|
Now where did gideongallery go?
Probably working on that torrent recorder that was his last get rich quick scheme a few months ago. |
Quote:
robbie the wayne's world bit you were talking about is actually part of MBA program at western as an example of product placement it specifically the concept of signage. using it to internally promote a your own site or an external site or product doesn't change the fact that it still signage. you argued for months product placement would never work in porn because coke/pepsi/whatever mainstream sponsor would not allow it. and no matter how many times that arguing product placement would not work in porn because coke would not pay for product placement was as valid as saying that there was no market for tampons because you could sell them at a gay bar. how stupid do you have to be to not realize that you are making the same arguement all over again. let me put it another way just because you fill a vending machine in the mens washroom with tampons and they don't sell doesn't mean that vending machine idea was a bad idea. |
There you go again...
I NEVER said anything about Wayne's World in the first place in that long ago thread. YOU DID. I said, hmmmm....how about taking that concept and tweaking it on the vids so it would allow someone surfing an illegit tube to at least know where that video came from because the illegit tube resized the vid so the watermark doesn't show. It was just one of a million things I think about and somehow you've latched onto that as some kind of "proof" in your delusional mind that YOU are a genius? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh I wasn't looking to try and upsell anything in my vids. I was just looking for any way to get a surfer to come to MY paysite from MY stolen vid because the thieves don't bother linking back to us in any way at all. Dude, it's really doesn't amount to anything. In fact, I haven't even done it yet. When I do it, it's just going to be ONE update. One scene that revolves around that funny idea. And yeah, it'll be campy and hopefully amusing just like Wayne's World was. The HUGE difference is this...I'll actually be filming and making something NEW. Whereas someone with your limited scope would simply steal actual Waynes World footage and try changing the words they are speaking and calling it a "parody" Now stop trying to change the subject: YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT ALL THE THINGS I POINTED OUT. Matter of fact...you are just completely lost in this business. That's why you are what you are and that's why you occupy your current station in life. As Bob Dylan once sang: "Can't you see, it's not my problem" Do yourself a favor. Go get a job. It's what you are destined for. You're a worker bee. Nothing more. |
ok gideongallery...come back here.
I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I didn't really mean that part about you being nothing more than a worker bee. Now give me a hug and wipe the tears out of your beady little eyes. We're still buddies! :thumbsup |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
nor am i again explain to you how insanely stupid the arguement that the only way to use your content to make a parody is to not use the content at all is. |
gideon? Damn it...
Okay, if anybody sees gideongallery would you please tell him to come back to the thread? Tell him I'm sorry and I didn't mean to say those harsh words to him. :1orglaugh |
Quote:
And I'll fire off a letter to George Lucas letting him know that since Star Wars was just a cowboy western movie (he said so himself) set in the future in a different galaxy...that he didn't create anything new either. You really have no clue about any of this do you? That's why I love fucking with you. You just show your stupidity over and over and over again. |
Quote:
Does Saturday Night Live use actual footage of other's work when doing a parody skit? No, they have talent. Did Weird Al Yankovich use actual recordings of other artists or did he re-record it himself? He actually re-recorded it himself from scratch because he's talented. Do all those new Hustler parody DVD's use actual footage from the television shows they parody? No, they shoot it themselves. You on the other hand have no talent. You just take the easy way every time. The only parodies that you seem to love are the ones that only require a person to make a pretty funny joke up. Whoopty doo. A child could do that. You don't have the skill set to do REAL parody. Accept it. You, and most people out there...are incapable of doing anything other than stealing footage and simply changing the words. I'm so impressed with that ~yawn~ |
Quote:
wayne's world did something new and unique they decryed product placement while doing product placement (that was what made the scene funny) you claimed that doing the EXACT SAME thing but just changing the context to porn was something new and creative. you are basically trying to denegrate the actual creative work or real artist to try and justify your copycat bullshit as some how creative although i would have to agree with you on star wars thing but considering that Quote:
|
Quote:
How about you address the original post you made here? And the fact that you showed you don't know what the hell you are talking about? You keep trying your best to sidestep me. It's funny. And you are entertaining the hell out of me with your know it all attitude about entertainment with absolutely nothing to back you up. No experience, no talent. You are the perfect example of a couch potato who watches too much television and thinks he could do it better. :1orglaugh |
Quote:
was a parody you only prove your a clueless moron when you argue that the court define definition of a "parody" is not a parody. of course if you want to argue about creative and creating something new there are only two creative or new downfall parodies the very first one which recast the serious movie into a comedic commentary/parody about an issue. and eff one which turned it into a DMCA trap that both explained why it was a valid fair use within the video and made itself a target of the abuser of the DMCA(sending take downs without actually check if it was fair use-- which the explaination within the video proved) everyone else are not new, not creative , derivative works which are still valid parodies. |
Quote:
Which is why all the examples Robbie are different. |
Re way above...
Self product placement... might as well just toss a stamp on the video, it would be more effective. Otherwise it better have a hell of a hook for it to catch anyone. Porn has product placement in it though, when you're a major studio/production company and you pay several people to sit around all day already, it's not a big deal to have them seek product placement as a side task. It's just one more thing you can do to help pay for content, it dang sure isn't buying you any new toys, cars or houses. When it comes to upsells, non-adult products bomb... landing pages, sandwich, whatever you want to try. Then the amount of time it takes to find a hot offer in mainstream that would do well in porn, you could have made 100x more just putting up killer porn sites instead either way. |
Quote:
Again, I'm not impressed. Anybody with a good sense of humor could have done that. Not much else was required which is why you THINK of it as real parody A true comedian or comedic group who take pride in their craft and worked their way up doing standup at shit hole clubs would find it funny as hell too. Doesn't mean that they would ever equate what they do with that funny subtitled video. YOU might think it's all the same. But real artists know better. Again, I'm showing you the sky is blue and you just keep repeating the same thing over and over and over and over. Here let me help you: gideongallerys entire thoughts: vcr, cloud, timeshifting, the hitler video with subtitles, waynes world Now take those words and repeat them over and over. You still haven't addressed the FACT that you are dead wrong on this thread. And you also don't address what I said about some of the greatest songwriters in rock history using old blues licks and creating new music that stands on it's own. According to you...they have no talent and are just copying stuff. Sorry gideongallery. But this entire thread shows again that you don't know what you are talking about on pretty much any subject. Which isn't surprising because you have never DONE anything to have the wisdom and knowledge that only experience can bring. You watch television. That pretty much sums up your entire "career". And as was already said earlier...you THINK the internet is your vcr What a clown! |
Quote:
Quote:
you don't understand what true creativity is and you are still trying to argue that vending machine in a guys washroom is a bad idea because you couldn't sell any tampons with that machine |
Quote:
And you are the one who has never created one thing. Just want to get those facts straight for the hundreds of webmasters we are entertaining with this thread. I love you gideongallery. |
Quote:
on a side note, how about timeshifting that sandwich |
Quote:
is not exactly the same bullshit arguement as saying vending machines in men's washroom wont work (=porn) at all because you can't sell tampons (=mainstream product) in them then you really are an idiot |
Quote:
So again I will say to you THE SKY IS BLUE. And you haven't proved that you can do one thing other than talk when it comes to selling PORN. I don't give a damn if your shit might work on a mainstream site to make pennies. I care if it can sell MY PORN SITE. It can't. And your whole idea is nothing more to me than an shitty upsell that would be better used to upsell another porn site...which we all already do and do it far better than your "genius" idea. loser |
Quote:
|
Quote:
not really a problem since it will never work anyway. |
Quote:
I never discount anybody or underestimate them. I just know that you have never said one thing on gfy that has led me to believe you have a clue. But that doesn't mean you don't. For all I know you may just be playing dumb on here. I enjoy these debates with you, but they are so one-sided it's like beating up a guy with no arms or legs (probably why I enjoy it so much lol ) But I really do have nothing but well wishes for you to be successful and if your ideas work and make more money than people did BEFORE piracy then I will be the first to congratulate you and I will defend you to the death on GFY and help you in any way that I can. |
Quote:
Thus fair use is a sample, and a copy of a whole is not a sample - unless it's for personal use. "If you're copying an entire work, it's not fair use. While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use." That limit being, personal use for time shifting. Not anything else. The only reason that "clip" is allowed is because it's a small sample and a parody not subject to dmca. Again point was, your example is vastly different than Robbie's. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Does it really exist? Or is it more delusion? |
Quote:
These guys have no idea about anything Internet and a good friends giving them advice is a hell of a push for someone that has talent. |
gideongallery, before you can even argue with fair use, you first have to understand the concept of establishing fair use. If you are profiting from someone elses work without their consent, the profit factor will completely remove fair use. It doesn't matter where or who is hosting the file, if you profit from it you are guilty of infringement. Period.
If you embed something from YouTube, wrap your ads around it, you make money off it. It doesn't matter if YouTube host it, the original uploader has consent or not. If you do not have consent, you are subject to infringement. You publish it on your website. If the source of what you embed, hotlink or whatever, is splitted into 1 million parts, your output will still be the same. Nothing change. As a matter of fact, reducing costs will eliminate the fair use argument even more. The more you profit, the less you can argue "non-profit". The host will also still have same obligations to comply with copyright laws. If they (as in P2P) only provide 1 byte of data, they still conspire. Just like in criminal cases, no one is excempt from conspiracy, unless they are not part of the international agreement. |
Warning: Posts below this mark are subject to a giant game of
http://www.mathematik.uni-bielefeld....mat/50x20f.jpg ... you have been warned!!!! |
Quote:
nuff said |
Quote:
fair use does not disappear just because you make money vcr sold for 1k each yet timeshifting is still a fair use hundreds of artist make money from parodies and parodies are still a fair use commentaries are sold and have advertising around them again it is still a fair use micheal moore made millions from his documentaries which used other people copies of speaches to make his commentaries. how many times have pointed out the 1/5 of the US economy is dependent on fair use. You can make money from fair use Quote:
|
Sorry to disappoint you gideongallery, but uploads to illegal porn tubes is not parody, "commentaries" or Michael Moore. YOU sir, are a moron :1orglaugh
No matter how much you argue and scream (which big letters mean), nothing gonna change that. It can't be claimed as fair use. Quote:
|
I've just wasted another ten minutes of my life and not learnt anything new apart from you can't sell tampons in the mens bogs :(
|
Quote:
You mean that "Canadian" tv show where they take a "full movie" and condense it down to 30 min's and replace character voices and such? That's exactly what I said fair use was. It's a "sample" of the whole. It's NOT the entire movie, which would not be fair use. Again, your examples are GREATLY different than Robbie's and you just got schooled in the subject you pretend to the be the master of. "In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use" "If you're copying an entire work, it's not fair use. While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use." |
[QUOTE=TheDoc;17166241]You mean that "Canadian" tv show where they take a "full movie" and condense it down to 30 min's and replace character voices and such?
That's exactly what I said fair use was. It's a "sample" of the whole. It's NOT the entire movie, which would not be fair use. Again, your examples are GREATLY different than Robbie's and you just got schooled in the subject you pretend to the be the master of. Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use Quote:
and you eliminated the italics that defined the first statement as being wrong. |
Quote:
"ALL" fair use falls under 4 factors or it's not fair use.
Hello #3.... "If you're copying an entire work, it's not fair use. While copying an entire work may make it harder to justify the amount and substantiality test, it does not make it impossible that a use is fair use. For instance, in the Betamax case, it was ruled that copying a complete television show for time-shifting purposes is fair use." ^ This would be for personal use... "For instance, the Audio Home Recording Act establishes that it is legal in some circumstances to make copies of audio recordings for non-commercial personal use." IE: It's okay to make a copy of a whole if it's for personal use. That makes it fair use. The clip you posted is fair use because, again... it's a sample of the whole and a parody. They can't use the whole, it's not for personal use. We done yet? |
Gideon the point again... your example was vastly different than Robbie's.
Yours is actual fair use, taking a sample of actual copyrighted content and using part/sample of it to create a parody of said material. Robbies, they create a new original product.. new actors, new funnies, new everything. It's not a copy of the original taken as a sample, it's a whole entire new whatever. Point: Actual creation. As Robbie stated.. with his something new is created, with yours a monkey can create them which is why Youtube is littered with 100's of this stupid things... any monkey can do it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
that is as big a misrepresentation as deliberately ignoring the 3 definition of monopoly so you can claim that your only a monopoly if you abuse something. in fact the court ruling prove absolutely that is not true many fair use violate one or more of those conditions timeshifting for example fails 3 of the four conditions 1. sony profited making money from both the vcr 1k each and the blank cassettes 2. it was a UNCHANGED copy (no contextual changes) 3. it was a complete copy. the only one condition it met was that it did change the value of the copyrighted work because the sale had already happened. the timeshifted sale (re-run) that was lost was not part of the intrinsic value of the copyrighted work but was instead monopoly profits from extending the copyright monopoly to the medium (blank tapes are not allowed) Quote:
no where in the time-shifting ruling did it say it was only valid if it was personal use if that were true and the right was only available for personal use the copyright holders could have demanded that the recording device encoded the recording so it could only be played on the vcr it was recorded. They could not make such a demand my right to move a show from monday to tuesday exist even if the power goes out in my house and i failed to tape knight rider it exist even if i have to borrow the tape from someone else (not personal) to full fill that right. Quote:
likewise just because the copying is for non commercial personal use doesn't automatically make it fair use. if i were to borrow a cd from the library (assuming i was in the states and not canada since we have a piracy tax) and rip them for my personal use. That copy would still be an infringement even though it was personal use. |
Quote:
Calling something a "right" that isn't infers a great deal of legal force upon it. IMO you use the word "right" intentionally, as a way to bolster your weak arguments. Re adobe: Quote:
|
Quote:
Point was and still is... your example is vastly different than Robbies, and that's true. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123