What software (s) have helped you most with the comic hobby?

[comicwiz]

I use compu-comic , software from Canada I bought a decade ago.

 

I have never heard of this software; is it still being manufactured? Where could I obtain a copy as I'm the process of auditing my entire collection, as well as putting together a schedule for insurance purposes.

 

 

[comicwiz]

Say someone publishes an article about Superior Comics and the Guide said all the info came from the Guide. Well, to the best of my knowledge, that's nothing the Guide could fight, since the writer coule merely cite the Guide as a source.

 

I suppose I'm citing an extreme case of infringement whereby a "newer" resource pops-up, which clearly lifts all information relating to Superior Comics without properly referencing OPG. As far as I know, OPG is the only resource for information relating to all the titles published by Superior Comics. This assumption is also firmly grounded in a case whereby Jay attempted to sue someone (later becoming an out-of-court-settlement) who lifted "chunks" of the text appearing in his UGPG. By copying Jay's research in chunks the thief also lifted sizeable amount of Jay's errors and mistakes; Jay was able to easily establish an infringement case against this thief as it clearly proved the thief had not done any independant research.

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

About Jay's case: that's interesting, and of course it does make sense. That's exactly why the deliberate insertion of errors that don't affect true information is an easy way to leave "markers" in your text to ferret out anyone who copies things wholesale in that way.

[comicwiz]

The thing I find even more extraordinary, and this relates back to an earlier post about copyrights, patents and trademarks, was when I first started studying trademarks and patents. Back when I first formed my web-dev firm, I thought it would be beneficial to become a trademark agent; this was at the time when it was fashionable to snatch-up a dot com at any cost. Many well-intentioned business start-ups started finding themselves doing a lot more cyber-squatting than they really needed to. A great many of these well-intentioned folks also decided to cover their tracks by getting their domains trademarked. It was like a one-two punch in the online business... and it meant an additional chunk of business and money for our firm, as we were one of the few firms capable of doing this without involving any lawyers, or legal fees.

 

At the time I was studying trademarks and patents, one of the interesting things I learned about is that they are generally very weak forms of legal protection in the case of infringement. Weak in the sense that even if you are able to prove that someone has blatently stolen your idea, concept or even a product, by the time you catch-up with the thief, and have your case successfully presented in court, infringement may be the last thing you have to worry about. The most interesting case I remember reading about was a guy who started a basement operation producing a fishing lure.

 

Having financed the entire operation on his own, he had to operate on very low distribution initially, but when the word got out on the street that his lure was landing all the prize lunkers across North America, his lure was so successful that a much LARGER bait & tackle outfit decided to knock-off his product. They mass-produced the product, producing it in a variety of different colours, with more appealing packaging. But the end product did not produce the same results as the original lure they copied. Because they saturated the market with garbage knock-off product, by the time the original guy took his case to court, got the court to side with him, and was awarded a minor compensation by the thiefs, it was too late. The lure was dismissed by amatuer and professional fisherman alike as being a complete failure. This was mainly attributed to a shoddy knock-off product, that although not bearing the same name, had already ingrained a product brand association in the minds of the consumer. Unfortunately, in this example, from a purely legal sense, a patent on the fishing lure did nothing to protect that entrepenuer against infringement.

 

I thought it was a useful example because although, as we have already come to understand that both the OPG and the UGPG are clearly capable of holding their own in the strictest sense of copyright laws, I find it fascinating that both Bob and Jay still needed to resort to publishing errors/mistakes to establish their own independent research in the face of the law. In light of our story about a guy and his fishing lures, I don't blame either Bob or Jay one bit!