Fox clamping down on DVDCoverArt.com (1 Viewer)

[Steven Wesley]

It appears that one of the studios isn't liking the whole "get your own cover art" concept. Matt posted this over at his site today:

We've been FOX'ed =(
Like many Simpsons and Buffy fan websites before us, dvdcoverart has been told by Fox to remove any items (ie, covers) which infringe on their copyrights, trademarks, or intellectual property. I am attepting to negotiate a mutually benefical arrangement with Fox, but am not overly optimisic about the outcome. In the meantime, we will be complying with their demand and removing the covers at some point in the near future. So get them while they are hot (and still available)

This is truly a bummer, as DVDCoverArt has offered a great service. But given how copyrights are enforced these days... you know the rest of the story.

 

[Tony Whalen]

It appears that one of the studios isn't liking the whole "get your own cover art" concept.

Not sure if it's the cover art issue, or if it's just Fox doing their thing, as they have done with many Buffy sites, Simpsons sites, and way back when, a ton of XFiles sites as well. They seem to be rather... protective...

DVDCoverart is a great resource... so I hope it's just Fox that takes issue with the practice of makin' your own covers...

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

You can kinda see their point: people are infringing on their copyrighted products. It's a question of integrity.


Gordy

 

[Ronald Epstein]

We agree with Gordon.

As a result of this, we too have removed our
Cover Art area.

 

[Marvin Richardson]

You can kinda see their point: people are infringing on their copyrighted products. It's a question of integrity.

Yep. It's their intellectual property and they can be jack asses if they want. I'm sure they'll say people are using the scans to build their own bootlegs.
I never understand companies going after fansites like this. I don't understand but then again I don't have to; its their property and they can do what they want with it.
If they'd just use the original poster art for DVD releases I imagine their be a lot less need for fan made covers.

 

[Eric Peterson]

Who do they think is being hurt by this? Do they think that people are using this coverart for bootlegs? Most people are using this resource to replace coverart that they don't like or in order to help them store a limited edition case. In other words most people are already their customers.

I don't get it. I've never used this website but I've thought about it on several occasions and I find this corporate mentality absolutely maddening.


This sounds similar to the whole Radiohead incident a few months ago, where the record company demanded that all lyrics and tablature be removed from websites. Several of the websites organized a massive boycott and the band also found out about it and offered their support. Within days the studio removed the threats.

 

[Jeff_HR]

I figured that it was only a matter of time. I think they got so big that they were no longer flying under the radar

 

[Ric Easton]

Well, I think its a big bummer! I'm waiting for the other shoes to drop.

All my custom made covers serve a purpose. Whether it's combining various editions for one package, saving shelf space or just offering alternatives that are not as boring as all get out. I would imagine bootleggers would want to copy the original artwork to fool people into thinking they are geting the real deal.

In all honesty, I would say that these covers are only used by folks who share a love of DVDs and also spend alot of money on them.

Making my own covers has been a fun and creative hobby, and I hope it does not mean this is the beginning of the end.

Ric

 

[Jeff_HR]

Making my own covers has been a fun and creative hobby, and I hope it does not mean this is the beginning of the end

I hope it is not the end either Ric. Do you know if the owners here will continue to host your Star Trek covers? If not would you try to get them hosted somewhere else besides Dvdcoverart? I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you.

 

[Will_B]

Fortunately, Fox's official cover art is pretty good already. So this is not much of a loss - particularly since Fox doesn't seem to make many films.

That their films continues to generate lots of enthusiasm from talented artists who wanted to make their own custom covers - despite their official covers being good to begin with - is testament to Fox's tendency to make blockbuster films -- blockbuster types of films/series (Star Wars, Die Hard, X-Files, Buffy, 24) that are intended to create the very fan bases that Fox's lawyers then try to dissolve.

It's kind of funny the way that they create the fanbase and then their lawyers get paid to dissolve the fanbase by trying to limit how fans can express their interest. It is kind of tough to sustain an interest in something if you aren't allowed to express the interest creatively. Fox would let fan interest wither and die in between the films. An interesting tactic, but not an especially enlightened one.

Hopefully some of the studio folks who read this forum will learn what their legal department did and ask them to kindly ignore dvdcoverart.com.

 

[Nick Graham]

Fox has been doing this to fan sites of Buffy, X-Files, Kingf of the Hill, Simpsons, you name it. Why, I don't know. I don't see how it is financially beneficial to them in the least. I could see them equating cover art sites as a means for bootleggers to have professional looking covers for their wares, but shutting down fans sites is ludicrous.

I wish a rep from Fox could explain why exactly they have this practice in place.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Fortunately, Fox's official cover art is pretty good already

My interest in alternate Coverart as it applies to Fox is mainly to acquire covers for the septuple & sextuple Alpha keepcases that I use to store the X-Files discs in. I do not like the fold-out design that Fox uses. I also use alternate Coverart to replace digipak packaging & snapper packaging which I HATE

with a passion. I'll also replace really offensive Studio generated "Noggin" coverart with something more pleasing to my eye.

 

[Will_B]

I wish a rep from Fox could explain why exactly they have this practice in place.

I'm sure there's no thought given to it at all. The line of logic probably goes something like "management is held responsible by the board, part of acting responsibly is protecting the assets of the company, therefore hire a pack of lawyers to do whatever the heck lawyers do, which will demonstrate that we act responsibly."

The concept that fans might be good things to have never enters into the equation, I'm certain. The lawyers don't need to have any understanding of fans, or care whether the studio has dedicated fans - that's not their concern, their concern is copyright law. The lawyers don't realize they're harming the company. All they know is they've been asked to impress their bosses.

 

[JohnAP]

Not as big a loss as when the made that Buffy script site shut down, even though they only posted scripts that had not been made commercially available for fans. Fox has every right to protect their copyrights, but they should acknowledge that things like this are only done in celebration of these Fox shows. Their lawyers have become notorious for stuff like this though, so it's not a surprise.

 

[Rob T]

As long as Paramount, Universal, Buena Vista and any other distributors that use bilingual packaging up here don't start doing this, I don't mind all that much.

 

[Randy A Salas]

We agree with Gordon.

As a result of this, we too have removed our
Cover Art area.

Along the same lines, I've always been surprised when various web sites post official cover art here and elsewhere (usually for upcoming releases) and then place the logo of their web site on the art as a kind of watermark. And nothing is said about it.

Their reason for doing so is clear: so that if others who don't have official access to the art end up reposting it, the original web site that does have access gets the credit.

The problem is that the art doesn't belong to the web site to begin with. In fact, the site typically has to acknowledge at the studio's press/retail site that it won't alter the art and that it doesn't have any rights to it once downloaded.

I don't see how that's any different than the illicit art at sites such as DVDCoverArt.com.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Well as much as I enjoy fan enthusiasm and the resource the DVDCoverArt.com represents, considering that you have to buy credits to download the art it makes legal sense to close it down.

This is completely different from a Buffy or Simpsons fan site. Fox probably sees this as a third-party profiting from their intellectual property and trademarks (and yes I know, understand, and appreciate that DVDCoverArt.com needs to charge to cover the upfront costs of running the site, but it still doesn't change the situation)

 

[Richard Travale]

I'm thinking that it had more to do with the fact that Matt was selling credits to download the art.
Before the flames start, I totally appreciate that the bandwidth for that type of site isn't cheap and some sort of income was needed. I'm just making an observation.
*EDIT* weird, I didn't even see Adam's post.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

I just wish the studios would get together and sell their rental slicks to the general public. Every single major studio title made has a rental slick made for it. It would be so easy to just use DVDCoverArt.com as distro point

 

[Travis D]

Fox... [CRUDE AND INAPPROPRIATE ICON REMOVED BY ADMIN]

I will continue to buy your products like always, but as long as YOU continue to make shitty art for stuff like Daredevil, I will print off fan made art that you will not see a dime for.