a grip around here, eh?

  • 2-feign-reluctance
    2-feign-reluctance TigerTown, USA Posts: 23,462
    I say as long as you don't start mass producing and selling, you won't be committing copyright infringement and end up with $25k in fees and jail as your home. Avoid that, and you're doing no different than people on here who make their own bootleg "art" using official PJ photos/art.
    www.cluthelee.com
  • Sidnum
    Sidnum Posts: 674
    rival. said:

    maverick said:

    No no no. And I can't believe people think this is ok...

    :lol:

    people need to get a grip around here, eh?

    For real.

    Serioulsy. If you get a copy made for YOURSELF, that you hang in YOUR house, there is absolutely no harm in that. I would totally do that.

    Again, if you're copying and selling(which we all know your aren't) then that's a different story.
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 13,101
    Sidnum said:

    rival. said:

    maverick said:

    No no no. And I can't believe people think this is ok...

    :lol:

    people need to get a grip around here, eh?

    For real.

    Serioulsy. If you get a copy made for YOURSELF, that you hang in YOUR house, there is absolutely no harm in that. I would totally do that.

    Again, if you're copying and selling(which we all know your aren't) then that's a different story.
    no reputable printer is going to copy a copywrighted work like that. if he can do it himself or knows someone personally maybe they do it for him, but taking it somewhere it's probably not going to get done.
  • ponner1us
    ponner1us Posts: 741


    no reputable printer is going to copy a copywrighted work like that. if he can do it himself or knows someone personally maybe they do it for him, but taking it somewhere it's probably not going to get done.

    I'm no patent attorney, but I wouldn't be so sure about that. My last question and then I'll stop, but there are a lot of interesting opinions on this.

    What if it was not a "copy" but a print of a jpeg that is in the "public domain?"


    Journey Begins: 1992-08-15, Montage Mountain Performing Arts Center,
    Scranton, Pennsylvania

    Journey Ends:
  • pdalowsky
    pdalowsky Doncaster,UK Posts: 15,280
    Can't help but agree with Maverick above....

    The OP clearly has no intention to sell or make money so that's cool but once this starts there's always some asshole who sees the chance to profit ...

    The Hartford 98 was copied/reproduced and Raleigh 98. People are now ultra careful around those prints.

    For those mocking the 'it's only a rock poster'... Yes it is but it's often something that costs a grand or more. A serious investment so you can deride it all you like but if the fake is made really good ( again this isn't about the OP who presents a different position altogether ) then you are potentially damaging valuable items out there through uncertainty and mistrust in that market

    If the reproduction is purposefully made different, then it's a different matter entirely. An attempt to make a product that can double as an original isn't cool to me
This discussion has been closed.

Categories