It used to be 19 years with the option to renew for another 19. Meaning if you didn’t care, it went into the public domain after 19 years and if you did care, it went into the public domain after 38 years. That seems really reasonable to me.
They’ve also benefitted enormously themselves from public domain and expired or pre-copyright works like traditional folk tales etc. exploiting them and their timeless appeal for huge profits, then mired and viciously defended those derivative works with copyrights and trademarks, and refused to allow their own works’ copyright to expire. Take take take, never giving back.
I feel like I remember reading about a city that basically encouraged graffiti, and would rotate through local artists every few months or so. Seems like a great way to give the place some character
I’d assume they’re drinking the same kool-aid too. They’ve most likely had a “traditional”, conservative upbringing, so women have their place and that’s just the way it is, as God intended. Abortion is an abomination, society is forcing all these scary new sexual terms on us, pronouns are just for trendy teens who want to feel special, and MeToo exposed how sexually depraved all these liberals are. I don’t think conservative women really identify with any liberal values, they’ve internalized their whole conservative worldview so much that they don’t even see the abortion debate as having anything to do with their rights.
It can’t quite get brutalist buildings to look as good as non-brutalist buildings, but yeah painting them is a great move that really improves the vibe.
Not sure if you’re making a clever joke, or if you don’t know that brutalism is defined by using steel and concrete in large blocks. Might be a mega “woosh” on my part though haha
That said, yes, their tendency towards large unbroken planes of material make them prime candidates for murals, and you see a lot of that in places like Chicago that had a big Brutalist phase.
I feel like most brutalist buildings are designed by a committee. They want the building to look like it provided maximal value for money, so they try to avoid looking good.
Some graffiti is, I think, traditional at this point and a good mural can do wonders to humanize it. I have a feeling that patterns are not actually going to improve it though. The problem is often the form rather than what the material looks like. You could paint it to look like a row of thatched cottages but that would to me be even more depressing.
You are also then committed to repainting it regularly or it’s going to quickly look even worse than when you started.
Vines in my opinion are great dicore maybe that’s because I’m a sucker for abandoned building vibes idk what it is that makes me love looking at abandoned buildings it’s one of the reasons I love portal 2’s abandoned sci Fi look if I wasn’t for the high heights and turrets I would love to explore abandoned apeture
Graffiti is vandalism. It is not traditional, and it’s not art. It’s a crime; there is no exception unless it’s done on private property with permission from the property owner.
Imagine someone buys the Mona Lisa and declares that its not art and da Vinci grafittied their privately owned piece of canvas. Artists around the globe in shambles.
You’re right, but you have to draw the line somewhere. If someone decides to light a building on fire and call it “performance art,” nobody considers it anything but a crime. If someone spray-paints a vulgarity on the side of a school, few would call that “art,” but a mural on the side of a concrete wall is “street art.” The subject matter and the quality of the painting doesn’t make the determination between art and vandalism; it’s just vandalism.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.