[FlopZnuts]

Boy, am I glad I didn't bring up the Star Trek themed chips that I have been daydreaming about.......

[Matthew]

How soon we forget - tell me what has changed?

http://www.chiptalk.net/forum/poker-...tml#post167195

[palmimports]

Originally Posted by Matthew

How soon we forget - tell me what has changed?

http://www.chiptalk.net/forum/poker-...tml#post167195

if its regarding using Lynnbarks images on our site- alot- I had explained this but so we're clear- my son put up our original site and we needed filler artwork- so he grabbed what he could find- didnt mean we were making the artwork- only using it as artwork on the site.

Once we spoke with Lynnbark and realized our sins- we took the artwork down.

There has NEVER been ONE chip produced by us using Lynbark's artwork.

THis thread deals with making chips using copyright artwork and NOT what you reference above.

There's a difference.

Where' my damn coffee.........

[99%evil]

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.

I see your argument, but let's put it this way. If you make one photocopy for research sake...it's probably not right, but it is done. Now say you take a book and photocopy every page and sell it. Now you've stolen from the original author, you're only making a copy, but you have taken away money from the original author, that person bought your copy at a lower cost and it doesn't make it right.

Furthermore, PI wouldn't sell the chips if it weren't for the images on them, and believe you me he is making a profit off of it. THe only reason the chips would sell is because of those images, the images are what makes the chips, just like the words on the photocopy is what makes the book.

[pokertvstar]

let's cut to the quick:

COPYRIGHTED images are copyrighted for a reason--if it's illegal to re-produce them without consent, then don't do it.

My point is this:

If someone felt this way, they should have voiced their opinion in the thread (as an adult), and not run around with that blanket of anonymity, neg repping people, and making a solid CT sponsor feel like a red-headed step child.

I don't think anyone of the original posters is in the wrong here. If the neg rep person would have just said something like...."do you have to obtain a release to use those copyrighted images on the chips?", an intelligent discussion could have taken place, the chips may or may not have been made, and PI would still be a sponsor on CT, rather than giving up on this place. Lord knows if I had done as much for the membership here as Joe, I would be feeling a bit unappreciated, and would want to roll up my tents and beat feet also.

[jdunford]

Originally Posted by 99%evil

I see your argument, but let's put it this way. If you make one photocopy for research sake...it's probably not right, but it is done. Now say you take a book and photocopy every page and sell it. Now you've stolen from the original author, you're only making a copy, but you have taken away money from the original author, that person bought your copy at a lower cost and it doesn't make it right.

Furthermore, PI wouldn't sell the chips if it weren't for the images on them, and believe you me he is making a profit off of it. THe only reason the chips would sell is because of those images, the images are what makes the chips, just like the words on the photocopy is what makes the book.

I completely agree with the first paragraph here (that's what I was trying to say above). Joe isn't offering a group-buy for Star Wars chips for the masses. He offered to print someone's "custom design" that may or may not include copyright-infringing material. If someone hands me a book and says "please copy pages 2-499" of this 500-page book and I do and charge them the standard photocopying fee for a single copy of each page, which of us violated the copyright laws? I'm not making any more money than if I'd photocopied their 5-year-old's finger painting... just like PalmImports isn't making any more money than on any legitimately from-scratch artwork for poker chips. They sell custom chip labels all the time and can't possibly be expected to keep track of what is made from scratch and what includes infringing material (like my polar bear and penguin examples, above).

Admittedly, the Star Wars case is obvious because LucasArts has infiltrated every corner of modern society. Darth Vader's voice (or should I say James Earl Jones's) was recently publicized as the most recognized voice in the world in a study where they played famous audio clips in all sorts of remote places (hopefully with permission!). But I am sure there are cases where its not as obvious and nobody notices or cares. I had custom labels printed by PalmImports recently, and 2 chips in particular contained clipart that I got off the internet (don't even know where I found them). There's no way Joe could know that. And I have no idea if I should've asked permission from the original artist, but figure no one outside my home is ever going to see them, so what do I care?! No one will profit from it. I *could* have made my own (much crappier) artwork, and Joe would've made exactly the same amount of money. He didn't profit in any way from me using downloaded artwork. The only person who profited was me, because it took a lot less time than making my own and probably looks better, too.

[plagueboy]

Originally Posted by sn0wstorm

Printing Star Wars chips for a personal set is NOT like going to Walmart to steal something. This ain't the same. You are NOT hurting anyone with those chips. But you do hurt when you steal.

Making Star Wars chips ain't stealing. You people need to get this out of your heads.

Sure it is easier if you ask George Lucas if it is okay. But I think he will be rather angry getting such a mail and wasting his time asking such an irrelevant question.

It's not exactly like going to walmart and stealing something, but it is an infringement on the creators rights and in a way is like taking money out of his or her pockets.

How would you feel if someone on this board took one of your mockups and went and printed poker chips with it? Wasn't someone banned from here for doing just this? Do CT member's suffer less harm when their art is stolen? I think not, in fact, I'd argue less harm, as our art is less likely to be worth as much as lucas's.

If one takes copyrighted or trademarked work and put it on a chip just out of laziness or the inability to make something in the same style, then the art was stolen from the creator. If it's desirable enough to use then the artist needs to be compensated. If one can't afford to pay, one can try to get permission to use the art for free. If permisison is not granted (for free or not), then the art shouldn't be used. It's as simple as that. Otherwise, the creator's art is being benefited from without any compensation, even though the art likely did cost the artist time and money to create (and obviously saved you time and money to steal).

If anyone here personally doesn't feel that they should be compensated for their hard work, then we can argue socialism.

As a designer, I don't see how you can be on both sides of this. Are you using unlicensed copyrighted source materials? If not, why? If so, then do the people you're designing for know?

[X-Files]

From the LucasFilms site.

How can I get approval to use a photograph or film clip?
Lucasfilm manages the rights to films in the Star Wars saga and the Indiana Jones trilogy, as well as Tucker: The Man and His Dream, Willow and Labyrinth, and requests related to those films should be directed to Lucasfilm's Publicity Department.

[99%evil]

Check out htis link it kind of bridges the gap on the conversation
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Check out the spots on research and scholarly research.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

the nature of the copyrighted work;

amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

[kmalsom]

Originally Posted by X-Files

From the LucasFilms site.

not directly related, but:
from http://www.lucasfilm.com/press/news/news20061011.html
Roffman noted that many Star Wars fans around the world produce replicas of Star Wars costumes for their own personal use and enjoyment, an activity to which Lucasfilm Ltd. has no objection. One such group, the "501st Legion" of stormtroopers, is a global organization that has often worked with Lucasfilm and its partners. "We appreciate that Star Wars has sparked the imaginations of fans around the world," he said. "We would never want to discourage fans from showcasing their enthusiasm for the movies. However, anyone who tries to profit from using our copyrights and trademarks without authorization crosses the line; they become an infringer and we will go after them."