Bad Copyright Takes

Womp womp

You know I don't think he really appreciated you correcting him

Credit to @kathryntewson.bsky.social for the screenshots

From Matthew Keys @matthewkeys.net "Just saw this. Now I understand why you're a miserable person. You don't have to impart it on everyone else." Showing a screenshot of the bio of Andrew Davis @thrownintosol.bsky.social, with full bio reading: "Tired and barely functional. Long Covid. Autistic, ADHD, OCD, Chronic Depression. Profile Pic; @failnaut on Twitter/Bluesky!" "Chronic Depression" is highlighted.

From Matthew Keys @matthewkeys.bsky.social Apparently in response to someone sharing a screenshot of the above post as commentary on his horrendous behavior and character "This screenshot violates my copyright. You do not have permission to post/redistribute my content. You must remove it with 48 hours, or I will file a DMCA notice with Bluesky. If Bluesky upholds the valid DMCA complaint, they may take action against your account."

Hello new people, there's still ex-site content to import but the archive is in hand, what's the most effective way to selectively post old content with old dates and all

should import more posts from the old site before it finishes crashing and burning

Tweet 1: You do realize that all the authors were paid, right? Like, when I was EiC they were all paid and given summaries of their sales. You also realize that all the authors had their rights given back to them since like July 1st, yeah? Tweet 2: You do realize that the books aren't being sold by DLP either, right? Like, we have them taken down and have, again, since early July. But here's KDP's TOS in case you're struggling with this.

Highlighted KDP language for Term and Termination of Agreement: We may continue to sell any inventory we have of your Print Books. Following termination or suspension, we may fulfill any customer orders for your Books pending as of the date of termination or suspension, and we may continue to maintain digital copies of your Digital Books in order to provide continuing access to or re-downloads of your Digital Books, as well as digital copies of your Books to support customers who have purchased a Book prior to termination or suspension.

Rising from my grave to ask a mostly rhetorical question:
Does this provision absolve Caitlin of liability for authorizing Amazon to print and sell books, like Wings of Sorrow, despite losing the rights to publish said book BEFORE its scheduled publishing date?

Just finished attending a panel at Dragoncon on some particular potential legislative copyright disasters from @mfrose.bsky.social and sticking around for some post-panel Q&A

Zannon Koitsu @Sotamusora First, its not stealing if you bought the game. Which its still a demo. An second, boof vr is not copyright protected since, it doesnt have a patent prior to 9/20/2020 let alone when the demo v1 was released . How about people prove its copyright protected first .

Zannon Koitsu @Sotamusora An dont get me started on him not having a lisence to sell products . I can tell you as fact werethrope would lose more than he would gain. If anything I would gain money from him. So, he's only hurting himself . An fyi my re rigs are derivatory works. Which he cant sue.

Zannon Koitsu @Sotamusora Enjoy the free ports of the #boofvr models [redacted mediafire link]. Cause, you should never pay for a demo of a game . Like #werethrope would force people to think . He should just stop and work for #electronicart where his greed would be welcomed. [Image of three nude furry bara men with a Sencorship bar over their lower halves]

Tomas600 @T60w0 WTF I love the art of Boof Dad and I will pay for his game why I understand the work that he has make, I don't will use a pirate version, I preferred pay by the original version, thanks. Zannon Koitsu @Sotamusora Replying to @T_60w0 and @Werethrope You do know demos are suppose to be free right? Legally werethrope is selling a fraud product which is illegal. AN since, he didn't make a complete product. He is also violating product sales without a license. Nor does he have a copyright patent. So theres that against him.

Zannon Koitsu @Sotamusora @youtube the youtube user #werethrope is violating copyright laws. By claiming a video that he has no actual copyright over. Unless, werethrope can prove with signed documentation by the f.c.c. for copyrighted goods. I will request his channel get flagged for false flagging me. [Image below of a copyright strike on YouTube for posting a video of models from a patreon-exclusive demo]

Context: BoofVR appears to be a furry bara VR porn game created by Werethrope. Development is funded via his Patreon account, which offers access to milestone demos. This feller here ripped and redistributed models from one of those demos.

Ryolator @Fryolator1 Another "fun fact" - these companies all hosted copyrighted material for years, which is why they needed Section 230. So now that they are editing content, do I have a case against them when they publish material I find inappropriate, libelous, or that I have rights to?

Bad Vibes @badvibes258 No because she is focused on 1/20th of the issue. Second, when she used the art to promote her brand, that alone changes the analysis from copyright analysis to trademark. Which changes the qualiy and due diligence of her analysis.

From Bad Vibes @badvibes replying to Kathryn Towson Well did you have permission to post your content? Is that little fat bird yours? Can you prove it? Then the second question is to file a dmca claim did you do a fair use analysis first? Those steps have to be followed. And remember copyright doesn't cover certain things. Kathryn Tewson @KathrynTewson replying to Bad Vibes Yeah, I did. That bird is mine; it's my own original design, I painted it myself, and I took the photo that forms the basis of the digital work myself. Here is a picture of the signed original on my wall. [Signed picture of an orange watercolor bird hanged on a wall] Bad Vibes @badvibes258 replying to Kathryn Tewson See you have a tiny little problem. A bird doesn't necessarily get the benefit of copywrite protection.

Deleted post

So what did I miss?

From: Paul @Paul91458279 “Original work is copyrightable. Such as my ideas. Using such without my expressed written permission is illegal and liable for prosecution. I have never signed away my copyright rights in my life. So…… @BenPBradshaw @RDEhospitals @nhscreative @NHS @NHSEnglandLDN @NHSConfed Screen capture of a Google search of “what is classified as. original literary”

Explanation from britishcopyright.org displayed by Google “”Original” means that the work originates with the author. It is their own creation; not copied, but the result of exercising independent skill, labour and judgment. … The author is normally the first owner of copyright in their literary work, unless the work was created by an employee during their employment”

From: vic mignogna @vicmignogna "Many have asked over the years if I would ever have a pop figure made of me. Well, no one wants one of ME, but what about one that represents ten different characters I've played over the years? Here's the prototype! It's all ready to go, so if you like it please let Funko know!"

A horrific faux-Funko chimera of at least ten different copyrighted characters that Vic Mignogna has no ownership over whatsoever

From Off3ns1v3Dargon @Off3ns1v3D Replying to Ronald_Toye_III "So much for going after people who @ you only. You desperately stalk anyone. Plus, that would be on Funko, they already have pops of all the stuff so making a hodge podge of it should not be a problem for them unless they have a contract saying otherwise."

From Kane Turner @Gambenoo Replying to Ronald_Toye_III "You wouldn't need licensed consent for that. It's a original design with no ip tags on it anywhere. Just cause it has a waisted cloth, doesnt mean he would need funimation permission."

From: Reborn Exists @jordanreapers Congrats to Emmett The Perjure Plant and Kathryn Two-Ton-Sam for getting my Youtube channel taken down by false flagging it, which by the way is in complete violation of the Freedom of speech Act or commonly known as the 1st Amendment. #ISWV #IStandWithVic

From: TheBigPaunch @TheBigPaunch replying to Kathryn Tewson “You admitted that it was a false claim earlier saying that Twitter laws and Youtube laws don’t apply to your claim. That’s a not-so-subtle admission to guilt right there”

From: TheBigPaunch @TheBigPaunch replying to Kathryn Tewson “Stop spreading lies, your profile pic is evidence of transformative action from your original art piece.” A digital picture of an orange bird, followed by a framed watercolor portrait of the same bird.

From: TheBigPaunch @TheBigPaunch replying to Kathryn Tewson “I want to see the section in the Berne Convention that supports your statement on automatic copyright.”

From Reborn Exists @jordanreapers on Twitter, replying to Kathryn Tewson: "No one. The moment you create a account on twitter your copy right protection is invalid because Twitter is a public domain. Pure and simple and it's in the license agreement we all automatically agree too so there's no way around it and further more youtube has a fair use."

Hello, Bluesky!