New York City is for sellouts

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1248 of them)
I've had a lot of fun blasting out patronizing
ranting and raving emails

I think Mike's and my assumption upthread a bit just got proved.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:17 (twenty years ago) link

Hire a lawyer and take it to civil court already, you unbelievable dickless wonder

TOMBOT, Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:26 (twenty years ago) link

I can be equal measures:

Astounded a the amount of copyright violation happening/condoned on this thread, pissed off because of the 'tude here and the casual way you steal from me and others, and entertained while confounding you all... It's been a full fun filled day.

One point that I wanted to make is this: You (the generic you) may think that you can flaunt copyright law and use a persons images/content any way you want with impunity. On one level you are right, you are probably a punk kid with no assets worth chasing down. However the community in which you operate, meaning the provider that hosts thisserver, and other businesses are vulnerable, and a company like cnn or Disney will pursue them if someone makes enough noise. Wouldn't you feel real stupid if your provider pulled the plug on this board for violating their acceptable use policy after a nasty letter from Disney's copyright enforcement office? It's not beyond the realm of possibilities. It may not be quite the right page, but this link should give you an idea of the kind of legaleze your are up against... http://www.keypoint.com.au/agreement.html

You (the generic you and the community inclusive you) are vulnerable and accountable for your actions online. Period.

Mr_Steve (Mr_Steve), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:35 (twenty years ago) link

You seem to have paid no attention to all of the people who are essentially agreeing with your point (if not the way you made it).

Now you're just going out of your way to be an obnoxious sockfucker.

El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:38 (twenty years ago) link

Has there ever been a ruling that decided that making embedded links to images on remote servers constitutes an infringement of copyright (as you keep saying it does)? Apologies if I have missed it. That Brad Templeton page you linked to just seems to be one guy's pontificating.

and entertained while confounding you all...

You do realise how ridiculous and pompous this sounds, right?

N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:53 (twenty years ago) link

If he did, would he continue to post?

El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Wednesday, 18 February 2004 23:55 (twenty years ago) link

and entertained while confounding you all...>>>>

You spend your off-hours playing RPG games, don't you?

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:00 (twenty years ago) link

your enduring of my dull, familiar, predictable and patronizing behavior can be considered a pennance for your attitude about stealing other peoples work.

For the record, almost the entirety of my posts and I'm pretty sure most of JBR's posts (being as we have the most amount of pic posts on this thread) are our own fucking photos off our own fucking webpages, you obnoxious cockfarmer. Jesus Christ, get over yourself. Your fucking image was deleted and, quite frankly, no one in the entire world would've been nasty to you if you hadn't come in and acted like an jackoff ramming a bee stick up his ass from the get go. You couldn't even see the words "Moderation Request" on the bottom of the page and you rush in and lose your mind on the reading skills of people who, quite honestly, didn't go to your page to begin with. Whoops, sorry.

On the upside, I was afraid you were a NYer. But you aren't! So no blight on us. I was afraid you were taking a careful stance to prove Nick right about us.

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:20 (twenty years ago) link

"'rue the day?!' Who talks like that?!"

Kingfish Beatbox (Kingfish), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:23 (twenty years ago) link

Mr. Steve on the law, part 1:

It is precisely this attitude of entitlement and open flouting of legal and ethical behavior that I find so offensive. The hypocritical element is just frosting on your cake of moral turpitude.

Mr. Steve on the law, part 2:

stop and smell the kine buds

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:25 (twenty years ago) link

Actually I think I say 'rue the day' quite often.

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:26 (twenty years ago) link

You would, wouldn't you.

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:29 (twenty years ago) link

do you say 'go spare' too?

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:30 (twenty years ago) link

Sometimes.

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:32 (twenty years ago) link

x-post.

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:33 (twenty years ago) link

Does it matter?

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:33 (twenty years ago) link

"believe it or not, george isn't home..."

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:36 (twenty years ago) link

I really, REALLY hate it when ignorant cockfarmers start spouting intellectual property law that they themselves don't understand IN THE SLIGHTEST. I'm talking to you, Mr. Steve.

Colin Meeder (Mert), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:39 (twenty years ago) link

Ally OTM, and whats interesting is if you go to the moderator board where he lists a slew of URLs that are being leeched, many of them are THE WEBSITES OF USERS OF THIS FORUM. We're putting up our OWN pictures.

I do photography too, and I put it online. I agree, credit should be respected, but why would I complain if my pics appeared elsewhere - its good exposure. "But no one knows theyre mine!" you might say.

Well, thats why I'd be smart and put a clear copyright watermark with my name etc ON EVERY PHOTO ON MY SITE. There, your getting credit problem is solved, and if you dont mind about bandwidth, what other issue is there?

Sure being asked is nice but were it me, I'd be pleased to see my pics with my name on them all over the web personally.

Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:42 (twenty years ago) link

I think Steve is off confounding a chatroom somewhere.

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:45 (twenty years ago) link

Haha Trayce, "Oi! You fookin' kids stop stealin' my photographs, ahright?? It's, like, fookin' kine buds."

http://bitchcakes.topcities.com/garethfap/phoneconfusion.jpg

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:49 (twenty years ago) link

Trayce otm. hopefully we've all learned some valuable lessons today. Don't leech other people's bandwidth unless it's something REALLY cool - and if you're uber-precious about your work then config your webspace and tailor your material to reflect this. take care of yourselves, and each other.

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:51 (twenty years ago) link

Gareth could sue us all for millions. Well, maybe just me.

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:51 (twenty years ago) link

We also learned "people in general like to antagonize each other to orgasm", but I suspect we knew that already.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:52 (twenty years ago) link

Gareth will copyright us all with guns.

Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:55 (twenty years ago) link

To orgasm.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:55 (twenty years ago) link

only on ILX tho ;)

Ally and Tom could sue me for stealing their infinitely amusing fake e-mail thing

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:56 (twenty years ago) link

I really, REALLY hate it when ignorant cockfarmers start spouting intellectual property law that they themselves don't understand IN THE SLIGHTEST. I'm talking to you, Mr. Steve.

Misstatements of law by lay-persons v. Failure to teach legal principles to citizens generally FITE

gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:57 (twenty years ago) link

Go ahead. All you guys keep telling yourselves how valiant and righteous you are. That you are justified in taking and using that which doesn't belong to you. Also, go head, keep proclaiming to the choir how "most of the images" belong to us. Did you see this thread: New York City is for sellouts Did you see the list of images I referenced? Did you see how the first 5 out of 6 are copyright violation on the face (unless of course you have permission... I'll leave it to you guys to count up all the image tags in this thread and then count the number that are user owned. If those two numbers aren't equal, guess what, you're probably stealing the rest!

I don't care if 90% of the image tags point to images owned by you guys. It's very apparent to me that many of the images posted in this thread are being stolen. I have no interest in filing lawsuits against you penniless little worms, but every time you go and shoot off your mouth about what a sock fucker I am and all that sanctimonoius crap you're spewing, I'm tempted to send out an email to each of the victims of your theft - including the big guys that might just be looking for a good test case to establish some case law. Isn't your ISP the biggest one in Autstralia?? Hmmmm.... Wanna see if all the people you are stealing from think what you are doing is cool? I don't think so. Also, since I've so clearly spelled out the unlawful activity (yeah, debate it in front of a civil judge if you want, I consider it unlawful and there is case history to back me up), when the complaints hit your provider etc etc, it'll be clear that you guys were notified, warned, and had ample opportunity to remedy the widespread copyright violations that are all over this thread -- and yet you took no action...

But never fear, I'm sure your provider is willing to fight the good fight for you guys, go to bat against the legal department at ESPN/Disney/CNN etc to establish that what you guys are doing is just fine and dandy... Sure, that's exactly what your provider is gonna do... If I were you guys, I'd be looking forward to it. I'm sure it'll be exciting...

You guys are fools. I've been having fun pounding home my point that what you guys are doing is wrong, even if it's commonplace. The quality of the arguments from your side have been good -- for a bunch of fourth grade special education students. I have grown weary of you all and this topic.

And yes, since this whole thing started out with you stealing from me, I have tried to be an asshole to you all. Of course this whole thing has been ridiulous and pompous. Thanks for playing along... Fuck you very much.

Note, this is not a threat, this is not extortion. If you guys continue to link to images on my site, I wll search for and find every instance of image theft, deep linking and any other copyright violations and notify the victims (I'm sure they'll be pleased to know you've been punking them) as well as all of your providers, they have acceptable use policies. I'm sure they'll enjoy seeing the postings where you say, "fuck it, I know it's wrong but I'm doing it anyway, what are you gonnna do about it sock fucker??". That is not a threat, that is a promise. Leave me and my site alone, and I'll leave you alone. Fuck with me with me and you better hope you don't so much as spit on the sidewalk next to the building where your server is located... Because I'll be there to call attention to it.

I'm outta here...

Have a nice life kids...

stevem

Mr_Steve (Mr_Steve), Thursday, 19 February 2004 00:59 (twenty years ago) link

If this was a film you'd be played by Anthony Michael Hall.

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:03 (twenty years ago) link

Ally, I think you need to apologize to Anthony Michael Hall. This guy would be played by Randy Quaid.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:04 (twenty years ago) link

i ws saying 'ALLYZAY RIGHT ON!' lots of times but -. when did we get so hermetic? only towards assholes? is stevem an asshole? and Evil stevem?

stevem isn't an asshole. he only has hair.

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:04 (twenty years ago) link

when did we get so hermetic?

When was the first ILM post? Sometime in 2000?

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:05 (twenty years ago) link

I sure I had something funny to say worth saying.

x-post. : /

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:06 (twenty years ago) link

< /sub-RJG at best>

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:07 (twenty years ago) link

Steve didnt even address my point about watermarking his goddamn photos. Geez.

And if Labyrinth is "Australias largest ISP" I'll eat my hat. My several friends who work there will find that terribly hilarious actually.

Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:09 (twenty years ago) link

whoa, dude has pictures of kmfdm. I assume Sascha and co. gave him permission.

bnw (bnw), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:13 (twenty years ago) link

oops

bnw doing it again (bnw), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:14 (twenty years ago) link

sub me?

RJG (RJG), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:15 (twenty years ago) link

The thing is, the whole thing is hysterical. I've never seen anyone act like this, I mean a good general policy to have is to be at least vaguely polite about things. The other thing is that huge ass corporations like Disney have people who they pay to basically sit there and run through referral logs, which anyone with half a brain knows. So I'm assuming that such a learned legal authority as evil stevem knows that his bizarro threats are like the rantings of a crazy senile man in a rent-controlled building in NYC: weird, pointless, delusions of grandeur. They already know about it. And, obviously, don't give a shit. The guy just gave himself a ton of bad publicity on a site that is supposedly getting 1,200 hits per day, as he claims this thread is getting (!!! which seems, er, ludicrious but I guess Andrew would know that better than I), for no reason other than to be a curmudgeonly asshole who flip flops what he says on every other post.

I mean, good lord, Trayce OTM, as someone trying to get attention for your photography, do it in a positive fashion. I'd be pleased too, and am pleased when this happens to me. If the issue is bandwidth, which happened when I was at the newspaper, a polite email was generally all it took to stop anything from going on. I sure as hell wouldn't have gone on a website ranting maniacally about how I'm going to take down all and sundry supposed illiterates garnering myself and the publication I worked for a bunch of ill-will and ridicule.

It's just horrible fucking marketing and as a fan of popular shite, I can't condone that.

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:15 (twenty years ago) link

[MOD NOTE: STOP LINKING PICS FROM THIS GUY'S SITE, YOU GIGANTIC ASSHAT; IT WASN'T FUNNY THE FIRST TIME]

dA oRiGeNaL sTeVEm!, Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:16 (twenty years ago) link

(I hope he appreciates my metaphor, it seems the only way he speaks)

Allyzay, Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:17 (twenty years ago) link

stop being a nobhead dA oRiGeNaL sTeVEm

can we just delete alt.stevem's pics and links to and just lock the thread now?

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:17 (twenty years ago) link

but what about the sellouts in new york city?

RJG (RJG), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:18 (twenty years ago) link

what about yancey?

RJG (RJG), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:19 (twenty years ago) link

yeah, sub me.

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:19 (twenty years ago) link

probably x-post.

*acting cool like I don't already know*

cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:19 (twenty years ago) link

"Also, since I've so clearly spelled out the unlawful activity (yeah, debate it in front of a civil judge if you want, I consider it unlawful and there is case history to back me up), when the complaints hit your provider etc etc, it'll be clear that you guys were notified, warned, and had ample opportunity to remedy the widespread copyright violations that are all over this thread -- and yet you took no action..."

The Copyrighted images are not being hosted on this server. No Copyright violations are occurring. You have no recourse here.

Andrew (enneff), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:20 (twenty years ago) link

Also, I should probably mention that ILX is not a Keypoint Subscriber and thus not bound by that legal document.

Andrew (enneff), Thursday, 19 February 2004 01:25 (twenty years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.