Lockheed Martin and Censorship
9 Star
Share This Post
Graeme (Who am I?) , Canberra: Jun 1 2008
Made Popular Jun 1 2008

picture5-62_tT4Xy_15992

Many of us would be familiar with some of Lockheed Martin’s greatest hits: the F22, the F35, the F117, the Trident missile, the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System and many other complex and nasty tools of death, defense and destruction. It has just recently come to my attention that Lockheed Martin have been moving to ban 3D artists from producing or sharing models of their aircraft. The image above of the B-24 Liberator is a representation of the 3D model designed by John Macneill, “3D illustrator whose work frequently appears Popular Science and other national magazines” (source). The popular 3D content marketplace TurboSquid has bowed to pressure and removed John Macneill’s Lockheed Martin content from their website.

OK, so you might understand a that if the 3D artist were making detailed models of classified or currently operational military aircraft, there may be some issues. However, this particular aircraft is a World War 2 era machine. The mind boggles.

untitled-1_rn4od_15992

Lockheed Martin has recruited the DMCA to their cause. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act:

criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services that are used to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works (commonly known as DRM) and criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, even when there is no infringement of copyright itself

3D art is not allowed to represent their weapon systems and platforms, even of bygone eras and even the name “Lockheed Martin” or “B-24 Liberator” becomes sacrosanct. Am I the only person that get’s the feeling that some member of the administrative arm of the company formerly known as Lockheed Martin has found themselves with a little too much spare time on their hands ? Perhaps it is an ingenious way to raise revenue through copyright litigation actions. That the arms industry is the largest business in the world is no secret - that they might stoop to such low blows to raise more revenue is astounding.

Ultimately - this company is largely in the business of making weapons and weapons systems. You would imagine that they would use any little chance of a PR opportunity to make themselves seem a little less sinister. On the contrary, historical aircraft are now the property of the company and I can’t wait until they work out a way to come and repossess the memories and recollections of the crews who flew these aircraft.

untitled-2_G5qgM_15992

A photographer can take a photo of any type of car and sell the photo; look at any car magazine. A painter can create a painting of anything and sell that, remember Andy Warhol’s famous 1968 painting of a can of Campbell’s tomato soup? But a CG artist cannot create a sculpture of a Ford Mustang and sell that, at least not on Turbo Squid. There is obviously a double standard here. So where does this leave CG artists? Until a stock company becomes willing to fight back against these takedowns, there seems little any individual artist can do.

(source)

Also see: Electronic Freedom Foundation article on this issue.

Add Images and Videos
Close X
Recommended Tags or Keywords
Search by Tags or Keywords
Selected Media ( You can Upload only Six media )
Manual Upload
Sorry, no media found for this combination of tags. Try to search minimum number of tags at once
2 Stars
Grace (Who am I?)
Quezon City, Philippines
Being a graphic designer, Graeme, I’m sure you know that there is an almost invisible line between patents and trademarks that are products of R&D and this thing they call ’top secret’ that is a product of intelligence war rooms.

Ghosts of Cold War past. :)
1 Stars
It makes you wonder - if you are wounded by ordnance/munitions/whatever and when you are (if you survive) treated in hospital - does the arms/ammunition/ordnance manufacturer own the copyright to the x-ray imagery of the shrapnel or physical relics left in your body ?
2 Stars
Grace (Who am I?)
Quezon City, Philippines
Hmmmm...thought-provoking...

I suppose it will be counted as evidence and will stand in court...
2 Stars
Reuben (Who am I?)
Los Angeles, United States
Hey come on. We need to see the difference but painters and computer graphic artists. A painter or photographer gets a copyright as the picture in itself is a new creation. A new meaning is included in it by the perspective of the artist. A CG also does a great amount of work but still it is not any invention or new meaning. S/he is just using somebody else’s work to generate money for himself.
1 Stars
Interesting point, Reuben. I guess it comes down to where you perceive the authenticity in the creative act - where the reality of the art lies when art is always already about copies of things, ideas, concepts. If I take a photograph of your body and call it art, I have not made your body but just copied it and the art is in the lighting, the focal stop, the post production, etc. If I paint you I similarly engage in a creative process where I do not make you or your physical reality but I make interpretive copies of you. If I paint (or 3D model) a WW2 aircraft, it takes (in fact and arguably) considerably more technical skill than it does to photograph or paint your such an object. 3D modelling and texturing is a significant and complex creative feat of engineering in a virtual mathematical space.

If we consider the technical skill as the
syntax of the artistic process - surely the semantics, that is - the meaning is always a matter of post facto attribution ? Then any creative act is an act overflowing with meaning because we attach meaning after the act of creation.

I don’t know... if we are to look at the ways people make money out of other’s work - the Colt company (gun manufacturer) has been removing the right for people to reproduce their weapons in computer games. Is this because they are not making money out of the games ?

I really am neutral on all of this, and while I lean towards the free-expression side of the censorship debate, I think it is a fascinating thing to think about. :) :) :)
1 Stars
oops... had a problem with my text formatting there
Add your Comment