What I said
Glen Wooten
make sure that the proper information is available to all, and also to
clear up a few points:
Terry Smith quotes from Matt High on May 9:
TS> You my also scan in samples of AP books under the "fair use" clause
TS> of the US Copyright code. "Fair Use" is generally defined as "for
TS> purposes of review and promotion".
Just so that everyone is aware, the "Fair Use" clause, which is generally
abused by many people, is only applicable to published works, and is more
for review & REFERENCE, not promotion. Fair use would not be applicable
to simply a piece of art that you have, only to one in a published work,
and then only with certain restrictions.
Terry Smith quotes from Dennis Falk on May 9:
TS>DF> We believe you, Terry... Especially since you *did* get Terrie and
TS>DF> Glen mad.. That GIF is one I've seen back in August last year...
TS>DF> It is not "official" in any manner, no matter what you say.
TS> Funny - Glen wasn't mad when he called XANTH.. and he DID send the
TS> customized gif snailmail when he sure didn't have too.
TS> When Glen Wooten called, they had all (unauthorized GIFs) been gone
TS> for weeks.
I believe that Dennis was referring to my disclaimer after the posting of
the "Teddy Punk" GIF of Terrie's in 27 parts on AFF. Yes, Terrie & I
were less than thrilled to see it sent out to all creation WITHOUT OUR
PERMISSION OR EVEN NOTIFICATION. As I stated before, that GIF was sent
to Terry Smith simply as one of the few authorized GIFs, and the notice
was placed in it to show it was on X(A/N)TH with permission. It was at
no time meant as an advertisement. This point was discussed with both
Terry Smith and his associate Kevin Duane. While the sending out of the
GIF as a promotion for X(A/N)TH was just this side of a copyright
violation, it certainly was not very cricket.
As for being mad when I called X(A/N)TH, of course I wasn't. You always
keep a neutral demeanor when investigating. That is simply SOP. Yes, I
did send him a copy of "Teddy Punk", which he is in danger of losing
access to unless I hear from him. Several letters have been e-mailed to
him to which no response has been received.
It is possible that all unauthorized GIFs had been removed prior to my
initial contact, and are still not on the board. I have, however, heard
differently from many people. I can neither confirm or deny this, as I
have been informed that a "gate" is in operation, making verification
difficult.
TS> The day will come when all art is gifed automatically. 10 years from
TS> now people will laugh at my critics. But being right too soon is the
TS> same as being wrong.
Oh, if that is to pass, that will be a sad day for artists unless the
copyright laws are radically altered.
TS> I don't think it was theft, I don't think anyone was damaged, and I
TS> don't think the RCMP will bust their ass to investigate a 'crime'
TS> that resolved itself months ago and never had a penny involved in it.
Copyrights are a very serious matter, whether you believe so or not. And
don't be too sure about the RCMP not investigating something like this -
a few "examples" go a long way towards keeping the problem (and it could
be any problem with a BBS - copyright violations, pornography, code-
passing, and others - take your pick) down. If there isn't a precedent
already, you don't want to be made one.
/------------------------------------------------------------------\
| ProLine: gwooten@pro-amber | UUCP: crash!pro-amber!gwooten |
| GEnie: g.wooten | InterNet: gwo...@pro-amber.cts.com |
\------------------------------------------------------------------/
\ Our Motto: "Bonum Est Quam Carricare" /
---------------------------------------
Cinnamon DeWolf
Ummm....
As much as I feel copyright infringment is wrong, if you honestly think
the RCMP (CA) or FBI (US) or whoever is going to care about something
like this, you're fooling yourself. C'mon. Not even PLAYBOY could get
a suit settled in court regarding a very, very well known GIF BBS.
As wonderful it would be to see all crimes go punished, don't think
anyone's really going to give much of a damn about any of this. You
can complain, hell you can sink a few hundred or thousand dollars into
a lawsuit. And whether you win or lose you're going to be real sorry
you got into it all in the first place.
In some cases a lawsuit, or pressing charges, or whatever makes sense.
Think about it a minute. it's not that big a deal, on a grander scal
than you or anyone else is willing to thnk about.
--
-- -- Get your mouth away from my penis! I am NOT yiffy! Ow!! Band-Aid! Bactine!
Please direct all correspondence to wol...@netcom.com
** To respond with flames, use the new Remote Mailer, RM! Simply think of **** what you want to say, and type "RM *" to get it to me! For quicker **
** response, please use the "-rf" option, for Really Fast! **
Ken Sample
|>
|> Ummm....
|>
|> As much as I feel copyright infringment is wrong, if you honestly think
|> the RCMP (CA) or FBI (US) or whoever is going to care about something
|> like this, you're fooling yourself. C'mon. Not even PLAYBOY could get
|> a suit settled in court regarding a very, very well known GIF BBS.
|>
|> As wonderful it would be to see all crimes go punished, don't think
|> anyone's really going to give much of a damn about any of this. You
|> can complain, hell you can sink a few hundred or thousand dollars into
|> a lawsuit. And whether you win or lose you're going to be real sorry
|> you got into it all in the first place.
|>
|> In some cases a lawsuit, or pressing charges, or whatever makes sense.
|> Think about it a minute. it's not that big a deal, on a grander scal
|> than you or anyone else is willing to thnk about.
|>
You just don't get it, do you?
It *IS* a *VERY* big deal to the artists who are having their work,
their livelyhoods, their souls, their creative efforts and sense of
creative control stripped away from them by some shlemps with a couple
of hundred dollars worth of technology.
Speaking for myself alone, since I don't know how anyone else thinks,
creating a piece of art is a time-consuming, sometimes-pleasurable,
sometimes-painful process wher I have to delve deep into myself and
shave off a piece of my personality, my soul and put it down on a piece
of paper. I don't think I can explain the creative process that goes on
inside me so that another person will understand, but dammit, the art I
can manage to dredge up out of myself is *PERSONAL*. Every piece, every
line was put down because I wanted to give something to someone. Usually
a single someone. Rarely myself. It's my child. It's a part of defining
what I am. Defining what I am to another person. It's a giving thing.
I give of myself to someone I feel *something* for, whether it's a commmon
interest, admiration or purest love, through my art. Perhaps not as much
now as before, but still, a lot.
To have someone, *anyone* just up and take one of my children and
arbitrarily put it scan it, modify it and use it so they can make themselves
look good to a bunch unknowns who-knows-where is *TOTALLY* unacceptable
to me. The art isn't just *mine*, it's *ME*! It's a piece of me. I don't
know if other artist feels this way, but I'll lay down good money that a
lot of them, especially those who object to unauthorized GIFs, do.
Law is Law. Yeah. Sure. It's wonderful that the copyright laws are there.
I think they're good laws. Artists are notoriously poor because it's an
expensive vocation to get started in. And it's a fickle one, too.
But beyond the law and what the FBI or RCMP will 'bust their asses' doing,
is what *I* will do. Regardless of how much trouble I can get myself into
saying this here, but if the unauthorized GIF thing goes on with me, I will
just up and deal with the perpetrators my own damn self. 18 months in
jail for the piece of mind of myself and a few dozen artists is a good
trade in my opinion. It HURTS me and I'm tired of hurting. That's it.
Whether someone *understands* that or not is irrelevant. It's stated
as fact for everyone here to see. It HURTS. For some people, financially.
Some emotionally. Some both. Unless the perpetrators get their jollies
from hurting the people they like to say they're trying to help, they
should be decent enough to stop when asked. It can't be so difficult.
Easier than making the GIFs, I would think.
Tone of the person making the request should be irrelevant. If asked to
stop, stop.
The Fandom doesn't need this mess. It doesn't need any more stress than
it already has. Because of this controversy, I've decided that I'm not
doing any more art for public consumption. I'm going to draw for individual,
and make copies for myself and the person the art is for. Period. That
way, a personal bond between myself and that person won't be abused without
the consent of at least one of us.
My list of authorized GIFs is simple. It it was put up by me on tezuka,
it's authorized. That's the only place I've put them and if it's there
it's okay to take and distribute, but *don't* modify it. Playing with it
for your own entertainment is fine, but don't tack on text or color it
and pass it off as legit, 'cause it own't be. And I won't sit for it.
So, as I slowly lose track of what I wanted to say, I'll leave you all to
ponder what I did say. The opinions expressed here were my own, from as
deep as I could manage and still be able to type.
Now, to see what comes of them...
coug'r
Ken Sample
pu...@donuts0.bellcore.com
Dean Graf
on why unauthorized GIFs are wrong, irrelevent of law and enforcement.
One of my personal rules has always been: Never Piss Off A Nice Person.
Few things are more savage, calculating, and ingenious about revenge
than a good-natured, friendly, caring person who has been pushed too
far. For my money, Ken is a prime case in point.
Now, do you schmoes out there who think nothing of distributing and
altering GIFs see the damage you're doing? I hope so, but I fear not.
* OLX 2.1 TD * Never wear anything in public that panics your cat.
{ Team H BBS - Richmond, CA - 510-236-5114 - ANONYMOUS ACCOUNTS AVAILABLE }
{ Japanese Animation & Adult *** Stories, Pictures, Conversation }