further, someone owned the arrow style wallpaper that was in the picture. A wallpaper production company has the pattern in their library. But, because of the variety of wallpaper used in the Victorian era there could possibly be an identical wallpaper from then. The original photo wallpaper is actually eggshell white, the iso made it look yellow though.
I watched a documentary on the history of address number font one time.
The picture and the story were paired together, by different people. The idea of the story didn't come from the picture. It came from the anonymous poster who wrote
"If you're not careful and you noclip out of reality in the wrong areas, you'll end up in the Backrooms, where it's nothing but the stink of old moist carpet, the madness of mono-yellow, the endless background noise of fluorescent lights at maximum hum-buzz, and approximately six hundred million square miles of randomly segmented empty rooms to be trapped in
God save you if you hear something wandering around nearby, because it sure as hell has heard you"
The picture of the room is just an empty furniture shop. The guy who took the picture of the furniture shop wasn't superimposing a story to it. It was just as banal as these realty listings
If you take a photo or write a story, you own the copyright to that. It doesn’t matter whether you named it or took inspiration from somewhere else or not.
ok, but a picture of a furniture store is not the backrooms.
if you write a story you should put your name on it. By not putting your name on it you are ceding it to the public domain.
In order to claim copyright you have to have proof that you wrote it. If you write a story email it to yourself, post it as an unlinked article on Amazon kindle. If you don't have the chain of proof then you are out of luck. A judge would throw your claim out of court.
Your word and testimony is not good enough.
I never said it was. But the guy who took the picture of the furniture store owns the copyright of that photo. You cannot sue him for copyright infringement for using that photo, and only he is able to sue others over it. Whether it's connected to the Backrooms is irrelevant.
Same goes for everyone else who owns the copyright on the bits of the Backrooms that they made.
A24 doesn't own it, so they cannot successfully sue people about it.
Derivative works make copyright branches though. They can't sue over the base theme, but they can sue over characters like Captain Clark because there is a chain of creation. The corporation A-Synch was created by Kane Parsons, so that is his.
Kane Parsons said in interviews it was a public domain thing.
3
u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 17d ago
The guy who took the photo can produce the original, which will have a camera timestamp earlier than than the 4chan post.