▲ 1034 ▼ Universes (slrpnk.net) submitted 2 years ago* by Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 57 points 2 years ago (4 children) The French Cinematic Universe is weird, I'm glad France isn't real permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Rusty@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago If France would exist, where would you put it on a map? permalink fedilink source parent [–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago It is extremly strange There is proof that borders between France and real countries like Brazil exist in the French Cinematic Universe, which means that there exists a French Cinematic Multiverse and roads between universes to make sense Im also pretty confident birds are related to this, but im not sure what their role is permalink fedilink source parent [–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago France is real if we let it be real inside our hearts. permalink fedilink source parent [+] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rusty@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago If France would exist, where would you put it on a map? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 10 points 2 years ago It is extremly strange There is proof that borders between France and real countries like Brazil exist in the French Cinematic Universe, which means that there exists a French Cinematic Multiverse and roads between universes to make sense Im also pretty confident birds are related to this, but im not sure what their role is permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago France is real if we let it be real inside our hearts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's illegal to post photos of the Eiffel Tower at night. (No one cares.) permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) The lighting is copyrighted, so it's technically copyright infringement. They only seem to care if you do it in a professional/commercial capacity though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm sorry, fucking what? How can lighting, or the sight of something be copyright? Fuck what wonderful captialistic hellscape we live in permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) Architecture is an artistic medium, so it's subject to copyright. It gets a little complicated though, because this wasn't legally decided until the latter half of the 20th century. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'll start obeying French law when they extradite Roman Polanski permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago He's not in France, so that's tricky. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago The Eiffel Tower in the meme is as illegal as the Rattaouile frame since if the photo is from a broadcast the royalties have already been dealt with. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Really? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) The lighting is copyrighted, so it's technically copyright infringement. They only seem to care if you do it in a professional/commercial capacity though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm sorry, fucking what? How can lighting, or the sight of something be copyright? Fuck what wonderful captialistic hellscape we live in permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) Architecture is an artistic medium, so it's subject to copyright. It gets a little complicated though, because this wasn't legally decided until the latter half of the 20th century. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'll start obeying French law when they extradite Roman Polanski permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago He's not in France, so that's tricky. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 2 years ago* (2 children) The lighting is copyrighted, so it's technically copyright infringement. They only seem to care if you do it in a professional/commercial capacity though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm sorry, fucking what? How can lighting, or the sight of something be copyright? Fuck what wonderful captialistic hellscape we live in permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) Architecture is an artistic medium, so it's subject to copyright. It gets a little complicated though, because this wasn't legally decided until the latter half of the 20th century. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent [–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'll start obeying French law when they extradite Roman Polanski permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago He's not in France, so that's tricky. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net [S] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'm sorry, fucking what? How can lighting, or the sight of something be copyright? Fuck what wonderful captialistic hellscape we live in permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) Architecture is an artistic medium, so it's subject to copyright. It gets a little complicated though, because this wasn't legally decided until the latter half of the 20th century. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) Architecture is an artistic medium, so it's subject to copyright. It gets a little complicated though, because this wasn't legally decided until the latter half of the 20th century. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Johanno@feddit.org 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) While architecture could be copyrighted. Public buildings are excluded from that for obvious reasons. This includes the eifel tower. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago TL;DR: The light show is considered a separate artistic creation and the Eiffel Tower's management company holds the copyright. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Does the architect hold the copyright of a photograph that a photographer has taken though? I can see it getting murky quickly. What if the building is in frame, but is not the focus of the photograph. Can the architect still claim copyright infringement on that particular photo? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) I'll start obeying French law when they extradite Roman Polanski permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago He's not in France, so that's tricky. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago He's not in France, so that's tricky. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago The Eiffel Tower in the meme is as illegal as the Rattaouile frame since if the photo is from a broadcast the royalties have already been dealt with. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EfreetSK@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 child) Big if true! permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) 330 metres tall, in fact. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Guys, it's a movie. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Life imitates art, though. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to set up an "Olympics" in real life. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) 330 metres tall, in fact. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Guys, it's a movie. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Life imitates art, though. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to set up an "Olympics" in real life. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Guys, it's a movie. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Life imitates art, though. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to set up an "Olympics" in real life. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Life imitates art, though. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to set up an "Olympics" in real life. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] roboto@feddit.org 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) Still fascinated by that movie. The rat is the chef, amazing! permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Do you mean Racacooni? With the racoon chef? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w8qK_FtJLM here is the clip. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stress_headache@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago That was a rat? I thought it was a little guy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Do you mean Racacooni? With the racoon chef? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w8qK_FtJLM here is the clip. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w8qK_FtJLM here is the clip. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stress_headache@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago That was a rat? I thought it was a little guy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fubarx@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 years ago You could swim in Ratatouille river. permalink fedilink source
[–] yemmly@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago Many Bothans died to bring us this information. permalink fedilink source
[–] netvor@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago That's actually the leaning tower of Eiffa. permalink fedilink source
[–] ZarkleFarkle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago The Olympics is a form of war that should be avoided as much as possible using high level code structures like GNU Octave. permalink fedilink source
all 29 comments