• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

poster/comic cover reproduction site: need help to find the name of the site

Started by kagemusha7s,

30 posts in this topic

Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
I think it's this one.

 

(shrug)

 

A comment based on my previous post from the other thread regarding this business practice:

 

Cool poster, however the nature of my profession requires me to

 

(tsk)

 

chastise posterburner.com for infringing on copywritten artwork and not notifying customers they cannot do that. Major no-no to reproduce artwork without permission, regardless of how cool it is or how many copies they make.

 

Edit: This responsibilty does not fall to the customer, but to the business to keep people informed about what constitutes as infringement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kagemusha7s

kagemusha7s

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I saw a post a while back about a site you could send a picture to and they would make you a full size poster.

 

The OP had a poster made of a G.I. Joe cover.

 

Anyone know the name of the website?

 

 

Here you go.

 

 

That's the one :banana:

 

I tried searching for it, but had no luck :tonofbricks:

 

Thank you (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
techtre2003

techtre2003

Posted
Posted
I think it's this one.

 

(shrug)

 

A comment based on my previous post from the other thread regarding this business practice:

 

Cool poster, however the nature of my profession requires me to

 

(tsk)

 

chastise posterburner.com for infringing on copywritten artwork and not notifying customers they cannot do that. Major no-no to reproduce artwork without permission, regardless of how cool it is or how many copies they make.

 

Edit: This responsibilty does not fall to the customer, but to the business to keep people informed about what constitutes as infringement.

 

Yes, I understand. I had the Dr. Balls approval logo as my avatar when I posted that but I wasn't thinking that when I changed my avatar back that the previous posts all changed too. Kind of ruined my joke :boo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bookery

Bookery

Posted
Posted

Dr. Balls, you are forgetting c-section of the copyright code...

 

§ 501. Infringement of copyright3

 

(a) Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 or of the author as provided in section 106A(a), or who imports copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of section 602, is an infringer of the copyright or right of the author, as the case may be. For purposes of this chapter (other than section 506), any reference to copyright shall be deemed to include the rights conferred by section 106A(a). As used in this subsection, the term “anyone” includes any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this title in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.

 

(b) The legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright is entitled, subject to the requirements of section 411, to institute an action for any infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of it. The court may require such owner to serve written notice of the action with a copy of the complaint upon any person shown, by the records of the Copyright Office or otherwise, to have or claim an interest in the copyright, and shall require that such notice be served upon any person whose interest is likely to be affected by a decision in the case. The court may require the joinder, and shall permit the intervention, of any person having or claiming an interest in the copyright.

 

© All of the above restraints against copyright infringement are summarily deemed null and void if the Court should decide that the accused infringer really really wants the stuff bad enough.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
Dr. Balls, you are forgetting c-section of the copyright code...

 

§ 501. Infringement of copyright3

 

(a) Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 or of the author as provided in section 106A(a), or who imports copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of section 602, is an infringer of the copyright or right of the author, as the case may be. For purposes of this chapter (other than section 506), any reference to copyright shall be deemed to include the rights conferred by section 106A(a). As used in this subsection, the term “anyone” includes any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this title in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.

 

(b) The legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright is entitled, subject to the requirements of section 411, to institute an action for any infringement of that particular right committed while he or she is the owner of it. The court may require such owner to serve written notice of the action with a copy of the complaint upon any person shown, by the records of the Copyright Office or otherwise, to have or claim an interest in the copyright, and shall require that such notice be served upon any person whose interest is likely to be affected by a decision in the case. The court may require the joinder, and shall permit the intervention, of any person having or claiming an interest in the copyright.

 

© All of the above restraints against copyright infringement are summarily deemed null and void if the Court should decide that the accused infringer really really wants the stuff bad enough.

 

lol

 

Yes, I have noticed that single-serve infringement often trumps the need to follow the law. I understand the desire - and that is why it's important for a business to educate their customers about infringement in order to cultivate a more law-abiding attitude. But that goes out the window when one vendor refuses and the one down the street doesn't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ryan.

Ryan.

Posted
Posted

What's the difference between this and buying comics secondhand? Either way, someone else is profiting from a creator's work. Note: This is a legitimate question for those who know of such things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davenport

Davenport

Posted
Posted

I wonder where custom print posters fall within all the other Fandom "infringement' activities. Con sketches, cosplay, custom action figures, custom sculpts and model kits, and so on.

 

Creators and rights-holders have long benefited from a certain degree of Fan expression. Just not sure why a custom print poster tips the scale more so than, say, inked cover replicas or custom-bound hardcover art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joecgcmaniac

joecgcmaniac

Posted
Posted
What's the difference between this and buying comics secondhand? Either way, someone else is profiting from a creator's work. Note: This is a legitimate question for those who know of such things.

 

The comics were produced legally, these posters, not so much. When the comics were sold, the creating company got paid, the poster makers aren't paying for the use of other's creations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
revat

revat

Posted
Posted
I have seen comic stores advertise that if you bring them your favourite comic book cover you own and they wil print it on a 18 x 27 inch canvas. For a fee of course and I am sure it is just not simply production related...Same thing here?

equally infringe-worthy, unless they go get permission or buy the rights to that cover.

 

But also just as hard to enforce (if not harder). You think Disney is going to come to your shop with a cease and desist order?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
What's the difference between this and buying comics secondhand? Either way, someone else is profiting from a creator's work. Note: This is a legitimate question for those who know of such things.

 

The comics were produced legally, these posters, not so much. When the comics were sold, the creating company got paid, the poster makers aren't paying for the use of other's creations.

 

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

 

The problem resides in a company profiting from others and not having to pay any royalties or fees for usage. Example:

 

Let's say "Ralph" pays PosterBurner.com $20 to make a poster of GI Joe featuring characters created by Hasbro and drawn by artists paid by Marvel.

 

It costs PosterBurner.com $9 to print and ship a poster.

 

PosterBurner.com pockets $11 making a poster with someone else's idea and someone else's artwork without having to pay any fees to those companies.

 

In essence, they produce something that is not theirs and make money from it.

 

If someone bought a print from me, and then someone else offered to make it 2X bigger for an added price of $20 - that takes money out of *my* pocket. I lose the sale. I lose the opportunity to provide a customer with a bigger print. As the creator of the artwork, it is my perogative to provide customers with what I want - no one else gets to make those determinations - because it's my property.

 

I think people dismiss that because it's a big corporation and they can stand to lose a few bucks. Most infringement is done so out of ignorance not malice - it's not often that I see such blatant infringement like what PosterBurner.com is doing.

 

And again - it's not the repsonsibility of the customer to understand copyright law and licensing - it's the responsibility of the business to conduct themselves ethically in regards to other people's rights and to educate customers when they want something printed that the vendor shouldn't print.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing