*dead Nooooooooooo!! My 9 year #1 video removed via copyright laws

You keep posting these, Ant.

I don't get the appeal. It's not funny enough to be a parody, but it's not unique enough to stand as an homage or a furthering of the Star Trek idea. The Orville is just hack writing, cutting as close to the copyright law as they can sneak without getting sued (they hope).

@Zawash -- all true. And yet, just because Calvin and Hobbes and Bill Watterson are/were awesome, it doesn't make IP and copyright rules any more sensible.

My opinion: those respectful and well-done parodies and homages (say, Pants are Overrated's Hobbes and Bacon) are fair use. The person/people that drew Calvin peeing on things? Fair use also. There is a big difference between "tasteless" and "should be illegal".

Selling car decals with those images is different, because then you're treading all over the "not for profit" element of fair use. However, tracking down tons of small-scale infringers on that, or even worse, average people who simply buy the decals/shirts/whatever and likely don't know or care to know about IP and copyright laws is ... a losing battle at best, and punitive towards *fans* of the IP at worst.

There are many many examples of going to idiotic (IMO) lengths to protect IP. Disney suing local bakeries for drawing some character in icing on top of a kids birthday cake. Metallica suing Napster, University internet hosts, and even individual downloaders of their music. Teachers being sued for playing a clip of a TV show, movie, or song as part of their lessons. Etc. etc.

At some level, copyright is a good thing. Or at least a necessary evil. But the litigious zeal with which IP and copyright are "protected" these days seems like we've lost sight of the "art before commerce" element that is a huge part of why Calvin and Hobbes was so awesome. And why IP is something worth protecting (within sensible limits).

A good video from a copyright attorney explaining how he sees the situation and talks about trademark and copyright law in general. https://youtu.be/74ykxzNGspg

Sweet Zombie Jesus! I had not heard about what they're parodying.
The Fine bro's think they 'own' 'react' videos? How did they ever get a copyright to something that's ubiquitous as reaction videos. That's completely insane and not what copyright laws are intended for.
I feel like they need to get a slap down from, I dunno, lets say the creators of candid camera? Or maybe 'kids say the darndest things'?

Good bye Fine Brothers. I hope you enjoyed having a company, because I'm fairly certain you've just destroyed it.

In addition to being $14/29 ( shipping auto added to pledge - $20 to the EU) on the kickstarter, it is also likely that selling this thing anywhere in the industrialized world is Illegal under copyright law.

Right now they have > 10x their required amount, they are going to have a hard time dealing with the new volume as is. So no benefit to joining at this point. It will likely be much cheaper to pick them up from newark/digikey or even sparkfun when they are actually in stock. assuming they actually ship and nobody with an IP claim to the linux kernel their chip supplier is stealing decides to sue them over it.

There is no statute of limitations in the offense of the First degree (premeditated) murder by Federal agents of Randy Weaver's wife and son in 1992. Justice has not been served yet.
I sent the following message to Idaho Governor Butch Otter via both is Facebook page and via a direct link to his state website. I'd like to challenge all of you to do the same. Just copy & paste everything below the line. His contact information is at the bottom.
---------------------------------------------------
Remembering the Real Story of Ruby Ridge Idaho - August 21 1992
From >> [url redacted]
Uncovering government corruption at Ruby Ridge
According to FBI Grand Jury Testimony, US Marshals were involved in the cover up, the media, and the story from the Weaver's perspective...

Today, you are considered an "extremist" by the ADL and SPLC if you think the actions taken here by the Federal Government were out of hand. For the first time in US history, the FBI was given permission from cabinet members of the George HW Bush administration to change their Rules of Engagement to, "can and should shoot to kill" effectively rendering the US Constitution useless. A young boy was shot in the back and killed by US Marshals, and FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi later shot and killed Vicky Weaver while she was unarmed and holding her 10 month old baby in her arms. This incident serves as an educational tool to all Americans on just how useless our coveted Constitution is to the Federal Government when you cross them. I do not endorse violence towards the Federal Government. This is simply the closest I could come to the real truth without media/Government disinformation.

You have to ask yourself, even in this age of information, why is it so hard to find the truth about Ruby Ridge?

See the following links for more information:
[url redacted]

The Preliminary Hearings of Weaver and Harris -
[url redacted]

New York Times Propaganda -
[url redacted]

DOJ Whitewashing and Final Report on FBI wrongdoing -[url redacted]

Idaho vs Randy Weaver
[url redacted]

No. 98-30149. - IDAHO v. HORIUCHI - US 9th Circuit United States US 9th Cir. IDAHO v. HORIUCHI United States Court of of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. IDAHO
[url redacted]

No. 98-30149. - IDAHO v. HORIUCHI - US 9th Circuit United States US 9th Cir. IDAHO v. HORIUCHI United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit.IDAHO
[url redacted]

US 9th Circuit - Court Decisions - June 2001 5, 2001 No. 99-71081. IDAHO v. HORIUCHI June 5, 2001 No. 98 30163. SILVER SAGE PARTNERS LTD
[url redacted]

US 9th Circuit - Court Decisions - June 2000 No. 96-50297. IDAHO v.
HORIUCHI June 14, 2000
No. 98-70772. VAN GERWEN v. GUARANTEE MUTUAL LIFE COMPANY ERISA
[url redacted]

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORT REGARDING INTERNAL INVESTIGATION OF SHOOTINGS AT RUBY RIDGE, IDAHO DURING ARREST OF RANDY WEAVER
[url redacted]

SPLC and Spokesman Review Propaganda 20 years later
[url redacted]

I have a friend who was a Deputy United States Marshall at that time. He wasn't involved with Ruby Ridge, but he knew 2 agents who were. He told me:

"I knew two of the guys in the woods that weaver's son engaged. It was a mess from the start. If the dog would not have smelled the surveillance team nothing would have happened that day. It all ended badly. Stupid ATF case was bad from the start. Weaver would have been acquitted if he would have just gone back to court. Travesty of bad decisions all around."

The fact remains that it wasn't Randy Weaver's fault he didn't make it to the court appearance. It was all due to an intended snafu on the part of the Feds. They set him up to murder him and his family with extreme prejudice!

At the Nuremberg trials: Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him". This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders".

In my opinion, the officers involved should be charged with first degree murder, and those who assisted the operation should be charged and tried as accessories to first degree murder. Until this happens, we will never again be "One nation under God." This travesty screams for justice!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video and this blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law

If we are ever going to get anyone to open the case again and get these murderers charged and tried for their crimes against Americans, we need to raise public awareness of the facts involved. The best way to do it is to get as many people as possible to share the link below or copy & paste it and post it in as many places as possible. I would also suggest you copy and paste the link and send it to every state legislator and the current governor of Idaho.

[url redacted]

To send Idaho Governor Butch Otter a link to this story, click on the link below:
[url redacted]

Governor Otter's Facebook "Page"
[url redacted]

Thanks, I think we may be in more agreement than it seems too. I'm vehemently opposed to the majority of current patent and copyright law. Monsanto is one of the worst when it comes to 'making the most' of prosecuting people who by all rights should be able to do what they are doing were it not for existing patent law, and it should be stopped. I just don't see Monsanto stripping away choice from farmers in anywhere near the way as some describe. The only guys losing their lunch to Monsanto are the smaller seed developers/sellers, and those guys are going out of business not for Monsanto lawyers, but for having inferior products in the eyes of their customer(farmers). Sure, Monsanto has sued some guys growing/using their own seed, but those have been almost entirely guys like Percy who are deliberately looking for ways to grow Monsanto's seed without paying the patent tax. I'm of the opinion Monsanto is wrong to be doing even that, but these videos make out as though Monsanto is targeting a far broader range of people than it in fact is.

Call aliens dead, colour J white and make K a cowboy.. that's the 10% difference they needed to avoid copyright laws.

At the time of his suicide, Hitler's official place of residence was in Munich, which led to his entire estate, including all rights to Mein Kampf, changing to the ownership of the state of Bavaria. As per German copyright law, the entire text is scheduled to enter the public domain on January 1, 2016, 70 years after the author's death.[19] The copyright has been relinquished for the Dutch and Swedish editions and some English ones (though not in the US, see below).
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^Sagemind:
In Canada, We have Indigo Books, Indigo Books also runs Chapters bookstores, Coles Books, Worlds Biggest bookstore, Indigospirit, SmithBooks and The Book Company. It's the biggest chain in Canada, practically a monopoly, but not quite. It's our equivalent to Amazon books combined with Barns & Noble in the US, in fact, Amazon even owns stock in the Canadian book chain. It also retains a 57.7% share in Kobo Ink. (968.9 Million in yearly Sales.)
Heather Reisman, Indigo's CEO and owner banned "Mein Kampf" from all the stores. Although not casual reading material, Mein Kampf is required reading in quite a few university and college's. It's an important book for historians and students of history and politics.
You can find critiques of the work in her stores but not the book itself. Heather herself has, admittedly, never read the book. Being Jewish, she sites it as hate literature and doesn't want anyone to see it.
Heather's stance is that she is not Banning the book, she just doesn't carry it. It just so happens she doesn't have any competition. (other than college book stores and few straggling independants)
So my point is, if she is blocking this historical book, which other publications is she blocking? And what can we do, when the book stores filter the books we can see?

Out of curiosity, if someone were to buy Mein Kampf, where does the money go? Who publishes it? Or would it be in the public domain now?

I agree.

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Fucking copyright.

Copyright should be bound to the creator of the work, and expire when the creator dies. That's the only reasonable way to have copyright.

"Most laws are written on one page, the exceptions are written on 300 pages."

http://videosift.com/video/Understanding-Copyright-Law-and-Exclusive-Rights

Check this one out: http://videosift.com/video/Understanding-Copyright-Law-and-Exclusive-Rights

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
I've gotta know, how on earth did you come across this video?

Voting for this poll ended with the majority of users voting Yes, copyright laws are antiquated..

I'm about to upload a rare flick to You Tube, Leni Reifenstahl's Das.Blaue.Licht.1932, a rare snoozer procured through free and easy file-sharing.

If her estate cares anything about clearing up the tarnished name of an incredible talent they should be fine with it ~ If not, YouTube sends a shot across the bow and there's no harm or foul, just a friendly reminder to, "Don't Doo Dat!" (Probably some fucking self-hating Nazi or Jew, anyhow....)

Do the same with ANYTHING that has to do with Tallulah Bankhead (last feature film made in 1965), and her estate goes ballistic....PROBABLY because certain people who think lawyers can solve problems waste millions of dollars trying to get their way through intimidation and evil.

The lawyers are their employers are the only ones making out like bandits on copyright laws and the artists matter not: The people who hired the lawyers are the ones who have fucked the artists through contract already!

Fuck em all, when pirating and "illegal" downloads stop on the internet is the day I take up noodling or cribbage and convert my computer case into a nest for opossum!