[99%evil]

It is stealing. I don't mean to be a jerk, but this is what copyrighted images are. A copyright isn't just a imaginary word. It means something, if it didn't everyone would have been making Star Wars toys, but they can't because it would be ILLEGAL to copy the images.

[Garyon]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

Come on folks, you've got to know this is wrong, hey I'm all for sticking it to the man, but when there could be collateral damage that takes out this site, there's no question.

I guess lack of sponsorship and manufacturer representation ... thusly lack of interest, membership, and activity IS a better way for the board to come down. Wow ... I'lll sleep so much easier tonight.


Gary

[2_hotty]

That's all that needed to be said.

"Go for it if you want, just don't do it here please, as it could hurt the site."

That would have been fine. We can't do that though, can we. No, as a group we act like idiots neg repping people when we think that have broken this code of conduct that not everyone agreed with and signed anyway. It's flat out stupid.

It's also exactly what most of us thought was going to happen. Which leads me to believe that it was on purpose. You have to be really naive to think that this wasn't going to be the result of that creativity thing. Multiple people expressed this exact concern, myself included, and we were told that "it's not about that" or "that's not why were doing this". They didn't understand that we knew it wasn't about that, but that wasn't the point.

I still like the idea, there is just too much left to interpretation for it to do any good. Especially when people will take it as a pass to be a **** because they think that someone is violating this agreement.

Welcome to the future of CT.

[99%evil]

Originally Posted by Garyon

I guess lack of sponsorship and manufacturer representation ... thusly lack of interest, membership, and activity IS a better way for the board to come down. Wow ... I'lll sleep so much easier tonight.


Gary

Huh? So you'd rather put someone else's site (Ten) at risk, just so you can get cheap chips with stolen images? This should not create a rift here, no one wants this site shut down. Just because some people don't understand what a copyright is, doesn't make it ok.

[Garyon]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

It is stealing. I don't mean to be a jerk, but this is what copyrighted images are. A copyright isn't just a imaginary word. It means something, if it didn't everyone would have been making Star Wars toys, but they can't because it would be ILLEGAL to copy the images.

Have you never never made a Mix tape for yourself or a girlfriend/boyfriend (no offense, I don't know your gender )? Kinda the same deal isn't it? Because you copied it onto Memorex are they liable? Are the record companies gonna come after you? - only if you distribute copies en masse.

Record companies don't chase down each individual Mix-Tape (CD, MP3) creator. Is it infringing upon copyright? TECHNICALLY ... yeah probably, but if the record company doesn't care, or at least decides not to do anything about it, then their inaction implies permission.

Is driving 75 illegal? How often have you gotten pulled over for doing 75MPH in a 65MPH zone? I mean ... really.


-----------------------------------------------

I have found Joe to be very open to opposing point of views and differing opinions, and I think that that's fair, usefull and what forums like these are all about. But what is the purpose in the Neg reps? I would give Joe POS Reps for his posts, starting what I think is an ETREMELY useful discussion ( In between the bickering there has been some insightful information ) but it won't let me rep him again (sorry Joe, I keep trying). Running Joe ... or ANYONE off the site for that matter, restricts the amount of information we, as a community, have to fall back on.

That people don't post here out of fear of being De-Repped is beyond insane and is the complete anti-thesis of what these forums are set up to do. I like th erep system byut agree that it needs to be overhauled. I would like to see being able to ADD rep ... and not take rep away.

Just my 2c ...

Joe - I hope that you reconsider. It is the contact with folks like you, Matt and Gene that make this site. Losing that would definately be a serious blow.

Gary

[99%evil]

Have you never never made a Mix tape for yourself or a girlfriend/boyfriend (no offense, I don't know your gender )? Kinda the same deal isn't it? Because you copied it onto Memorex are they liable? Are the record companies gonna come after you? - only if you distribute copies en masse. If I charged someone for the tape, it's illegal. And copying the tape is illegal, not likely you'll get caught, but if you post on a website you are going to copy tapes and sell them...the website aided in the sale.
Record companies don't chase down each individual Mix-Tape (CD, MP3) creator. Is it infringing upon copyright? TECHNICALLY ... yeah probably, but if the record company doesn't care, or at least decides not to do anything about it, then their inaction implies permission.

Is driving 75 illegal? How often have you gotten pulled over for doing 75MPH in a 65MPH zone? I mean ... really. Yes it's illegal, EVERYTHING IS LEGAL UNTIL YOU GET CAUGHT.

[palmimports]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

Huh? So you'd rather put someone else's site (Ten) at risk, just so you can get cheap chips with stolen images? This should not create a rift here, no one wants this site shut down. Just because some people don't understand what a copyright is, doesn't make it ok.

Ive said this before- specifically regarding the Bellagio Tributes- and someone replied( not sure if it was Greg or a mod) that they were NOT worried in the least about site exposure regarding legal issues.
We ALSO did our homework if everyone remembers regarding whether we were infringing on copyright- ran it by our legal dept- AND called the Bellagio.
Brief Summation: nobody gave a rats asx.

The fine line difference is: IF someone is MASS marketing an item for profit- someone is gonna be concerned. IF I print some labels for my poker chip set using walmart's logo- do you REALLY think theyre gonna care?

With that said- I DO sincerely believe we should NOT use this site as a vehicle for mass producing blatently knocked off artwork/chips.

If we want to put an end to harry homeowner having a set of perparation H custom poker chips for his own use- then lets Ban ALL scanner and printer sales, and ban ALL label sales --
Then we can all sleep better at night knowing copyrights are safe.\

( relax i got a pot of coffee brewing now and I'll be in a MUCH better mood in about 20 minutes)

[WolfPack]

I have to throw my 2 cents in here.

I don't think the creativity cannon is the reason for the neg repping (I at least hope not) I voted for it and this is not what I had in mind.
I believe the whole purpose behind it was to get people to create new original chips, and not the just copy existing chips.

As for this thread.

When does something become legal to use?
If I buy a darth vader mask, lay it on a piece of black cloth and take a picture, can I now use that digital image?
I bought the mask don't I have the right to personal use of the image I took?
There has to be a line, I ask this because I am no lawyer and truely do not know, but it seems there has to limitations to copyright. Mass distribution is one thing, but here we are talking personal use.

As for rep, I am all for getting rid of it I have never liked the anonymous aspect of it. Either attach names or do away with it. I also don't think the neg rep thing is the only reason Joe is leaving, I would put money down that there is more to it we do not know on either a personal or professional level.

[jdunford]

Hopefully the negging has stopped and this has turned into a "non-violent" discussion of copyright interpretation...

Although I don't necessarily agree with everything posted, 99%evil has made several good points. Jamby, if you're reading this thread, please forgive me but I want to bring up a second example just to make a point...

Another member is making a chip set featuring pictures of bears on each chip. These pictures are (I'm nearly certain) taken off the internet. They're just found at random, photoshopped to fit the chip, and used without permission. Should permission have been sought and obtained in order to use these? Chances are they were taken by amateurs with a "don't know, don't care" attitude, but we can't be sure. Is it the fact that LucasArts is a multi-billion-dollar corporation that this Star Wars example has been heavily scrutinized while other artwork (probably somewhere in the 20-30% of all custom chips designed here... nearly 100% with photographed artwork) are taken without permission? Sure, designing your own logos from scratch (especially just some geometrical pattern) is completely creative, yada yada yada, and that's great and all, but where does someone who's never been to the Arctic get a picture of a polar bear from? Or (reverse the poles) a penguin? I'm sure the designers of the Antactic Casino custom chips didn't go to Antarctica (or even a zoo) to photograph an emperor penguin for his custom ASM set... (again, sorry for the specific references, but it helps to make the point).

[jdunford]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

If I charged someone for the tape, it's illegal. And copying the tape is illegal, not likely you'll get caught, but if you post on a website you are going to copy tapes and sell them...the website aided in the sale.

PalmImports isn't charging for the (copyrighted) artwork. They're only charging for printing and materials used... the same as any other piece of artwork. It's not like they charge 10x as much because it's Star Wars... It's like photocopying a page from a book at the library. By doing that, I'm running the risk of getting nailed for copyright infringement... not the library or the makers of the photocopier (or the person doing the photocopying, if it wasn't me). Sure, if I start making photocopies and selling them at a markup because they contain some copyright material, that's illegal. But if I offer 10c photocopies and someone wants a page from a book copied, why do I care? I'm just providing a photocopy, and only charging for the service, not the information that the material might contain.