Inappropriate Sample Pack Cover?

[burkek]

Hey guys I am the creator of this sample pack cover, and i just want to start by apologizing to anyone who is offended by this cover, it has been changed. Let me be honest by saying that it was completely unintentional i had no idea thats what it was, i have no memory of this happening as i was only 3 years old then. It was truly a simple idea in my head, not a piece of art, the pack is all about deep rumbling basslines and i thought, what "natural" sound has the most bass? The first thing that came to mind was an "explosion" then i googled "space explosions" and that picture was the coolest looking one to me that i found. Anyway guys sorry again to anyone who was offended by the image it was a complete mistake and i will for sure be more careful in the future!

I'm wondering why no one thus far has mentioned copyright - as in, you can't just Google a photo and then use it for commercial purposes. Was the original Challenger photo even licensed for use on the sample pack? Was the replacement licensed or did you just Google something there too?

KEv

[VitaminD]

What's next?

Using a 9/11 image for a sample pack with sexy vocal licks?

If the Challenger explosion image were used for a punk CD cover, illustrating the fallibility of technology, with a CD and the respective songs, I'd understand it -- but for sub bass samples??

Yes, I agree to some extent. While I personally wouldn't have a pic like that for my sample pack. But I think it was probably an innocuous reason that the producer used it. They may not have known or really thought about it.

So if you think it's not appropriate that's cool, but I think as an artist everything is fair game as long as it's 'legal'.

I'd be more worried about the censorship billy club that would follow. If you open up that floodgate.

There wouldn't be a need for so many laws and rules if people, at their own decision, would be more thoughtful/considerate and empathetic of other people...

Well yeah... But that's in an ideal world. I wish I could end world hunger but I can't.

Exactly. Hence we need rules and laws.. its all cool and fair game until the grenade lands in your lap..

Where does the 'fair game' line rest? I mean if there is no line then what does that speak of humanity? This isn't a matter of growing a thicker skin.. because the issue isn't the offended but, instead, is of the offender. If the art you are creating is offensive on purpose then you are taking a hostile attitude towards others then telling them to grow a thicker skin.. just because you want to offend someone and have them thank you for the negative experience you're providing? how self centered THAT would be.

We should be more mindful of others.. instead of looking at people as fair game objects we should be looking at each other more as someone's loved one.. on a more general scale put yourself in some others 'shoes.'

While, perhaps, the 'ideal' world is unobtainable and we can't please everyone nor should we try.. I still think we can surely get closer to 'better' by not purposefully stepping on each others toes.

In this case the designer was ignorant of the origin -- that is different.

[Tricky-Loops]

Hey guys I am the creator of this sample pack cover, and i just want to start by apologizing to anyone who is offended by this cover, it has been changed. Let me be honest by saying that it was completely unintentional i had no idea thats what it was, i have no memory of this happening as i was only 3 years old then. It was truly a simple idea in my head, not a piece of art, the pack is all about deep rumbling basslines and i thought, what "natural" sound has the most bass? The first thing that came to mind was an "explosion" then i googled "space explosions" and that picture was the coolest looking one to me that i found. Anyway guys sorry again to anyone who was offended by the image it was a complete mistake and i will for sure be more careful in the future!

I'm wondering why no one thus far has mentioned copyright - as in, you can't just Google a photo and then use it for commercial purposes. Was the original Challenger photo even licensed for use on the sample pack? Was the replacement licensed or did you just Google something there too?

KEv

You're right but that certain image is fortunately public domain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chall ... losion.jpg

This file is in the public domain because it was solely created by NASA. NASA copyright policy states that "NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted". (See Template:PD-USGov, NASA copyright policy page or JPL Image Use Policy.)

[Robmobius]

We should be more mindful of others.. instead of looking at people as fair game objects we should be looking at each other more as someone's loved one.. on a more general scale put yourself in some others 'shoes.'

While, perhaps, the 'ideal' world is unobtainable and we can't please everyone nor should we try.. I still think we can surely get closer to 'better' by not purposefully stepping on each others toes.

In this case the designer was ignorant of the origin -- that is different.

Freedom of speech is more important than pleasing people (for me).

[Tricky-Loops]

...we need rules and laws.. its all cool and fair game until the grenade lands in your lap..

Where does the 'fair game' line rest? I mean if there is no line then what does that speak of humanity? This isn't a matter of growing a thicker skin.. because the issue isn't the offended but, instead, is of the offender. If the art you are creating is offensive on purpose then you are taking a hostile attitude towards others then telling them to grow a thicker skin.. just because you want to offend someone and have them thank you for the negative experience you're providing? how self centered THAT would be.

We should be more mindful of others.. instead of looking at people as fair game objects we should be looking at each other more as someone's loved one.. on a more general scale put yourself in some others 'shoes.'

While, perhaps, the 'ideal' world is unobtainable and we can't please everyone nor should we try.. I still think we can surely get closer to 'better' by not purposefully stepping on each others toes.

In this case the designer was ignorant of the origin -- that is different.

+ 1,000,000

The question is: Do we have to say and show everything just for the sake of "freedom of expression", just because it's allowed, even if it offends many people?

For example, I could wear a t-shirt with a swastika (as art) in Germany and no one could arrest me as long as I'm not a known Nazi. But why should I? Just to be politically incorrect, just to provoke? Aren't there better ways to provoke?

There's a difference between provoking in art (and music) as a critique and provoking just as childish act of defiance...

[nineofkings]

I'm sorry about being so delicate and self-centered that I think it's best not to use images of a space shuttle exploding and incinerating everyone on board on international TV out of context. I think the dev did exactly the right thing by publicly informing us that he changed the cover. That should be the end of the story. I'm not entirely sure why some people would prefer that the dev had given us the finger instead.

It's not censorship. You're allowed to talk about these things all you want. It's knowing what it is you're talking about that's the issue. If a bunch of leaves blowing in the wind somehow arrange themselves to spell out "Death by napalm," then it's not censorship to sweep the leaves up because they don't actually mean anything by that. It's just a coincidence. There's no statement being made.

I'm also proud to announce my new product, "9/11 Drumz," to really hit the dance floor hard and tear the roof off that sucka. Get ready for beats so hot they can melt steel beams. Telling me this is a bad idea is taking away my freedom.

[Tricky-Loops]

I didn't even feel offended in any way, my opinion was just that the image is indeed INAPPROPRIATE for a sub bass sample pack...

The interesting thing in this thread is that people who don't care about others who feel offended are trying to make themselves look better by calling the offended people "self-centered". If they really were that self-centered, they wouldn't care about the Challenger explosion victims at all...

[Robmobius]

I didn't even feel offended in any way, my opinion was just that the image is indeed INAPPROPRIATE for a sub bass sample pack...

The interesting thing in this thread is that people who don't care about others who feel offended are trying to make themselves look better by calling the offended people "self-centered". If they really were that self-centered, they wouldn't care about the Challenger explosion victims at all...

Or it's about people who huddle together and cry foul because they don't like something. Then imply that they have superior morals to people who support freedom of speech and artistic freedom.

[nineofkings]

Then imply that they have superior morals to people who support freedom of speech and artistic freedom.

Here's the thing: the images of the explosion as used here were not intentional references to the Challenger. There was no artistic concept in using the Challenger explosion for this. It was a coincidence.

[Tricky-Loops]

Or it's about people who huddle together and cry foul because they don't like something. Then imply that they have superior morals to people who support freedom of speech and artistic freedom.

Or it's about people who huddle together for the sake of freedom of expression and cry foul because they don't like something. Then imply that they have superior morals to people who don't support offending people when it's not really necessary...

It's a double-sided sword...

(If you really have to offend people, then at least do it in a funny, artistic way like Rammstein!)

[Robmobius]

Or it's about people who huddle together and cry foul because they don't like something. Then imply that they have superior morals to people who support freedom of speech and artistic freedom.

Or it's about people who huddle together for the sake of freedom of expression and cry foul because they don't like something. Then imply that they have superior morals to people who don't support offending people when it's not really necessary...

It's a double-sided sword...

Yes it is indeed...

It's really up to the individual to make the call. But I certainly wouldn't change something because someone else didn't like it (or thought it was offensive). Someone else's reality is not mine and vice versa.

As long as it's legal then that's fair game imo. BTW I'm not going to get into the whole legal aspect. I'll leave that to your own judgment.

[Tricky-Loops]

It's really up to the individual to make the call. But I certainly wouldn't change something because someone else didn't like it (or thought it was offensive). Someone else's reality is not mine and vice versa.

Imagine you want to use an image of a multiple car crash as cover for your sample pack "Highway Guitars", and nobody likes it - your wife doesn't like it, your kids don't like it, your relatives don't like it, your band mates don't like it, your friends don't like it - you wouldn't change it at all? And you would tell them all they were "self-centered" just because they don't like it?

[highkoo]

It is a difference of opinion so fundamental that I can hardly articulate it atm...

Anyway,
My self-centered bit was just in reference to the thought that your feelings should affect someone else, not just having the feelings themselves.

[VitaminD]

We should be more mindful of others.. instead of looking at people as fair game objects we should be looking at each other more as someone's loved one.. on a more general scale put yourself in some others 'shoes.'

While, perhaps, the 'ideal' world is unobtainable and we can't please everyone nor should we try.. I still think we can surely get closer to 'better' by not purposefully stepping on each others toes.

In this case the designer was ignorant of the origin -- that is different.

Freedom of speech is more important than pleasing people (for me).

Except freedom of speech only protects one from governmental hindrance in sharing said speech on public ground -- it however does not protect oneself from repercussions of sharing one's speech otherwise.

That is to say, Freedom of Speech doesn't preclude one from their responsibility in their actions (what they say); I can go stand on the square and shout hateful words.. it doesn't mean I'm not likely to get fired from my job or I should expect other citizens to take these (hypothetical) words lightly (slander or threatening speech as example). It just means the government is bound to lawfully allow me to state my thoughts without fear or governmental reprisal or blockage.

[notinterested]

Freedom of speech........

Capitalizing on the shuttle disaster.....bonus.

Capitalizing by anyone else....you'll hang.