· Posted: 18 Feb 2008 09:49 · Edited by: jock123
Moulinsart is ridiculously strict.
Moulinsart is only a strict as it needs to be to protect its rights in the works of Hergé - there isn’t a way to say this that will convince you, is there? Losing your copyright is like being pregnant - it’s not something which can be done by degrees.
Even Disney allows you to do fan art.
That’s interesting - what makes you say that? I can’t find anything which says you can on their web-sites, so a citation would help your case. Other than that, I’m afraid I don’t believe it. They don’t even allow their own artists to do sketches for members of the public (on the studio tours the scratch pads that the demos are done on are marked with a Disney copyright, and the pages are collected and stored or shredded).
By not letting fans use their creative juices to create Tintin art, they're limiting it to a purely materialistic, money-fuelled organisation.
But to be blunt, that is what they are there for - it is their sole reason to exist. What you don’t get across is why they shouldn’t be?
They are an organization to make money out of the life and works of Hergé, and the profits are ploughed back into a charitable foundation, which funds the conservation of Hergé’s art, the written archives, his research library, and in the not-too-distant future, the museum.
The sound protection of the copyright also aids projects such as the Nelvana cartoons, merchandise and especially things like the Spielberg movies. It is unlikely that the amount of money needed to make films or toys would be risked by the studios and others if they thought that Tintin was a project which could lapse into the public domain due to the copyright being allowed to be violated.
I think we all know the difference about doing a bit of art and putting it on the Net and putting art on the Net, passing it off as Herge's and charging for it.
Yes, and that’s neither here nor there: I know the difference between them too, but it doesn’t make either of them right. Either way it queers the pitch for the legally owned and operated Tintin franchise.
It seems to me that your beef boils down to a) not wanting Moulinsart to make money, which to my eyes is to the detriment of all Tintin fans, as it will stymie any worthwhile development of the works through movies, the museum etc.; and b) an unfounded belief that Moulinsart are stopping you from doing something you want to do out of spite, rather than just doing their job.
cigars of the beeper
Moulinsart is more strict copyright wise than other organizations,
No, they aren’t, they are no more or less strict than any other business. Where they may differ is in what rights they choose to offer, and how they want them exploited. It could grant limited rights for people to create fan works, but that is giving permission to do so under set conditions. However, that is not possible to them, as Hergé’s widow (who is the ultimate owner of Hergé’s estate, not Moulinsart/ Studios Hergé) has not given them permission to create new work, so they cannot grant that to others either.
If it's ALL Herge's wishes I understand and respect that, but if it's Rodwell and his doings, I don't like it one iota.
Mme. Rodwell/ Remis wants it that way, so that’s the way it is.