Yet another new low for Cedar Fair

[BoddaH1994]

 

As adorable as it is predictable.

[disco2000]

Usually it is the other way around with CF issuing a C&D for IP violations...

[beastfan11]

That’s pitiful. They should be embarrassed. Is money so tight that they can’t: 

1. Pay the original artist to use their work (this would also be a great PR/Marketing story). 

2. Have one of their own designers/artists create something new? 

3. Hire a freelance designer/artist to create something new? 
 

Gotta save money for the chicken sandwich budget, I guess. 

[PKIVortex]

I believe they already switched back to the original frame for photos. This is truely sad.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

[IBEW_Sparky]

Im sitting here laughing way too hard right now, because when I first saw the image before reading the Xpost and replies, I thought CF's new low was digitally blacking out everyones faces unless they paid for the Funpix 

[disco2000]

2 minutes ago, IBEW_Sparky said:

Im sitting here laughing way too hard right now, because when I first saw the image before reading the Xpost and replies, I thought CF's new low was digitally blacking out everyones faces unless they paid for the Funpix 

That would be one way to "prevent" people from taking pictures of the monitors LOL.

[IndyGuy4KI]

15 hours ago, beastfan11 said:

(this would also be a great PR/Marketing story). 

Probably could have gotten the logo for free if they reached out to the artist to say, "we want to use your logo in our on ride photo." We will offer you free advertising with a blog and social post to user it on our on ride photo." Easy PR and helps the artist all without costing the park any more additional money bedsides the few hours of comms time that they are already paying anyway. Sure seems like the company is working harder at looking bad instead of working smarter. I am sure some poster will cross examine with their thoughts soon.

[disco2000]

5 hours ago, IndyGuy4KI said:

Probably could have gotten the logo for free if they reached out to the artist to say, "we want to use your logo in our on ride photo." We will offer you free advertising with a blog and social post to user it on our on ride photo." Easy PR and helps the artist all without costing the park any more additional money bedsides the few hours of comms time that they are already paying anyway. Sure seems like the company is working harder at looking bad instead of working smarter. I am sure some poster will cross examine with their thoughts soon.

I see what you did there...good one 

[DJSkyFoxx]

I feel bad for the artist. Granted I have never heard of this individual artist, I know that typically when one conducts a Google image search, the image generates from a website more often than not and usually includes a watermark if it is copyrighted material. The fact that whoever stole this work just took it upon themselves to take it without ever contacting the artist is just pathetic and sad. Not to mention very tacky not to respond to the artist's correspondence in regards to said stolen work. This artist seems like a class act in how they are trying to handle this, but I also just feel so bad for them. Art is a gift to the world and stealing it is low and degrading. I would be very upset if someone stole my art or music and didn't ask permission. Chances are, if someone asked me to use any of my materials I would happily oblige so long as I was given the fair credit. That's why a lot of artists are broke when they are alive because they are usually just happy to be involved and be recognized. Money is nice and obviously a great bonus if a living can be made off of doing creative and fulfilling work. But I know a lot more artists who do it just for the fun of it without gaining much money and are just happy to be given credit when paired with other artists or in this case, a large company who EASILY could have either paid this creator or given them some kind of exchange. A season pass. A VIP experience. Literally anything, but moreover, CREDIT!!!!

[KIBeast]

On 5/6/2024 at 5:09 PM, PKIVortex said:

I believe they already switched back to the original frame for photos. This is truely sad.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
 

If that is the case, then it seems Cedar Point is not upset that they did anything wrong, just that they were caught.

[disco2000]

I doubt CF will comment on what happened or the resolution, but for all we know this was a FunPix mistake and CF had no idea?

[DJSkyFoxx]

19 hours ago, disco2000 said:

I doubt CF will comment on what happened or the resolution, but for all we know this was a FunPix mistake and CF had no idea?

So just for funsies I decided to run a little experiment. Specifically in my Google search I typed in "Maverick roller coaster art" and did an image search. Guess what popped up? This exact image with it clearly stating it is being sold from RedBubble with the artist's name as well as their brand "Theme Park Collection". This was a conscious decision to steal this art. The artist even has their watermark in the lower righthand corner. I guess you could say I find this incredibly frustrating as someone who has done my fair share of art and music, I would simply be taken aback to have my work clearly stolen from me. Whether it be CF or whoever runs FunPix, someone made the effort to disregard a clear watermark and the ownership of this imagery. 

 

The image from RedBubble: 

https://www.redbubble.com/i/art-print/THE-WILD-ONE-Maverick-Roller-Coaster-Cedar-Point-Theme-Park-by-jfells/34415986.1G4ZT

 

 

[disco2000]

28 minutes ago, DJSkyFoxx said:

So just for funsies I decided to run a little experiment. Specifically in my Google search I typed in "Maverick roller coaster art" and did an image search. Guess what popped up? This exact image with it clearly stating it is being sold from RedBubble with the artist's name as well as their brand "Theme Park Collection". This was a conscious decision to steal this art. The artist even has their watermark in the lower righthand corner. I guess you could say I find this incredibly frustrating as someone who has done my fair share of art and music, I would simply be taken aback to have my work clearly stolen from me. Whether it be CF or whoever runs FunPix, someone made the effort to disregard a clear watermark and the ownership of this imagery. 

 

The image from RedBubble: 

https://www.redbubble.com/i/art-print/THE-WILD-ONE-Maverick-Roller-Coaster-Cedar-Point-Theme-Park-by-jfells/34415986.1G4ZT

 

 

So for kicks, I took it a little further as well LOL.

I assumed FunPix was a 3rd party and I was willing to give some benefit of doubt to CF that perhaps FunPix simply made the switch without their approval.

So I looked up who owns FunPix and this shows up in the TOS:

I grant to Cedar Fair L.P. and its wholly owned subsidiaries (doing business as MyFunPix.com), their affiliates, agents, and respective successors and assigns the right to photograph and/or videograph me and the worldwide unlimited fully paid up perpetual right to use such photographs and videos including the right to publish, and copyright in any and all media of advertising, marketing, sales, and promotion of such photographs and without limitation, the right to adapt, edit or otherwise use the photographs and videos, or any portion thereof, alone or in conjunction with other materials, in all types of media including but not limited to electronic, digital and computer-based media and technologies, now existing or hereafter developed, as well as the storage, retrieval, transmission, display, output and reproduction of data through any such media and technologies.

So I guess yeah, CF is ultimately responsible and can't try to point the blame to a 3rd party vendor...

[DispatchMaster]

On 5/9/2024 at 8:28 AM, DJSkyFoxx said:

This was a conscious decision to steal this art.

Maybe, but it's not as if it was some malevolent directive from the CEO. Most likely some low level employee was tasked with the job, searched for art online, and this is the unfortunate result.

Unless there's some "smoking gun" showing intent, calling this "another new low for Cedar Fair" is nothing more than desperate clickbait.

[Orion-XL200]

Thanks for your input....why do you come to this site? You seem to have an issue with anyone who doesn't agree with your opinion.

[DispatchMaster]

Thanks for your input... Why did you post in this thread? You seem to have an issue with anyone disagreeing with those whose opinions they do not agree with.

[Browntggrr]

I have a close relative who has taken pictures of NFL games since the early 80's and worked for NFL Properties until the NFL owners decided on starting NFL Network and NFL Properties was dismantled.

10 years go by & he found his copyrighted pictures being used by NFL.com & NFLN.  He & other photographers sued NFL for copyright infringement and after a number of lawsuits eventually won.

Was it an honest mistake on the NFL's part?  Possibly.  Was it an honest mistake on CF's part?  Possibly.  I would expect the NFL to know significantly more about copyright infringement than CF, but either way, it's still wrong and the person that has the legal copyright deserves to be made whole.

Can it be considered a new low?  That's a matter of opinion.