Grader Notes

[RockMyAmadeus]

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

 

I intend it quite frequently--when someone else is being a , I make extra effort to be a right back to them.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

What about when comic book characters are used in advertisements for the comic book dealer? Such as an ad in The Overstreet Price Guide?

 

I've seen plenty of ads using copyrighted protected characters and wondered how they get away with that. The intention is to make money with those ads and using those characters in ads appears to be a legal issue.

 

Companies widely always allow direct or second-hand copyright violations slide when it comes to companies helping them sell their products. In the case of a comic book seller, it ultimately makes Marvel and DC money for to there to be a resale market for their products, so it's to their benefit to allow it. We're all fans of their products here--this forum is a living, breathing advertisement for Marvel, DC, and the rest.

[chrisco37]

I've looked into it in the past. There are "fair use" laws that allow you to use for educational purposes. As long as you are not using them to make money and are using their characters within reasonable quantity (this is where it gets ambiguous) you are well within your rights to reproduce their characters.

 

Do you recall where you heard it? My ex-girlfriend and her sister--one is a teacher and the other works in a public library--have both independently been told the opposite with regards to character images. I memory serves, Disney's position is they don't want teachers intentionally or unintentionally portraying their characters to students in a negative light.

 

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

Disney has been known hold a firm stance on preserving the artistic style and integrity of the character, meaning if a 4 or 5 year old drew one of their characters crudely because they draw like you'd expect a 4 or 5 year old might draw, they wouldn't allow it.

 

I don't want to derail this thread into a Disney-thing but, if what you and FF are saying (in regards to the Disney characters) is true, how did South Park "get away" with it?

 

I know Disney is pretty vigilant about defending their property, but there must be some loophole that allowed South Park to do what they did this season (the Jonas Brothers episode).

[fantastic_four]

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

 

I intend it quite frequently--when someone else is being a , I make extra effort to be a right back to them.

 

 

 

There have been three people in the history of this forum where I have taken a permanent adversarial attitude with because they're that way themselves, even if they don't realize it--Danny Dupcak, Vince, and you. So yea, I'm sure you think I'm adversarial/dismissive/combatative, because I always have been with you, because you're that way with almost everyone. Dupcak and Vince knew they're that way, though...I can't tell if you realize it or not.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/contact-us/corporate-communications

 

 

[comicwiz]

I've looked into it in the past. There are "fair use" laws that allow you to use for educational purposes. As long as you are not using them to make money and are using their characters within reasonable quantity (this is where it gets ambiguous) you are well within your rights to reproduce their characters.

 

Do you recall where you heard it? My ex-girlfriend and her sister--one is a teacher and the other works in a public library--have both independently been told the opposite with regards to character images. I memory serves, Disney's position is they don't want teachers intentionally or unintentionally portraying their characters to students in a negative light.

 

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

Disney has been known hold a firm stance on preserving the artistic style and integrity of the character, meaning if a 4 or 5 year old drew one of their characters crudely because they draw like you'd expect a 4 or 5 year old might draw, they wouldn't allow it.

 

Within the first minute of this TED preso, Clay Shirky describes a Ma and Pop Bakery that was "hassled" out of being able to print a child's drawing of Mickey Mouse:

 

[fantastic_four]

I don't want to derail this thread into a Disney-thing but, if what you and FF are saying (in regards to the Disney characters) is true, how did South Park "get away" with it?

 

I know Disney is pretty vigilant about defending their property, but there must be some loophole that allowed South Park to do what they did this season (the Jonas Brothers episode).

 

Which episode? I think I've seen all of this season--I DVR it, but may have missed an episode. My guess is they got permission, but it depends upon what they did.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

 

I intend it quite frequently--when someone else is being a , I make extra effort to be a right back to them.

 

 

 

There have been three people in the history of this forum where I have taken a permanent adversarial attitude with because they're that way themselves, even if they don't realize it--Danny Dupcak, Vince, and you. So yea, I'm sure you think I'm adversarial/dismissive/combatative, because I always have been with you, because you're that way with almost everyone. Dupcak and Vince knew they're that way, though...I can't tell if you realize it or not.

 

[fantastic_four]

 

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/contact-us/corporate-communications

 

 

Give it a whirl! I'm curious as to what response you get, if any.

[Jeffro.]

I've looked into it in the past. There are "fair use" laws that allow you to use for educational purposes. As long as you are not using them to make money and are using their characters within reasonable quantity (this is where it gets ambiguous) you are well within your rights to reproduce their characters.

 

Do you recall where you heard it? My ex-girlfriend and her sister--one is a teacher and the other works in a public library--have both independently been told the opposite with regards to character images. I memory serves, Disney's position is they don't want teachers intentionally or unintentionally portraying their characters to students in a negative light.

 

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

Disney has been known hold a firm stance on preserving the artistic style and integrity of the character, meaning if a 4 or 5 year old drew one of their characters crudely because they draw like you'd expect a 4 or 5 year old might draw, they wouldn't allow it.

 

I don't want to derail this thread into a Disney-thing but, if what you and FF are saying (in regards to the Disney characters) is true, how did South Park "get away" with it?

 

I know Disney is pretty vigilant about defending their property, but there must be some loophole that allowed South Park to do what they did this season (the Jonas Brothers episode).

 

The Simpsons also did it quite liberally in the early years of the show.

[chrisco37]

I don't want to derail this thread into a Disney-thing but, if what you and FF are saying (in regards to the Disney characters) is true, how did South Park "get away" with it?

 

I know Disney is pretty vigilant about defending their property, but there must be some loophole that allowed South Park to do what they did this season (the Jonas Brothers episode).

 

Which episode? I think I've seen all of this season--I DVR it, but may have missed an episode. My guess is they got permission, but it depends upon what they did.

 

There's no way Disney would've given them permission. Here's an image from the episode, "The Ring" Season 13 Episode 1:

 

[comicwiz]

I don't want to derail this thread into a Disney-thing but, if what you and FF are saying (in regards to the Disney characters) is true, how did South Park "get away" with it?

 

I know Disney is pretty vigilant about defending their property, but there must be some loophole that allowed South Park to do what they did this season (the Jonas Brothers episode).

 

Which episode? I think I've seen all of this season--I DVR it, but may have missed an episode. My guess is they got permission, but it depends upon what they did.

 

There's no way Disney would've given them permission. Here's an image from the episode:

 

 

They'll be hearing from Disney's lawyers now

[RockMyAmadeus]

I wish the adversarial overtones related to this topic would go away--I myself have an intellectual interest in the topic, it's the only reason I'm discussing it. I don't think I started them and don't know where they're coming from.

 

 

I intend it quite frequently--when someone else is being a , I make extra effort to be a right back to them.

 

 

 

There have been three people in the history of this forum where I have taken a permanent adversarial attitude with because they're that way themselves, even if they don't realize it--Danny Dupcak, Vince, and you. So yea, I'm sure you think I'm adversarial/dismissive/combatative, because I always have been with you, because you're that way with almost everyone. Dupcak and Vince knew they're that way, though...I can't tell if you realize it or not.

 

 

Ok, fair enough. And Marty Mann can respond to your dismissive tone on his own.

 

Ok, fair enough. And Marty Mann can respond to your dismissive tone on his own.

 

Dismissive tone? Where? None was intended.

 

It's how your typed word comes across sometimes.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

[Transplant]

There have been three people in the history of this forum where I have taken a permanent adversarial attitude with because they're that way themselves, even if they don't realize it--Danny Dupcak, Vince, and you. So yea, I'm sure you think I'm adversarial/dismissive/combatative, because I always have been with you, because you're that way with almost everyone. Dupcak and Vince knew they're that way, though...I can't tell if you realize it or not.

Don't let his passive aggressive silence turn this into a thread about him, please.

[RockMyAmadeus]

There have been three people in the history of this forum where I have taken a permanent adversarial attitude with because they're that way themselves, even if they don't realize it--Danny Dupcak, Vince, and you. So yea, I'm sure you think I'm adversarial/dismissive/combatative, because I always have been with you, because you're that way with almost everyone. Dupcak and Vince knew they're that way, though...I can't tell if you realize it or not.

Don't let his passive aggressive silence turn this into a thread about him, please.

 

 

[comicwiz]

Dear Popcorn machine maker person (observance of workplace equity in full effect), if you are reading this.

 

We have performed the requisite research and have our first case subject revealing brain cavity decay relating to the over consumption of popcorn.

 

Please pull the plug on the Popcorn maker.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Dear Popcorn machine maker person (observance of workplace equity in full effect), if you are reading this.

 

We have performed the requisite research and have our first case subject revealing brain cavity decay relating to the over consumption of popcorn.

 

Please pull the plug on the popcorn maker.

 

 

[COI]

 

This is the first Friday that has felt like a Friday in a long time.

[comicwiz]

I think we all got that powder keg in us. The topics are simply the wick.

 

On this topic, the wick suppliers have barely been able to keep up.

[Jeffro.]

Dear Popcorn machine maker person (observance of workplace equity in full effect), if you are reading this.

 

We have performed the requisite research and have our first case subject revealing brain cavity decay relating to the over consumption of popcorn.

 

Please pull the plug on the Popcorn maker.