DISCLAIMER & NOTICE TO EBAY & VEROThe works presented on this disc(s) are owned by me, the seller, In accordance with policy of recordable media, I claim ownership and rights to this and am legally authorised to replicate the content without permission or licensing.
ATOM wrote:Too true,I reported a guy a few months ago for selling illegal AD&D compilation PDF'sand D&D novels in compilation PDF's.Despite clarification of my report by EBay, the auctions were still there to the end, they made no effort to remove them?
The works presented on this disc(s) are owned by me, the seller, In accordance with policy of recordable media, I claim ownership and rights to this and am legally authorised to replicate the content without permission or licensing.
easilyentertained wrote:ATOM wrote;"Ditto! Well done, it really annoys me when I spend years collecting magazines and modules and some plonker sells illegal PDF's of them!The same I suppose for books and comics. "NOT ILLEGAL, run a Google search on ERB & Public domains...or more easily you may check here; http://www.angelfire.com/zine2/erbville/erbpdf.htmBy the way most of that is free for download and printing @ ERBville as well...If he lifted it from their site, that's another matter I'd think.I've seen similar compilations before, if you own said periodicals you've every right to make a compilation, which you could either sell or give away. Was it renewed is key here and in most cases it wasn't. While ERB's heirs have the rights to much of his work, (the censored and edited later prints definitely) format is extremely important. Look to Weird tales and you'll see what I'm getting at. Robert Weinberg has sued many (your truly as well) for making compilations of early material of that periodical, and failed.While I agree the AD&D compilations are illegal, in particular the Novels. I'd respect the IP of an individual author, perhaps not as much with TSR itself, notable for disregarding others IP as it suited them for years. Never mind it's apples & oranges. All of that material is much more recent. Post 1978 implies it is copyright protected and will likely remain so.If he lists something else and it's legal your establishing a pattern ...of harassment, & interfering his/her ability to earn an income. YOU might want to check with a lawyer, as Ebay in a frenzy to appear legit (which they aren't) might pull the ad. They'd be wrong and so are you.If I or anyone else chose to repackage something in the public domain and others were foolish enough to buy it...well Caveat Emptor. But the rub with that is you'd have to spend years collecting said material, which I can tell you is extremely expensive.Quite common as well; Project Gutenburg, Sacred Texts the list goes on and on...
easilyentertained wrote:JasonZavoda wrote:That is for Burroughs works, not the work of the cartoonist or the company producing the comic. You can write your own version of Tarzan, but you cannot simply copy someone else work on Tarzan and reproduce it.When you buy a comic, you own that particular comic, not the rights to make copies of the comic and sell them.I heartily agree, but if say you wished to sell compilations by year, that may or may not be on the table. It can get rather labyrinthine, the older the works in question. I've had some experience with this in the music industry, which is why the legal dept is important No?I'm an advocate for protecting IP property, that being said I do not believe it shouldn't ever enter the public domain. Thankfully we don't have to hash this out regarding true classic material. Sonny Bono, can be faulted for two notable "acts"; Being a terrible musical artist, but the real travesty was the Bono Act, a real disservice to the general public. Artwork for hire is frequently the property of the publisher, as one goes further back this becomes more and more likely. If the publisher folded without anyone renewing it...or the artist/ his heirs getting the rights to it after the fact....becomes public domain. With the proviso that the timeline on artwork is different than literary, or say like Frazetta with the various works for Lancer, he must've retained the rights.I'm going through this now with regard to artwork, laughably a recent artist is attempting to claim that reproduction of a classic piece is his. Guys got some nads on him, when I'm thru gelding him he'll look great on my wall... I'd been trying to make the point that "reporting" everything is wonderful, and in many cases I appreciate the zeal displayed in the Acaeum Forum. There is however some risk to being an uninformed zealot. You might want to have an attorney on retainer here if you would like to safely continue your campaign. A pleasantly worded email regarding these particular rights said sellers claim to have will probably have them pull the auctions themselves. Especially considering the risk they run from legal action themselves if it isn't so? ASCAP for example has great attorneys, you might be better served by drawing their attention to these suspect listings?
JasonZavoda wrote:That is for Burroughs works, not the work of the cartoonist or the company producing the comic. You can write your own version of Tarzan, but you cannot simply copy someone else work on Tarzan and reproduce it.When you buy a comic, you own that particular comic, not the rights to make copies of the comic and sell them.
