Boys, your faux-enlightened legal analysis and complaints are simultaneously amusing and tiresome. You've gone on and on about various subjects but we're only talking about photographs of movie posters. For legal purposes, they are considered "slavish" copies of pre-existing creative works and do not enjoy any independent copyright protection. The plaintiff in Bridgeman made the same losing arguments you're making.
Mike, who are you anyway? Wow, you are a tiresome troll. Have you ever contributed anything to this forum or do you just come here to launch "digital piracy" crusades?
And of course the legal “help” from Adam is hilarious. This is the guy whose “nonprofit” website (BondPosters.com) is infested with advertising and promotes gambling websites. (The front page states: “We recommend visiting SpinPalace.co.uk whose poker games should help brush up your casino knowledge to hopefully defeat the budding Goldfinger's and Le Chiffre's of today.”) I can't imagine that Danjaq LLC – the copyright owner of all James Bond posters – would knowingly tolerate that abuse of its intellectual property.
But notwithstanding the foregoing please feel free to complain to Heritage and/or Poster Mountain that I am "stealing" from them and/or being un“fare” by posting some of their digital reproduction images on this forum to amuse and entertain my fellow poster nerds. That is a terrible crime indeed. Or perhaps not. Of course, aside from the ridiculousness of such complaints, I should mention that I have paid Heritage and its consignors $14,912 and Poster Mountain more than $1,000 for their wares and services, so your complaints may fall on deaf ears. Too bad, so sad.
WOW! ...Like, seriously, WOW!
This guy never ceases to amaze me.
Jees, I'm not a lawyer, however, I and the majority of people understand certain areas of copyright law.
As a lawyer himself, he doesn't seem to understand much but in saying that he doesn't specialise in copyright law so I suppose we have to let him off.
...Actually no, as a lawyer, HE SHOULD KNOW BETTER!
If a poster itself has been worked on or the image of the poster has been worked on in order to enhance the aesthetics of it, it then effectively has copyright protection.
Yes, he is quite right - SOME photographs CAN be deemed slavish copies but others are NOT slavish copies, much like many of those he uses on his website etc.
I'm amazed that he called Mike a troll for asking him genuine questions.
And then questioning him on his contribution to this forum.
Mel sadly is, in the simplest of terms, A HYPOCRITICAL BULLY.
Oh, that's right - Mel attacking my website yet again to aid him in his crusade because he doesn't like my comments in backing up Mike
So Mel does not understand what a non-profit organisation is. Well it is something which makes no profit...and that means any money that goes into the organisation gets put straight back into it. Oh, what Mel doesn't know is priceless. Using sly tactics to attack me again is very silly and pointless, but the fact remains the website is a non-profit cause. I don't make ANY money from the website. Not that I need to explain myself, but what I do receive goes into the maintenance and promotion of the website (actually it doesn't even get anywhere near the promotional finances!). There is a lot of behind-the-scenes work going on at the moment and if I was to make ANY profit whatsoever my website would then REALLY have to be infested with ads (he makes my website sound like eBay!) and it making a small fortune, but even then it would still be non-profit as the money would be pumped straight back in to the site
Why would Mel mention how much he has spent with Heritage and Poster Mountain?
Spending money does not give him the right to do what he does.
I've simply skimmed through the gibberish that Mike and his pals wrote. Suffice it to say that I think we can all agree that we're right and everybody else is wrong and/or diabolically evil. It's too bad Mike (is that you NickLowe?) and Adam don't do anything on this forum other than start fights. Jeff really does nothing other than praise others' contributions. We can only hope they actually contribute something positive and original someday.
I will continue to post images of movie posters generally without crediting intermediary sources on this forum for the reasons I've stated and the authorities I've cited. If you think I've committed a crime and/or been un"fare," please call the FBI, the MPAA, the National Enquirer, or sue me. Whatev:
It doesn't surprise me that Mel openly admits he skimmed through the comments (with more attacks).
It goes to show he hasn't got the jewels to stand up and be counted and actually answer people properly for once without attacking them. He talks like he is some God-like authority here; who's he kidding!?
I am honestly fascinated with how he STILL acts this way; it's bizarre to say the least.
He should credit all his sources instead of making the images look like his own.
This is false advertisement of his website, if I was to be really picky
However, this is verging on harassment and I've reported it to the forum owners for appropriate action.
Is he for real!? Harassment!?
He is the BIGGEST culprit of all on this forum!
He attacks and bullies people a heck of a lot here and yet when somebody questions him he runs to the head master and deputy head!
Classic bully. What a joke!
Thanks, just wanted some more info about you. [This area is where Mel had a link to Undead's personal information] Can I use this address for service of process in case we have to go to court to resolve our little spat?
Wow. Threatening Mike with court. Who would have thought that!?
Very novel and a sad scare tactic from a grade A bully.
We shall see. Not too cool to call someone a criminal for posting an image on a just-for-fun forum like this. It's also defamation with presumed damages. By the way, here's the original post showing a public domain image that you've identified as "criminal activity." As you can see, to the extent it's relevant, I clearly identified Poster Mountain as the source.
I don't believe Mike ever called Mel a criminal.
I love it how he always twists other peoples words.
And to have the audacity of accusing Mike of defamation - again...
Is he for real!? I mean, again, HYPOCRITE OR WHAT!?
Now Steve, Chris and Ari and the old NS4 gang will remember my old pal Nick Lowe, who made similar charges of "plagiarism" against me back in the day:
"Nick Lowe" also had very odd problems with the English language, just like "Mike" can't seem to spell "fare" right.
Now Ari, do pray tell if Nick's posts originated from New Jersey? You refused to tell me the IP address of "Nick Lowe," even though you knew the answer:
The post Mel links to was from almost three years ago, hardly back in the day.
You see, back then he pissed people off and he still doesn't realise that he pisses people off today; even people who do not post on these forums. Now that's a sign of a good "pisser offer"!
Mel as we all know can dish it out but can he hell take it, and yet he still attacks Mike, focusing on something that was a simple error that anyone could have made (apart from him of course).
Ari would of course know the IP address of Nick Lowe, and rightly so that he refused to tell Mel what it was.
Why on earth would a forum owner give out IP address information to anyone let alone to Mel? This is private information and as a lawyer Mel should know better than to demand this information. Sure, Mel could probably wrangle his way into getting some form of warrant executed on his behalf, but he isn't the law - I never knew he demanded this information!
In the spirit of such I will offer this to Mel. Let's bury the hatchet. I will leave it alone and not say any more on the subject. I think my point has been made for good or bad too many times. I will not badger, badmouth or say anything else referring to this incident on the forum. I would ask you to do the same. I would also ask that you delete the screen grab of my corporations contact information and address from your website and ask the moderators to do the same from this thread. Though it is public information I feel that it is unwarranted to publish it like it is and have refrained from doing the same with Mels home address for the same reason. It would just be bad form.
Some advice, Mike:
Mel will NEVER bury the hatchet with anyone he has had a feud with (even when he knows he is in the wrong) especially with someone who has disagreed with him. He bears a grudge I cannot liken to anyone else. Mel also NEVER apologises to anyone. You see, when he thinks he is right we, the majority, are always wrong no matter what the truth is. The truth does hurt him.
I find it truly ASTONISHING what Mel did with your details.
He cried his little heart out when I mentioned just his name in my signature a while ago when I was subject to his wrath (it was something I acknowledged I should not have done) but then he goes and publishes SOMEONE ELSE'S contact information like that! What a numpty!
Proves he believes he is above everyone else here. I guarantee that if someone posted HIS contact information he would reply with a load of legal threats as per and scurry away to Thierry and Holiday again like a school kid. I wonder how many people (on and off the forums) have all HIS personal information ready for when he ACTUALLY goes through with his legal threats, which are all a complete joke as he is the biggest culprit of all.
What he needs to understand is that the way he is upsets a lot of people.
Can a one post thread (presumably locked and pinned) be created by an admin in the APF Welcome/Join section that clearly states some of the rules?
Such as comment from Holiday buried away:
"Thierry and I have made clear - or at least we thought we did - that slurs, epithets, racist comments, hate mongering and the like WILL NOT BE FUCKING TOLERATED!"
But one comment I cant find but was said was that personally identifiable information is not to be posted.
The prohibiting of posting personally identifiable information is a rule in the SMF forum pack rules and guidelines that Thierry and Holiday will have received when they set up this forum. But they have both said this place has no rules and as far as I am aware, have not once upheld those rules (or if they have I do not know about it). If they had upheld those rules, Mel would have presumably been banned LONG AGO and quite rightly so.
So it's perfectly OK to call somebody a criminal multiple times for posting a public domain image to entertain forum members but God forbid if you post public information that anyone can look up on whois.com? Very logical, Ted.
And by the way Mike, don't you know that MoviePosterDB has downloaded virtually every "protected" Heritage image and sells them FOR PROFIT? Get your priorities straight.
Posterguide.org also has virtually every "protected" Heritage image.
Again, Mike did not call Mel a criminal.
I'm amazed Mel thinks it is OK to post somebody else's contact information without their consent and then try to make Ted sound like he is wrong for sounding him out about it.
What a hypocrite - Mel's full name is publicly available if you do a search, but it is wrong to mention that
Mel used to openly support MoviePosterDB (everyone should know they are a dodgy website; stealing artists work on many occasion and the like which is publicly available information), so why is he trying to divert people's attentions to that place? Why should Mike's priorities be that website? He was asking Mel a number of questions. Trying to get answers from an individual is far easier than doing the same with a company, so he does have his priorities right.
But you avoided the question. Is it perfectly OK to call somebody a criminal without consequences here?
Is Mel a great guy? I have no doubt he is in most respects and believe that this issue no withstanding would get along with him just fine but not on this particular one and am sorry that some people feel that it is a crusade against him. It is not. For me it is about laws that have been broken intentionally and incorrect use of the reading and intent of certain laws used to make it look OK which may make others think it is legal when it is not. Is Mel a criminal, in this particular case my personal opinion is a crime has been committed but I am not an attorney and it is for a court to decide which I am sure will not and hope for his sake never happens.
Is he for real!?
HE AVOIDED the questions posed by Mike and still has NOT answered them
Instead of answering Mike's questions and other people's comments, all he does is reply with a load of digressed
Look Mel, I like you.
I think you've got your heart in the right place.
But sometimes you can be a real dickhead.
You are the master of avoiding answering specific questions.
But, in this case, I will answer you directly.
No, I do not think it is OK to call someone a "criminal" on a public forum.
And I don't believe Mike has called you that.
He asked you a question and you avoided the answer. Repeatedly.
But, regardless, how the fuck does that exonerate you from calling him a 'troll" (which he obviously is not) and then posting personal contact info about him?
What is the adult rationale behind that behavior?
Well said, Ted.
What was his response? A half-arsed quip at something you said about him.
STILL no answers or anything that show he has a conscience.
I find it astonishing some people here actually defend Mel's actions at times.
The day he does get a woman will be the day all this shit ends as he will see the light.
