Jesus fresco 'destroyer' in Spain demands royalties for her work - Polidicks

[quote=BBC]The woman who ruined a prized Jesus Christ fresco in Spain is now demanding royalties after her botched restoration became a hit with tourists. Lawyers for Cecilia Gimenez, who is in her 80s, say any "economic compensation" would go to charities. She made headlines after her do-it-yourself restoration in a church left the 19th Century fresco of Christ resembling a hairy monkey. But thousands of people have since visited the church near Zaragoza. The airline Ryanair is now even offering deals to the north-eastern Spanish city, encouraging tourists to see the fresco in the Sanctuary of Mercy Church in Borja. 'Best intentions' "She just wants (the church) to conform with the law," said Enrigue Trebolle, Ms Gimenez's lawyer. Thousands of people have visited the church to look at the fresco "If this implies an economic compensation, she wants it to be for charitable purposes." The lawyer added that Ms Gimenez was favouring charities helping patients with muscular atrophy, because her son suffered from the condition. Ms Gimenez earlier said she had decided to restore the work by Elias Garcia Martinez because of its deterioration due to moisture. She claimed to have had the permission of the parish priest to carry out the job. "How could you do something like that without permission? He knew it!" she was quoted as saying. But during the restoration, the delicate brush strokes of Elias Garcia Martinez were buried under a haphazard splattering of paint. The once-dignified portrait now resembles a crayon sketch of a very hairy monkey in an ill-fitting tunic. Ms Gimenez appears to have realised she was out of her depth and contacted the city councillor in charge of cultural affairs. Cultural officials said she had the best intentions and hoped the piece could be properly restored.[/quote] [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19674622]Source[/url] [img]http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0921-botched-jesus-fresco/13826699-1-eng-US/0921-botched-Jesus-fresco_full_600.jpg[/img] Image in case you forgot.

I bet the lawyers did this. [editline]24th September 2012[/editline] It's a nice move to give it to charity though.

[video=youtube;UZ9VG9ny2BY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ9VG9ny2BY[/video]

[QUOTE=Killuah;37782368]I bet the lawyers did this. [editline]24th September 2012[/editline] It's a nice move to give it to charity though.[/QUOTE] She's just trying to save face, considering she destroyed Jesus and all.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;37782376]She's just trying to save face, considering she destroyed Jesus and all.[/QUOTE] She doesnt have much hope. She couldnt even save his face, what chance does hers stand?

[QUOTE=Tomo Takino;37782417]She doesnt have much hope. She couldnt even save his face, what chance does hers stand?[/QUOTE] Actually, according to the copyright laws she is the owner of the new painting. It doesn't matter if she ruined an old painting (and in so doing, committed a crime), the copyright laws doesn't take that into account. So legally, she has every right to get royalties. And thus can at least save her own face.

[QUOTE=Fear_Fox;37782530]Actually, according to the copyright laws she is the owner of the new painting. It doesn't matter if she ruined an old painting (and in so doing, committed a crime), the copyright laws doesn't take that into account. So legally, she has every right to get royalties. And thus can at least save her own face.[/QUOTE] Bullshit, that's like someone graffitiing someones house and then demanding money for it.

This would be a different case if she had been asked to alter the painting. Seeing as she took it upon herself to 'donate' her skill, she has no right to any money produced from it. [QUOTE=Fear_Fox;37782530]Actually, according to the copyright laws she is the owner of the new painting. It doesn't matter if she ruined an old painting (and in so doing, committed a crime), the copyright laws doesn't take that into account. So legally, she has every right to get royalties. And thus can at least save her own face.[/QUOTE] "copyright laws" do not transfer ownership of property because someone violated it.

could the world be wrong, and this is a more realistic representation of Jesus?

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;37782563]Bullshit, that's like someone graffitiing someones house and then demanding money for it.[/QUOTE] And the graffiti would just be a bunch of dicks.

Wasn't there a thread about this like a week ago, and she wanted to put the money toward a muscular dystrophy fund or something?

[QUOTE=WingedAssailant;37782759]could the world be wrong, and this is a more realistic representation of Jesus?[/QUOTE] 2000 years isn't that long bro

[QUOTE=Bletotum;37782575] "copyright laws" do not transfer ownership of property because someone violated it.[/QUOTE] By copyright definition it counts as a new creation. There was a blogpost brought up by the swedish pirate party about it, it's all in swedish but google could translate it [url]http://copyriot.se/2012/09/22/vem-tanker-pa-att-apjesus-skyddas-av-upphovsratt/[/url] I would also like to point out that Wikipedia regards her as "author or copyright owner" in the licensing notes about the picture. The painting itself (before she fucked up) was most likely public property though unless the ownership was signed over to the Church. The original painter has been dead for 78 years and the line goes at 70. [editline]24th September 2012[/editline] I would like to point out I don't mean it's a good thing. But it shows (once again) how flawed the copyright laws are.

this lady is awesome, not only she ruined a painting without anyone's approval, she DEMANDS recognition and money for it now hahaha

Soloution: give her the royalties and then sue the living fuck out of her for damaging a historical painting.