Oh duende dear

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Richard, Jan 8, 2005.

  1. Richard

    Richard Guest

    www.somestuff.batcave.net

    Now I dare you to claim copyright.
    Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.
    Richard, Jan 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Richard

    Steve Pugh Guest

    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:

    >www.somestuff.batcave.net
    >
    >Now I dare you to claim copyright.


    As your version is so much crapper than his, I doubt he would want to.

    >Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.


    Now show us that you can produce something decent with it.

    Steve
    Steve Pugh, Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:

    > Now I dare you to claim copyright.


    FFS, take this off alt.html. No one gives a shit, okay?

    > Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.


    Big whoop. So do I. Nobody cares.

    Welcome to the killfile.

    --
    Joel.
    Joel Shepherd, Jan 8, 2005
    #3
  4. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle Steve Pugh scribbled in the mud:

    > As your version is so much crapper than his,


    Hey, watch your tongue there young man. It's the same image, unchanged except
    for the name. My guess is changing it from square-eye.jpg to eye.jpg was
    quite an undertaking for poor RtS.

    --
    D?
    http://wipkip.biz just to raise my PR
    Duende, Jan 8, 2005
    #4
  5. Richard

    Steve Pugh Guest

    Duende <> wrote:

    >While sitting in a puddle Steve Pugh scribbled in the mud:
    >
    >> As your version is so much crapper than his,

    >
    >Hey, watch your tongue there young man. It's the same image, unchanged except
    >for the name.


    It is now. However, when I first looked it was different. The rounded
    blue corners had been removed and the square pupil had been skewed
    slightly and badly.

    Steve
    Steve Pugh, Jan 8, 2005
    #5
  6. Richard

    Richard Guest

    "Duende" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95D88A98818F4httpwipkipbiz@130.133.1.4...
    > While sitting in a puddle Steve Pugh scribbled in the mud:
    >
    > > As your version is so much crapper than his,

    >
    > Hey, watch your tongue there young man. It's the same image, unchanged

    except
    > for the name. My guess is changing it from square-eye.jpg to eye.jpg was
    > quite an undertaking for poor RtS.
    >
    > --
    > D?


    Oh I see now. You're claiming that the "square" of the replaced eye is YOUR
    work.
    Sorry, but that is something anyone can do.
    And you think your idea is original?
    ESAD.
    Richard, Jan 8, 2005
    #6
  7. Richard

    Sid Ismail Guest

    On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 21:15:29 GMT, Joel Shepherd <>
    wrote:

    : In article <>,
    : "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:
    :
    : > Now I dare you to claim copyright.
    :
    : FFS, take this off alt.html. No one gives a shit, okay?
    :
    : > Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.
    :
    : Big whoop. So do I. Nobody cares.
    :
    : Welcome to the killfile.


    I've killfiled him a while back... what a troll.

    Sid
    Sid Ismail, Jan 8, 2005
    #7
  8. Richard

    RobM Guest

    "Joel Shepherd" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:
    >
    > FFS, take this off alt.html. No one gives a shit, okay?
    >


    Agreed !

    Rob
    Melbourne
    RobM, Jan 8, 2005
    #8
  9. On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 00:33:00 +0200, Sid Ismail <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 21:15:29 GMT, Joel Shepherd <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > : In article <>,
    > : "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:
    > :
    > : > Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.
    > :
    > : Big whoop. So do I. Nobody cares.
    > :
    > : Welcome to the killfile.
    >
    >
    > I've killfiled him a while back... what a troll.
    >


    The problem is, that if all put him in a killfile, no one will be able to
    correct the very nonsense he utters on a daily base.

    But I agree that besides the correcting bit, no one should giv e any more
    attention to him and his posts. Ignore him. Don't keep rewarding him for his bad
    behaviour with ever more attention. Just let him be. Don't interact with him.
    Don't communicate.


    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
    | weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
    Barbara de Zoete, Jan 8, 2005
    #9
  10. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle Steve Pugh scribbled in the mud:

    > It is now. However, when I first looked it was different. The rounded
    > blue corners had been removed and the square pupil had been skewed
    > slightly and badly.


    Glad I missed it.

    Time to move on.

    --
    D?
    http://wipkip.biz just to raise my PR
    Duende, Jan 8, 2005
    #10
  11. Richard

    Richard Guest

    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote in message
    news:...
    > www.somestuff.batcave.net
    >
    > Now I dare you to claim copyright.
    > Just to show that I have the necessary software to edit any image I want.
    >
    >


    BTW, dipshit, searching google turned up at least 3 other sources of your
    prescious "square eye" thing.
    Not the same image, the same style.
    So your originality isn't all that original.
    And that's just what google found so far.
    No telling how many other similar, and same, images can be found.
    Richard, Jan 9, 2005
    #11
  12. Richard

    rf Guest

    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote

    > BTW, dipshit, searching google turned up at least 3 other sources of your
    > prescious "square eye" thing.
    > Not the same image, the same style.
    > So your originality isn't all that original.


    You really do not have any bloody idea of copyright law do you dipstick?

    Just because you happened to find something that is *similar* does not, in
    any way, lessen the rights that Duende has on that particular image that you
    stole.

    I would imagine that millions of people have taken pictures of sunsets. That
    does *not* mean that if I take a picture of a sunset that I do not hold
    copyright to that particular picture. In fact, I do. If you were to steal it
    (like you stole Duende's image) then I could quite easily sue you for
    copyright infringement.

    One of these days somebody is actually going to take you to task and sue
    your stupid arse right off. It just may be dynamic drive, the way you are
    stealing their copyrighted material. I would say they could easily argue
    that *you*, having there material on *your* piddly little web page would
    actually be quite a harm to their image.

    They also include a copyright notice on their page. This means that in the
    US of A they can also sue your for money. That's right. They can force you
    to pay for any loss of income due to your piddly little page degrading their
    reputation.

    I'd contact your lawyer right now :)

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Jan 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:

    > They also include a copyright notice on their page. This means that in
    > the US of A they can also sue your for money. That's right. They can
    > force you to pay for any loss of income due to your piddly little page
    > degrading their reputation.
    >
    > I'd contact your lawyer right now :)


    Now be careful Sir. RtS may have rights you are unaware of.
    http://tinyurl.com/428wr

    --
    D?
    http://wipkip.biz just to raise my PR
    Duende, Jan 9, 2005
    #13
  14. Richard

    Richard Guest

    "Duende" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns95D8D27EA3D38httpwipkipbiz@130.133.1.4...
    > While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:
    >
    > > They also include a copyright notice on their page. This means that in
    > > the US of A they can also sue your for money. That's right. They can
    > > force you to pay for any loss of income due to your piddly little page
    > > degrading their reputation.
    > >
    > > I'd contact your lawyer right now :)

    >
    > Now be careful Sir. RtS may have rights you are unaware of.
    >


    Duende, all you have to do is post the registration number for the
    copyright.
    Just because you "claim" it's yours, does not prove it is yours.
    Because you posted it on YOUR website, does not make it legally yours.
    Post the proof.
    Richard, Jan 9, 2005
    #14
  15. Richard

    rf Guest

    "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote

    > Duende, all you have to do is post the registration number for the
    > copyright.


    YOU BLOODY IDIOT.

    There does not have to be any registration number. The simple act of
    creating the work and publishing it makes it a copyrighted piece of work. It
    is automatic. Nobody has to do anything else, expecially obtaining
    registration numbers.

    > Just because you "claim" it's yours, does not prove it is yours.


    Yes it does. If he built it then it is his. Full stop.

    > Because you posted it on YOUR website, does not make it legally yours.


    Yes it does.

    > Post the proof.


    He already has. He has posted the work and he has implied that the work is
    his. That is all the proof that is required.

    If he decided to sue you for theft then the deciding factor would be that
    Duende could provide the court with the original uncompressed image, before
    it was prepared for web use. Can you do that? No, you can't.

    He has also declared, and you have admitted, that you stole his copyrighted
    work. Why not simply admit that you stole his work and move on with other
    things, like fixing your crappy site?

    Now that you have learned from CLJ that you can do something so dreadfully
    simple as to make two function calls in a single onmouseover event handler
    then you should be rearing to go :)

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Jan 9, 2005
    #15
  16. In article <592Ed.111311$>, rf
    (rf@.invalid) dropped a +5 bundle of words...

    > "Richard" <Anonymous@127.001> wrote
    >
    > > BTW, dipshit, searching google turned up at least 3 other sources of your
    > > prescious "square eye" thing.
    > > Not the same image, the same style.
    > > So your originality isn't all that original.

    >
    > You really do not have any bloody idea of copyright law do you dipstick?


    In addition to many, many, many other things.

    >
    > Just because you happened to find something that is *similar* does not, in
    > any way, lessen the rights that Duende has on that particular image that you
    > stole.
    >
    > I would imagine that millions of people have taken pictures of sunsets. That
    > does *not* mean that if I take a picture of a sunset that I do not hold
    > copyright to that particular picture. In fact, I do. If you were to steal it
    > (like you stole Duende's image) then I could quite easily sue you for
    > copyright infringement.
    >
    > One of these days somebody is actually going to take you to task and sue
    > your stupid arse right off. It just may be dynamic drive, the way you are
    > stealing their copyrighted material. I would say they could easily argue
    > that *you*, having there material on *your* piddly little web page would
    > actually be quite a harm to their image.
    >
    > They also include a copyright notice on their page. This means that in the
    > US of A they can also sue your for money. That's right. They can force you
    > to pay for any loss of income due to your piddly little page degrading their
    > reputation.


    They'll get 2 ketchup packets and some spare wood from his "Deck"
    because that's about all he's got to his name.

    >
    > I'd contact your lawyer right now :)
    >
    >


    --
    Starshine Moonbeam
    mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
    sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM
    Starshine Moonbeam, Jan 9, 2005
    #16
  17. Richard

    Duende Guest

    While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:

    > Cheers
    > Richard.


    Might as well give up on this. It's not worth gittin all worked up over. You
    know RtS would love to go on about it for a year or two.

    Time to take your sexy roo for a jog.

    --
    D?
    http://wipkip.biz just to raise my PR
    Duende, Jan 9, 2005
    #17
  18. Richard

    rf Guest

    "Duende" <> wrote

    > Might as well give up on this. It's not worth gittin all worked up over.

    You
    > know RtS would love to go on about it for a year or two.


    My thoughts exactly. I think I need to throw the brick wall away :)

    > Time to take your sexy roo for a jog.


    What? Sexy is for girls. This roo is a *bloke*. Doesn't need "sexy". He just
    exists.

    As for jogging, Bah Humbug. We'll just wait right here thank you very much.
    A nice rooette will hop past shortly.

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Jan 9, 2005
    #18
  19. In article <>, Anonymous@127.001 says...
    >
    > "Duende" <> wrote in message
    > news:Xns95D8D27EA3D38httpwipkipbiz@130.133.1.4...
    > > While sitting in a puddle rf scribbled in the mud:
    > >
    > > > They also include a copyright notice on their page. This means that in
    > > > the US of A they can also sue your for money. That's right. They can
    > > > force you to pay for any loss of income due to your piddly little page
    > > > degrading their reputation.
    > > >
    > > > I'd contact your lawyer right now :)

    > >
    > > Now be careful Sir. RtS may have rights you are unaware of.
    > >

    >
    > Duende, all you have to do is post the registration number for the
    > copyright.


    You don't register copyrights, RtS. Once one has published their own
    work the copyright is implied. Show me the proof, in law, that one has
    to "register" copyrights, RtS.

    --
    Hywel http://kibo.org.uk/
    I do not eat quiche.
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 9, 2005
    #19
  20. Richard

    Neal Guest

    Richard <Anonymous@127.001> wrote:

    > Duende, all you have to do is post the registration number for the
    > copyright.


    A registration is not required for claiming copyright.

    Seek a lawyer, you don't know jack shit about what you're babbling on.
    Neal, Jan 9, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. nospam
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    604
    nospam
    Nov 13, 2003
  2. =?Utf-8?B?QXNoYQ==?=

    Dear MVP - Web control performance enquiries

    =?Utf-8?B?QXNoYQ==?=, Sep 24, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    406
    Ken Dopierala Jr.
    Sep 24, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?QXNoYQ==?=

    Dear MVP - Web control performance enquiries

    =?Utf-8?B?QXNoYQ==?=, Sep 24, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    376
    Scott Allen
    Sep 24, 2004
  4. Edwin van der Vaart

    OT: Ping Duende

    Edwin van der Vaart, Jul 27, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    396
    Andrew Urquhart
    Jul 27, 2004
  5. Richard

    Ping duende

    Richard, Jan 11, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    41
    Views:
    1,520
Loading...

Share This Page