29.8.16

Abba

Recycling the song was bad enough but the leotards too?!

Danny Quirk


"December 19, 2015 - As artists, we find the ‘Fair Use’ doctrine to sometimes be beneficial, but sometimes to be extremely disturbing. I guess illustrator Danny Quirk subscribes to the latter according to a post he made concerning Madonna using his work on her shows under that doctrine. Danny has a series of illustrations called Dissections which shows medical sketches (the kind you find in old medical books), combined with living humans. This was his senior project for Pratt institute.
Danny claims that an artist called BessNYC4 [NSFW] pasted a photo of Maddona’s face on his drawing and that they were used in her social media. Any many young artists, Danny was first very happy for the fact that his art was so widely exposed. But then he realized that he was not getting any credit for his illustrations. Danny claims that he tried contacting Maddona’s agent and got no response.
Danny got even angrier when he discovered that those illustrations were also used in Madonna’s shows. Being annoyed he posted about it until his lawyer told him to take the post down as BessNYC4’s work was protected under the Fair Use doctrine for being transformative enough. Danny got annoyed enough that he shared his frustration on his page which got thousands of likes, shares and comments. I am attaching his letter after the jump.
First and foremost … I just want to deliver an open, and honest “F**K YOU” to the “Fair Use Act”, and an ACTUAL “what the F*K!?!?” to those it protects. Almost a year ago to date (Jan 2015) I awoke to a barrage of texts stating my work was popping up on Madonna’s FB, IG, and Twitter, with tens of thousands of likes, shares, comments, etc. ! ! At first, I thought … “WHOAH! / COOL!“ but shortly there after, it sunk in. I contacted her agent, and received absolutely no response. In the meantime, I found out digital collage artist BessNYC4 was the one who ‘made’ the work, sending it to her, merging MY ART with her head, and reaping all the benefits.. Things petered out, and I more or less forgot about it; u n t i l … early Oct 2015. I found out (for all intents and purposes) my art was used in her concerts, despite my attempts at getting proper credit acknowledgment, etc. I made a post to build momentum / got a lawyer, and was hoping for justice. My lawyer said “PULL THE POST!” and it was determined the work was ‘transformative’ under the “Fair Use Act”, which protected them / her and the coinciding articles (which came from momentum of the post covering the ordeal) made ME out to be the bad guy. WHY? Anyone with eyes can see… anyhow, this is a rant how WE ARTISTS are taken advantage of, and how laws protect everyone except for who they should, as you can see in THREE of my pieces … anyhow, I’m not thrilled. Pass along if y’all agree (maybe we can build momentum?)
Thanks,
Danny # "
SOURCE

She not only posted his photos on instagram, which is not a copyright infrigement, but also used them on concerts, from which she earns money and that is a plagiarism INDEED. What happened later? We read on Danny's facebook profile:
"Whelp, just as the last post was garnering momentum, Nipple Police flagged the 5 pixels by 5 pixels of painted nipple, and the post about the uncredited use of imagery containing my artwork in Madonna's social media pages and concerts was taken down due to a ''nudity violation''. Anyhow, thank you to everyone for the support / getting the ball rolling / helping get the word out, and helping to make a stink about us 'unknown' artist's work being misused by household names."

They removed his posts trying to shut him up. Few months ago I remember reporting a page on facebook called "Tits of pornstars"( after translation) with hunderds of photos and they replied to me there is no violation of fb regulamin. Pathetic. Madonna has many friends/ fans/ workers who try to hide the truth about her unoriginality and thievish nature. Many videos showing her plagiarisms and rip offs were removed from youtube or muted due to copyright infrigement of.. Madonna's music, not original. Even my secret project part 16 was deleted for using "her" song 'the beast within' not Fairuz'es voice samples. Video showing Sam Haskins rip off doesn't violate any copyrights but was removed from public view and is shown only for people who have a LINK. Many photos from Super Amanda's listal were removed too. On whosampled they reject my submissions about Mandonna sampling others and even delete old, accepted submissions which were there for years( She's not me sampling Sezen Aksu's yaz or Like a virgin and 4 Tops- I can't help myself).  Keep trying little menopausers but the truth always comes out. Sooner or later.


Jojoes Art

"Hey, we are JojoesArt and PixieCold, freelance artists from Berlin (and siblings.. :)). Yesterday we discovered, that Madonna posted an artwork of Jojoe on her official Instagram, with her own face photoshopped into the image, without mentioning him as the original artist at all.
Jojoes original picture: http://jojoesart.deviantart.com/art/Alice-in-Wonderland-301425862
Madonnas Instagram post: https://instagram.com/p/2lvvutmEUR/?taken-by=madonna
This is not the first time people get recognition for our work without giving us credit. Almost weekly we receive mails by people, who discovered our art being sold on eBay, wallpaper sites and even in shops all around the world. While we appreciate them liking our art, we would love to at least get some of that recognition also for ourselves, as we make a living by selling prints and originals of our work.
We are sure Madonna did not have any bad intentions and probably did not even know where the original picture came from, but still we think it would only be fair, if Jojoe received some kind of credit for that, especially since the post on Instagram received more than 50.000 likes.
Our plan:
So here is our plan: We want to raise attention for the important cause of artist´s rights. Therefore we were thinking, that the easiest way in our age of social media would be, to make this post and somehow get it to reach Madonna.
If Madonna sees this post we want to challenge her: Madonna, if you read this, we would like to tell you, that we appreciate you liking Jojoes piece of art. Therefore we want to create a unique piece of art for you together, a crazy/artistic portrait, and we would love to hand it to you. If you were willing, we could even auction the original picture and donate the money for a good cause. That would be a "compensation" everyone could benefit from. 
How you can support us:
It would mean the world, if you helped us to get this to Madonna by:
- Liking it and sharing it on your wall
- Posting a comment on Madonna´s Instagram/facebook and linking to this post (and PLEASE be nice to her, do not post hate comments, maybe just a nice heart ♥)
We know, it is kind of a crazy attempt, but we hope our message gets across! Artists have rights..."

Source
Madonna did not have any bad intention? Yeah sure, just like with Danny Quirk.

16.8.16

Mary Louise Brooks

No, two imitation pearl drink coasters won't create a "bust line".
PS. Kylie MinogueMarilyn Monroe and Marlene Dietrich posts were refreshed with new photos.


12.8.16

Charlotte Rampling

Why doesn't anyone talk about Charlotte Rampling or Liza Minelli but Madonna when comparing other female singers like Elin Lanto?
I thought it's because her 'tributes, hommages, reinventions, imiatations, recreations, sampling.." etc. are about taking someone's ideas, passing them to mainstream as own without crediting nor mentiong creators.
However when it comes to Marilyn Monroe everyone knows that Madge copied/imitated her. When someone else like Miley Cyrus or Gwen Stefani does it, they are still compared with Mummydonna, not with original. So what is the reason? Why are all female singers and celebrities compared to her? Is this her PR's, pseudojournalists who get paid for it doing?

31.7.16

Pat Benatar

Pat Benatar's voice alone blows Madonna off the stage and even with red sandals she can't pull off the spandex like the Queen of Rock n Roll can.



30.7.16

George Michael

His video inspired many singers such as Gaga, Beyonce and Madonnasaur who wasn't the first one to wear black latex clothes like her trolls try to tell us. Also human nature video wasn't inspiration for Rihanna's S&M video which is a plagiarism of David La Chapelle photos. Madge doesn't send trends, she follows them.


27.7.16

Liza Minelli

100% RIP OFF OF LIZA IN CABARET. Used her imagery often.
Below is a combo rip off of Liza and an obscure semi topless early picture of Marilyn Monroe. Cap, cane and all!

12.7.16

Erwin Blumenfeld

Next photographer that she "paid tribute to" by not mentioning a single word about him after copying his work.
PS. Guy Bourdin post was updated with 1 photo.

30.6.16

Taylor Swift

New albums equals new era in Madonna's rip offs and plagiarisms. Even before releasing 'Reductive Heart' she had to follow trends made by most popular singers. One of them is Taylor Swift and her single promo picture stylized as a movie poster with photos of starring people, date of world premiere and same black, white and red colors.


29.6.16

Britney Spears

We are back after a long hiatus with a lots of new photos.
Close-up on heels, while leaving the hotel, escaping from paparazzi, dancing in driven car and at the and everything turns out to be a daydreaming. It all was shown in Briteny's "I wanna go" one year before "Turn up the radio" video was released. I know there is also a similar begining in one Gaga's video, but close-up on feet is the only similarity. And no, Mandonna didn't do it before in Drowned world video because there are only paparazzi and she rides IN a car, without dancing. It's not similar to IWG video.
PS. September and Kylie Minogue posts were refreshed.