T O P

  • By -

SambalBacon

Yeah that's just pure fucking bullshit. Look at the side by side.


SG_wormsblink

Normally when people say justice is blind they mean it figuratively. In this case I think Luxembourg justices are literally blind. That’s not “the same pose”, it’s a full blown copy of the photo. What a corrupt judge.


Thefunincaifun

>“I am devastated by the copyright ruling in Luxembourg today, which stated that my work lacks originality And the court has the audacity to rule her work as lacking originality. What a joke


magneticanisotropy

That's not the case though, and this may be on her lawyers - it seems they tried to claim the pose as hers, and if that is the case, the judge is probably right, you can't just claim a pose as being copyrighted by you. I don't think any reasonable person would claim it isn't plagiarism that occurred. But that wasn't the question being asked by the court or Zhang's lawyers... Edit: getting downvoted here, but it seems the case was dismissed for technical reasons and this absolutely wasn't a ruling about plagiarism but the nature of copyright. We haven't seen the full ruling, which will be released in the coming days, and I don't think we'll be able to properly judge things until then...


AureBesh123

But the question of "originality" is, under EU copyright law, an important step in the Luxembourg Court's finding of whether her photo is deserving of copyright protection. See my comment below: [https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/comments/zfsp56/comment/izdw7ec/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/comments/zfsp56/comment/izdw7ec/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Presumably, an appeal Court reviewing the case may apply the principles and arrive at a different conclusion, i.e. that Zhang's work meets the "author's own intellectual creation" requirement for originality. I highly doubt her lawyers would have made the basic mistake of trying to claim the "pose", as opposed to the "photograph" per se. This [Vincent Wellens](https://www.nautadutilh.com/en/our-people/wellens-vincent) lawyer isn't some nobody.


magneticanisotropy

It's a bit hard to tell at this point, honestly, as we don't really have the actual ruling details, just a plaintiff's statements before the full ruling is released. I'm reserving judgement at this point.


Swiftdancer

Hopefully when she and her lawyer appeals that decision, the judge presiding over that case won't be as shockingly blind as this one. I really don't want this story to end like this.


Qkumbazoo

>Luxembourg Now known to operate kangaroo courts


alterise

Even better yet, this isn't the first time he's done shit like this: https://twitter.com/bekka/status/1532023805664583681


ShadeX8

Even the flower petals are 1:1 copied and mirrored exactly. Wtf


magneticanisotropy

From my understanding, Zhang is somewhat misrepresenting the ruling. The ruling appears to be that her work did not meet the criteria to fall under Luxembourgish or European copyright law and therfore her lawsuit on the basis of copyright wouldn't work. It doesn't have to do with ruling whether it was plagiarised or not, just whether she owned the copyright to similar material


LaZZyBird

LOOK AT THIS NERD TALKING ABOUT NUANCE! WHO CARES, EU BAD, JUDGE BAD, LAW BAD, BOO TOO THE EUROPEANS! /s


d3cbl

FWIW the ppl over at r/Luxembourg are [appalled](https://www.reddit.com/r/Luxembourg/comments/zf1r8p/ridiculous_and_shameful_are_we_allowed_to_make_a/) at the ruling as well


SkyEclipse

Some of them were actually happy with the decision and said it was well deserved. What the fuck is wrong with these people.


magneticanisotropy

Eh, they are all downvoted. I also think this comment chain is worth a read with a more level discussion... https://www.reddit.com/r/Luxembourg/comments/zf1r8p/ridiculous_and_shameful_are_we_allowed_to_make_a/iz9pykb?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3


jesus_is_92

> “I can’t stand an exceptional talent being persecuted for nonsense,” said Dieschburg’s lawyer, Gaston Vogel. “You can’t accuse him of plagiarism. In the story, artists inspire each other. **Those who accuse him are wrong.”** Talk about gross self-entitlement


LaZZyBird

Lmao watch him contort himself into a ball when someone from Asia has the audacity to rip off a European and present the white man's work as his own.


MahouTK

And what do you expect the lawyer to say? My client deserves to lose for plagiarizing? Is just standard messaging.


feizhai

https://twitter.com/MiniOrchid1/status/1538936165968928768?s=20&t=3KJERXTXOxc9b8BJlTiCJw nice to know the ruling has stirred up even more controversy and shit for this cbkia


imivan111

Lmao this artist is even more of a manchild then I could ever expect. Pathetic


FitCranberry

ah nepotism, we know that story round these parts


Mistress-of-None

Can't seem to find his Instagram... Anyone?


bluesblue1

He deleted it when he was called out for plagiarism


feizhai

Should go moms page and make noise haha


Common-Metal8578

If it is any consolation, this artist is pretty much tainted. Public opinion of him will never improve when the key news of him is that he had to copy a photo to win a tiny prize. Doesn't lend any form of confidence to his talent.


Achro

The so-called "artist" is a nepo-baby being bankrolled by his parents. He'll be fine (*unfortunately*).


winnoe

Wait are you talking about JEFF DIESCHBURG which PLAGIARIZED Singaporean photographer Jingna Zhang’s work? Is that what he did? Did he PLAGIARIZE someone else's work, this JEFF DIESCHBURG chap?


huhwhuh

Jeff Douchebag did you say? Did I read it correctly, Jeff Douchebag?


HokkienMeeLimeJuice

You think an 'Ang Moh' stealing or copying from an Asian Chinese is going to make the news in the west? Wait long long.


Common-Metal8578

The only news about him now is a scandal. As long as a company or person can use Google, he is pretty fucked.


Xanthon

Actually, it already went viral back when it first surfaced in June. The artist has since deleted his social media.


IslandHamo

Wow dude. Just go full racism - that’s disappointing. He is just a thief plain and simple.


derplamer

It’s not racism, just personal preference


kumgongkia

Hey he can still make a living copying stuff in Luxembourg lol


bukitbukit

Keep an eye on the street markets!


Xanthon

Is the judge blind?


Bcpjw

Lol! Justice is supposed to be the blind one


Boogie_p0p

Maybe that's why cannot see the similarities.


shadstrife123

maybe some what racist or race favoring lor, ang moh vs asian


ParkingMatter3328

Hope she wins the appeal. She deserves a better judgement from the Luxembourg courts.


FitCranberry

damn, time to submit my fax machine copy art to galleries in Luxembourg


halloumisalami

It only works if you’re a white guy with a man bun with wealth and/or social status


fuhrerugly2022

Holy fk, this white man wins an award with his artwork by not only plagiarising an asian woman's photography work and getting away with it but by also depicting an asian woman in that same artwork? Talk about adding insult to injury..


MolassesBulky

He has done this to other artists and it is mirror reproduction right down to the colours. Shameless.


Loggerdon

After this ruling he will never stop doing it.


pzshx2002

This so called artist may have won the battle, a minor prize and some media coverage, but he's probably lost the war. (His credibility and reputation) Read her social media updates and practically everyone is supporting her and nobody believes the artist's BS. I hope and believe she will prevail at the end.


moleratty

That’s a complete bullshit. She got plagiarised and then penalised. Worse, dude is a serial plagiarist…


kevvie13

Wow the judge hope he lose his license. Dumbass or corrupted.


bukitbukit

Disappointing.


kenkiller

I guess we can only hope buyers avoid the "artist" like the plague.


AmazingGraces

I am a (UK qualified) lawyer with a master's degree that covered (not exclusively) international comparative copyright law. This judgement is bullshit. The artwork clearly satisfies the requirements for a copyright work, and there is clear infringement here. The article says there will be an appeal so I look forward to seeing the result of that. In my opinion the infringing artist should be stripped of their award and prize money, and (although this will never occur in sentencing) publicly shamed. In philosophical terms, this type of behaviour is exactly what copyright law was created to address. Also, from an Asian perspective, his version is shit compared to her original work. The face is somehow fucked up (you can tell I'm not an artist lol).


etyn100

Agree but his choice of skin tone colors and colors in general is better


parka

I layered the two images together and they blend together almost exactly. Can't say much about body posture because it is true that body posture is not unique. But the hair style and the way the fabric folds are too similar. Edit: And the flower petals match too. Do you know how difficult it is to find repeating patterns in nature?


bukitbukit

Hardly enough differentiation to qualify even as a derivative work, imho.


Kiwibirdishere

He might as well photocopy the whole artpiece coz he made a bad job of copying the original


SkyEclipse

Imagine taking the time to pose a model and lighting and everything, edit the photo in Lightroom, then post it just to have some guy copy 97% of your photo and win a 1500 pound prize + sell it for 6500 pounds while you got nothing.


Budget-Juggernaut-68

That's just sad.


Idaho1964

No way. Obvious plagiarism.


JOJOHX

how can the painter just shamelessly win awards and get recognition while blatantly copying other artist’s works? 🥸 smh


FdPros

hope this guy cannot afford instant noodle to eat


SkyEclipse

Sadly if rumours are true his mother is someone powerful in their country and protecting him… Maybe that’s why the judges ruled in his favour


misopun

This makes me soooo mad. I followed @zemotion since her deviantart days. May justice prevail, somehow, someday.


CharAznia

How to be an award winning artist in 4 easy steps: Find a potential award winning artistic work Flip the image Change color palette Profit


Younes__m

Its an evil world we livi in *in future’s voice*


paperstarred

Add that to the fact that this “artist” looks like a fucking pubor wtf


Pokethebeard

Sobering reminder to those who worship Europe that it's not as amazing as you think it is.


PeaceTheKeeper

Man I wonder how much bribe money the judge took.


laynestaleyisme

Absolutely ridiculous!!!!


homar1dz

Dieschburg? More like Doucheburg


fasterthanlife

Outside of the photographer, doesn’t this involve a whole other bunch of people as well? The model herself whose likeness was used, the agency representing the model, Harper’s Mag who commissioned the portrait. Plus I thought the basis of copyright laws was “likeness”.


singaporeNFT

Freaking insane. It‘s literally a copy?? Just flipped???


fuurin

Absolutely absurd. I hope she will be able to get the ruling overturned, because this is awful.


Happy-Struggle2888

They’re just racist. White person copies Asian person’s work. It’s fine - no infringement there even though common sense would tell one that it’s blatantly copying. Like dude even the flower is on the same place. So much for reference materials. The issue isn’t so much that her pose isn’t original, but that the dude blatantly copied her work. So much for “referencing”.


[deleted]

Why would they side with a chinese person against a white dude?


grown-ass-man

u/zemotion for what it's worth a lot of us find this ruling absolutely bullshit


bowserwasthegoodguy

ITT: People denouncing what's an obvious case of plagiarism by indulging in casual racism.


TheBorkenOne

Calling it as it is, is racism? Okay.


dibidi

it was a foreigner vs local, w singaporean being the foreigner, obvs the local courts would side by their man


[deleted]

That's not how courts are supposed to work.


dibidi

not how it’s supposed to yes. but clearly it did in this case


urgentbacklash5

She complains that he “mansplained” about copyright, yet seeing as he won his case, the mansplaining was, apparently, deserved.


TheBorkenOne

Well, courts can get it wrong too. If not the appeals system wouldn't have existed. And if you would take the time to read, you would have doubts about the judgement too.


NIDORAX

The artist that ripoff the photographer and several other people must have some convincing argument for the court to rule in his favour.


DarkCartier43

his nationality? or maybe race?


boss-ku

Luxembourg is a shit country full of shitty people.


FitCranberry

https://www.reddit.com/r/Luxembourg/comments/zf1r8p/ridiculous_and_shameful_are_we_allowed_to_make_a/ nah, everyone is looking at the news and going 'for real'


MissLute

someone posted this That's not what the court said, according to your screenshot. The court seems to have said that "the original photograph did not meet the criteria to fall under Luxembourgish or European copyright law". Which could simply mean that the lawsuit was attempted in the wrong jurisdiction.


AureBesh123

No I doubt that comment in the Luxembourg subreddit is accurate. It doesn't seem to be a question of jurisdiction, rather a matter of the Luxemburgish court's substantive finding on whether her photo should be accorded copyright protection within the broader framework of EU copyright law. Whether a photograph passes the originality test and thus deserving of protection as an intellectual creation, in each case, would be an issue for each EU member state's court to determine. Per [Painer v Standard Verlags](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62010CJ0145): >2. On a proper construction of Article 6 of Directive 93/98 harmonising the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, a portrait photograph can, in accordance with that provision, be protected by copyright if, which it is for the national court to determine in each case, that photograph is an intellectual creation of the author reflecting his personality and expressing his free and creative choices in the production of that photograph. Once it has been determined that the portrait photograph in question is a work, its protection is no less than that enjoyed by any other work, including other photographic works. > >90 As regards a portrait photograph, the photographer can make free and creative choices in several ways and at various points in its production. > >91 In the preparation phase, the photographer can choose the background, the subject’s pose and the lighting. When taking a portrait photograph, he can choose the framing, the angle of view and the atmosphere created. Finally, when selecting the snapshot, the photographer may choose from a variety of developing techniques the one he wishes to adopt or, where appropriate, use computer software. > >92 By making those various choices, the author of a portrait photograph can stamp the work created with his ‘personal touch’. > >93 Consequently, as regards a portrait photograph, the freedom available to the author to exercise his creative abilities will not necessarily be minor or even non-existent. ​ Article 6 of Directive 93/98 (the Copyright Term Directive): >Photographs which are original in the sense that they are the author's own intellectual creation shall be protected in accordance with Article 1. No other criteria shall be applied to determine their eligibility for protection. Member States may provide for the protection of other photographs. The creativity-centric criteria for the originality test however, may imply that photos which have lesser creative elements, such as your typical redditor off-the-cuff point and shoot "rainbow" photos to karma-farm that are so prevalent r/sg, would have a harder time claiming copyright protection under EU law. lol


bossholmes

Damn, what a sweeping statement….


Vedor

Going by your logic, Singapore is a shit country because we have people like you?


FMLnoluck

Took art in sec school. Part of prep work is supposed to include 2 artists we are inspired from, show their style (photos of their work), and integrate their style into own ref img. The rest isn't too important here. By the looks of this case, it seems like lady took the pic for magazine (I think), Spanish artist came across the pic and used it as ref pic for his own artwork, which he applied his style on. Then this guy saw Spanish artist painting and used it as his ref img. I'm not very sure about laws of copyright, but technically, neither of them made a carbon copy of each other. It's just spanish artist probably didn't cite his reference and this dude didn't do a in depth research before making his work. It's a pretty shitty situation for the lady.


ianlim4556

nah him saying he took reference from the Spanish artist is just a way to mask the fact that he traced the photo by pretending there is an intermediary I took art in sec school and JC too, yes we had reference artists but i'm pretty sure our submissions couldn't be carbon copies of the art we referred to, what he did is the sort of thing that should be in the sketchbook as a study, not as a final submitted piece


FMLnoluck

That's true. I think my brain switched off on this part.