Dealing with People Selling Fan Projects — Page 11

Molly said:

YOU DOHO

This is an insult I’m completely unfamiliar with.

Just asking how much in US $ is a good blank 50 GB Blu ray. I tried looking it up but the pricing is all over the place.

TV’s Frink said:

Molly said:

YOU DOHO

This is an insult I’m completely unfamiliar with.

Possessed, this is a battle I do not think that you can win.

I did a Google search for “doho insult” and it asked if I meant “dodo insult”.

I did a search for just “doho” and apparently it means, “a large tree” in Arabic.

It’s pretty obvious Molly was using a very clever insult about how it doesn’t matter how big your tree is if you’re an extinct bird.

Clever girl!

1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
2. In exchange they ask from you money
3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi *** entertainment!

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Wrong.

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding LDS entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, LDS has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi *** entertainment!

Ha, I thought the same.

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

I’d love to see that argument for selling bootleg Blu-Rays stand up in court. IT WON’T!

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

So wrong, you clearly don’t know anything about copyright laws.

Molly said:

I was self-censoring, for what it’s worth.

Well yeah, but that still doesn’t explain how you landed on “doho.”

pittrek said:

1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
2. In exchange they ask from you money
3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Hi *** entertainment

HerekittykittyX said:

pittrek said:

1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
2. In exchange they ask from you money
3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Hi *** entertainment

The Force is strong with this one…

ZigZig said:

HerekittykittyX said:

pittrek said:

1. They are sending you copyrighted material without the permission of the copyright owner.
2. In exchange they ask from you money
3. The copyrighted material is a derivative work, not tranformative work, it’s complete and not just a few clips, and it’s not provided for criticism, scholarship, commentary, parody or news reporting.

So I don’t know like you but I all I see is selling illegal copies of copyrighted material

Hi *** entertainment

The Force is strong with this one…

This isn’t my first encounter with them I have got in a comment war with ***

pittrek tries to dismantle the arguments of “Han Shot First”. So if LDS is someone here, he would maybe be “Han Shot First”, but certainly not pittrek.

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding *** entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, *** has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hello there

You doho!

TV’s Frink said:

scotchka said:

Han Shot First said:

I think you guys are all misunderstanding LDS entertainment. They make it very clear that you are not being charged for the discs, you are being charged as compensation for the money that they spent to put the set together. Whether they are making a profit or not is impossible to tell (it is highly probable that they are), but selling artwork is not a crime, even if it is of copyrighted material. Therefor, LDS has done nothing illegal. The only issue is morality, which I will admit is shaky in this circumstance, but as far as legality, there is really nothing to worry about with these people.

Hi LDS entertainment!

Ha, I thought the same.

That’s because we are smart people.

!{}(x)

Replace { and } with [ and ]

Replace x with link to image.

ZigZig said:

You doho!

Lol.