BlueSunShirts.com getting FOXed?!!?

POSTED BY: TenthCrewMember
UPDATED: Friday, October 27, 2006 10:34
VIEWED: 25909
PAGE 7 of 8

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE

MYCROFTXXX

Monday, October 2, 2006 4:40 PM

As someone who holds several copyrights I can tell you that if you wrote a book, developed a show, or whatever and someone else profited from your original work you would not be very happy.

To answer the question about CNN, their hands are not tied when reporting the news. There is a clause in the copyright law called "fair use" where something that is newsworthy or is part of free speech you have limited right to use the material in some form. Mind you not all of the content.

As far as how long a copyright lasts I don't believe it is "forever" as stated. I could be wrong but I think it is 50 years after the principle holder of the copyright dies. I'm not sure how that works for corporations but I know I don't get to own it nor my heirs after that period of time. This is proven by the status of books by HG Wells and others that have passed into the public domain.

As much as we hate the situation, Fox (or Paramount, Universal, MCA, New York Times, Chicago Tribute, Nine Inch Nails, etc.) have final say how they use or license their intellectual property.

On a related note, I have noticed the licensed versions of Firefly/Serenity merchandise on other websites isn't any more expensive than that offered on Bluesunshirts.com or most of the cafepress-based products. Maybe Fox's licensing isn't that expensive.

--

Given a choice between the earth-that-is and the 'verse-that-will-be I'll take the latter.

宁静

WOLFEN68

Monday, October 2, 2006 5:06 PM

To 6ixstringjack:

It's a personal moral decision to copy movies/music. However, copying something that is so obviously excellent (and yet on the ropes), is a crime to this community. This show needs our support for any hope of continuation.

I've been buying copies for everyone as gifts and doing what I can to keep the stakes high for the copyright owners....in the hope that something "Firefly" will continue...c'mon movie #2 at least!

Than people like you undermine that effort. If I were you, I'd be ashamed to post here.

WHOISRIVER

Monday, October 2, 2006 8:32 PM

Quote:

I understand that there are legal blockades set in place now, but for sanity's sake, show a little outrage... or at the very least, some dismay about the slow death of creative thought, and OUR show.

I'm not going to show outrage, because I don't agree with you. It's that simple.

Firefly would *NOT* exist if the current copyright environment didn't exist, and Serenity would also *NOT* exist (Universal Licensing LLC bought the license from 20th Century Fox for the motion picture).

So, before I go tearing down that wall, I'm going to consider that. Do I consider fan websites getting C&Ds a bad thing? YES. Do I consider FOX enforcing their license sales for Firefly a bad thing? No.

It's not copyright law, overall, which is a problem.

I've no idea what an Alliance rhetroic for copyright is, especially since the Alliance is a fictional story device in Firefly. I can say this - I worked on the promotion for the movie, and none of you would be here if it wasn't for the corporate structure which exists around the shows.

What was part of the reason Universal went after Serenity as a movie so aggressively? The Firefly DVD sales. Is copying the series as a protest against copyright going to say 'Hey, there's an audience for this!'? Uhm, no.

Of course, I'm not saying corporations are all good things. Because they're not. They're, uhm, neccessary.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 3:00 AM

Wrong, wrong, wrong.... Who can change the minds of the indoctrinated?

I don't own copied versions of Firefly or Serenity. I copy them for friends to watch and leave the decision up to them if they want to buy it, which one has, and I've discussed this on another post. This is one more sale that wouldn't have been made if they didn't watch the copies I made for them.

I hear that Paris Hilton is trying to copyright the phrase "That's Hot".... and she'll probably get it. In 1989, Pat Riley trademarked the phrase "Three-peat" for commercial use and was able to collect royalties when the Bulls Threepeated in 1993. I realize that Threepeat is not a word, but this is just rediculous. How far do you propose we let this copyright BS go?

Careful.... One day you'll wake up and we'll all be talking Newspeak because thinking words have all been copyrighted and that would be double plus ungood.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

JAYNESBOWIE

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 4:40 AM

Ahhhh, I don't mean to be rude or anything, but since when have smuggling hot goods and underground dealings been against brown coat beliefs? I mean, that is what the crew DOES for a living aint tit?

Jayne: "Testing, testing. Captain, can you hear me?"
Mal: "I'm standing right here."
Jayne: "You're coming through good and loud."
Mal: " 'Cause I'm standing right here."

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 4:50 AM

Hey JaynesBowie.... Thank you so much for that. It's something that I've been tempted to say each time I've posted on this and other threads about it, but I decided against it. I thought I was swimming in a sea of Alliance types. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that.

I'm all about spreading the signal, but the powers that be didn't properly market the show or the BDM. So if my means of spreading it are deemed unethical by the standards of the Alliance, well they can kiss my butt. I would think that the chance of making some potential buyers out of people who would normally not watch Sci-Fi channel by giving them a few burned DVD's is better than the zero chance otherwise. And then there's always the potential for those to spread the signal even further. Viral marketing is what I believe they're calling it now.

Sorry I can't afford to buy a TV series or movie for every friend I have. I don't make the big bucks and I refuse to be one of the millions of idiot Americans who are up to their eyeballs needless credit card debt for doing stupid things like buying DVD's they cannot afford. I've bought my copies and that's what matters. Now it's up to me to spread the signal in any way that I can, and this is the only means by which I have. I know I'm not the only one.

And I dare anyone of you to look at yourselves in the mirror and have the nerve to call yourselves righteous. You're all liars and scammers at some point in your lives to some degree. It's human nature. Judge not, lest thee be judged.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

DRAGONESS

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 3:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Copyright law is the worst sin against mankind.

I have to disagree with you there. Just because somebody uses the law in a way that you don't like doesn't make it wrong.

I'm a graphic designer. Without the protection of copyright law, I'd be starving to death. Even though I completely loathe FOX, I believe so strongly in the protection of intellectual properties that I will defend even FOX in their right to take action against violators.

That said, I think they're total morons for simply trying to wipe out sites that are using their product. First of all, it's impossible to find and eliminate every single violation. Second, they could have their cake and eat it, too, if they would just negotiate a license with BlueSunShirts. That way, Fox gets to regulate the use of their property AND gets their proper cut of the asking price. Plus, they don't have to deal with putting together a distribution system, because it's already in place. And the fans get what they want as well.

But who ever accuse FOX of being smart?

Dragoness

WOLFEN68

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 5:22 PM

6ixstringjack:

I have to assure you that I don't count myself among the ranks of the righteous.

I'm to the extreme in my dislike for DRM and the erosion of fair use rights. If I bought a DVD, how come I can't make a copy for my sister if she's immediate family? When I was a kid, me and friends would all chip in for one music LP, than make copies on cassette tape for each of us to listen to.

At that time, it never occurred to any of us that this would be considered wrong by anybody...after all, why did they sell blank tapes?

In the case of Firefly, my thinking is a little different because I'm so avidly "into it" and hopeful there could be....something...more. In this case, I've worked hard to spread the signal and show the powers-that-be that there is money in this franchise.

SLGN

Wednesday, October 4, 2006 4:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mycroftxxx:
As far as how long a copyright lasts I don't believe it is "forever" as stated. I could be wrong but I think it is 50 years after the principle holder of the copyright dies. I'm not sure how that works for corporations...

When it is an individual who holds the copyright, it is X years (50?) from that person's death. As I understand it copyright, in this case a work for hire, is 75 years from date of publication or 100 years from creation, whichever is shorter.

______________________________________
Got Scape? Farscape now in syndication http://www.farwhat.com/

DRAGONESS

Wednesday, October 4, 2006 10:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by slgn:
Quote:
Originally posted by mycroftxxx:
As far as how long a copyright lasts I don't believe it is "forever" as stated. I could be wrong but I think it is 50 years after the principle holder of the copyright dies. I'm not sure how that works for corporations...
When it is an individual who holds the copyright, it is X years (50?) from that person's death. As I understand it copyright, in this case a work for hire, is 75 years from date of publication or 100 years from creation, whichever is shorter.

Copyright can also be renewed by the current copyright holder.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE