Author Topic: Picture of wacky past (Read 15222 times)

Kook · « **on:** March 24, 2015, 06:13:56 AM »

Thought you would enjoy this courtesy of ebay. Looks like a nice 6th series pack. Gotta love that 70s "doo"

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DEM12-1974-Vtg-Topps-Wacky-Packages-Stickers-Gum-Dan-Marcouiller-Original-Photo-/181698690412?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4e15fd6c

Fanatical_and_Sickly · « **Reply #1 on:** March 24, 2015, 07:00:58 AM »

Quote from: Kook on March 24, 2015, 06:13:56 AM

Thought you would enjoy this courtesy of ebay. Looks like a nice 6th series pack. Gotta love that 70s "doo"

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DEM12-1974-Vtg-Topps-Wacky-Packages-Stickers-Gum-Dan-Marcouiller-Original-Photo-/181698690412?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4e15fd6c

Very nice. Man, runaway was such a hard pull for me.

Lol. Too bad it's from one of those time periods that can't be repeated. Unlike all those other eras which can be...

Paul_Maul · « **Reply #2 on:** March 24, 2015, 07:50:51 AM »

Pictures like this are very emotional to me. It drives home in an instant what motivates me to waste time and money on this stuff forty years later. For whatever crazy reason this stuff was a really important part of my life.

BumChex · « **Reply #3 on:** March 24, 2015, 09:01:58 AM »

Quote from: Kook on March 24, 2015, 06:13:56 AM

Thought you would enjoy this courtesy of ebay. Looks like a nice 6th series pack. Gotta love that 70s "doo"

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DEM12-1974-Vtg-Topps-Wacky-Packages-Stickers-Gum-Dan-Marcouiller-Original-Photo-/181698690412?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4e15fd6c

That is really cool.

Kook · « **Reply #4 on:** March 24, 2015, 09:02:06 AM »

Quote from: Paul_Maul on March 24, 2015, 07:50:51 AM

Pictures like this are very emotional to me. It drives home in an instant what motivates me to waste time and money on this stuff forty years later. For whatever crazy reason this stuff was a really important part of my life.

Ditto

BumChex · « **Reply #5 on:** March 24, 2015, 10:26:52 AM »

Quote from: Paul_Maul on March 24, 2015, 07:50:51 AM

Pictures like this are very emotional to me. It drives home in an instant what motivates me to waste time and money on this stuff forty years later. For whatever crazy reason this stuff was a really important part of my life.

That picture reminds me of me at that age. Long hair and all. I know what you are feeling. I kept looking at it this morning while working. I finally broke down and bought it. It's a piece of Wacky history!

Kook · « **Reply #6 on:** March 24, 2015, 10:52:40 AM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 24, 2015, 10:26:52 AM

That picture reminds me of me at that age. Long hair and all. I know what you are feeling. I kept looking at it this morning while working. I finally broke down and bought it. It's a piece of Wacky history!

You beat me to it. I was considering it too. I think if it was still available tomorrow I probably would have pulled the trigger. That pic might look good in the header or footer of the forum website. Since you bought it, I would imagine you could use it...

BumChex · « **Reply #7 on:** March 24, 2015, 04:44:28 PM »

I split this topic from the non-wacky discussions because this is real Wacky history. Some people may not read non-wacky stuff.

RawGoo · « **Reply #8 on:** March 24, 2015, 05:20:05 PM »

Quote from: Paul_Maul on March 24, 2015, 07:50:51 AM

Pictures like this are very emotional to me. It drives home in an instant what motivates me to waste time and money on this stuff forty years later. For whatever crazy reason this stuff was a really important part of my life.

As far as I'm concerned, you're not wasting time or money if collecting and upgrading Wackys gives you pleasure.

Wackys were very important to me, too. It was such fun being out shopping with my mom and she'd sneak a pack into her purchase while I wasn't looking, and surprise me when we got home. And, I always looked forward to stocking stuffers!! Every year when we went lunchbox shopping we'd look all over, hoping to find a Wacky box. it's a shame they didn't make one of those.

Fanatical_and_Sickly · « **Reply #9 on:** March 24, 2015, 07:07:14 PM »

Quote from: Kook on March 24, 2015, 10:52:40 AM

Since you bought it, I would imagine you could use it...

Art ownership is not the same thing as image ownership....

BumChex · « **Reply #10 on:** March 24, 2015, 07:21:45 PM »

Quote from: Fanatical_and_Sickly on March 24, 2015, 07:07:14 PM

Art ownership is not the same thing as image ownership....

Not to start a big heated debate over intellectual property but I have a couple questions:

1. This photo is over 40 years old so would it still be considered copyright infringement for personal use? I'm not planning on selling copies.
2. Now that I own the image wouldn't I now be the owner? It states that it was a press wire picture. Weren't these taken to be sold? I'm now the owner.

Jean Nutty · « **Reply #11 on:** March 24, 2015, 11:54:24 PM »

This is really cool! I hope you post a nice scan when you get it Brad.

Also interested in what looks like a news clipping on the back... I assume from the "Original News Press Wire Service"...whatever in the world that is

Kook · « **Reply #12 on:** March 25, 2015, 05:25:01 AM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 24, 2015, 07:21:45 PM

Not to start a big heated debate over intellectual property but I have a couple questions:

1. This photo is over 40 years old so would it still be considered copyright infringement for personal use? I'm not planning on selling copies.
2. Now that I own the image wouldn't I now be the owner? It states that it was a press wire picture. Weren't these taken to be sold? I'm now the owner.

I think "theoretically" you own the picture but the photographer owns the copyright. The photographer can sell you the image or the entire rights to the image by agreement. Without an agreement in force either way, you probably don't really have solid grounds for copyright ownership, but in reality, the chances of dealing with any legal issue over what you do with a picture taken 40 years ago is likely pretty negligible unless you stood to make big bucks with it somehow IMO.

Fanatical_and_Sickly · « **Reply #13 on:** March 25, 2015, 07:53:12 AM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 24, 2015, 07:21:45 PM

Not to start a big heated debate over intellectual property but I have a couple questions:

1. This photo is over 40 years old so would it still be considered copyright infringement for personal use? I'm not planning on selling copies.
2. Now that I own the image wouldn't I now be the owner? It states that it was a press wire picture. Weren't these taken to be sold? I'm now the owner.

I'm not sure what the age limit is, but likely more than 40 yrs. Personal use is one thing and is fine. But selling is just one way to infringe. Reuse and reproduction rights covers a lot of areas.
My understanding is that you only own the photograph. The print. There is never a transfer of image rights unless specified.
Like Kook says though, this is all very trivial in this case.

That's my understanding. But I'm not a lawyer, I'm just staying at a holiday inn.

Fanatical_and_Sickly · « **Reply #14 on:** March 25, 2015, 08:00:10 AM »

Quote from: Kook on March 25, 2015, 05:25:01 AM

I think "theoretically" you own the picture but the photographer owns the copyright. The photographer can sell you the image or the entire rights to the image by agreement. Without an agreement in force either way, you probably don't really have solid grounds for copyright ownership, but in reality, the chances of dealing with any legal issue over what you do with a picture taken 40 years ago is likely pretty negligible unless you stood to make big bucks with it somehow IMO.

My understanding is there is nothing theoretical about it, only the physical object was sold and not the image.
And there is an agreement in force. There is *always* a tacit agreement that the creator of the image has the copyright ownership, unles there was an agreement otherwise to sell it.

ElectricSlave · « **Reply #15 on:** March 25, 2015, 09:37:49 AM »

When the group home found I was buying wacky packages they told me I was wasting my allowance. I said well you and the other guys buy cigarettes and burn the money, and they said well they needed them because they smoked. Boy there's no reasoning with some people. At least they didn't take my wackies away from me.

BumChex · « **Reply #16 on:** March 25, 2015, 09:54:11 AM »

Quote from: Fanatical_and_Sickly on March 25, 2015, 07:53:12 AM

I'm not sure what the age limit is, but likely more than 40 yrs. Personal use is one thing and is fine. But selling is just one way to infringe. Reuse and reproduction rights covers a lot of areas.
My understanding is that you only own the photograph. The print. There is never a transfer of image rights unless specified.
Like Kook says though, this is all very trivial in this case.

That's my understanding. But I'm not a lawyer, I'm just staying at a holiday inn.

Overall I don't think we are going to have any lawyers knocking at my door over this picture. I don't plan on selling copies so it shouldn't matter at all. I'm also not charging any money for the forum so I'm making no profit of a picture. It's probably the same for using the logo for Wacky Packages. Topps hasn't come after me either.

Kook · « **Reply #17 on:** March 25, 2015, 10:05:09 AM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 25, 2015, 09:54:11 AM

Overall I don't think we are going to have any lawyers knocking at my door over this picture. I don't plan on selling copies so it shouldn't matter at all. I'm also not charging any money for the forum so I'm making no profit of a picture. It's probably the same for using the logo for Wacky Packages. Topps hasn't come after me either.

That was my point.

BTW, the kid in the pic reminds me of the one on the wacky patches box, (just a little longer hair).

Pic courtesy of Rusty's site: http://www.lostwackys.com/1974-PATCHES-box-wacky-packages.htm

sco(o)t · « **Reply #18 on:** March 25, 2015, 10:07:22 AM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 25, 2015, 09:54:11 AM

Overall I don't think we are going to have any lawyers knocking at my door over this picture. I don't plan on selling copies so it shouldn't matter at all. I'm also not charging any money for the forum so I'm making no profit of a picture. It's probably the same for using the logo for Wacky Packages. Topps hasn't come after me either.

Err, there's someone at the gate for you...

Joe G. · « **Reply #19 on:** March 25, 2015, 11:04:43 AM »

It's interesting that the reporter described Wackys as meaningless, ridiculous, stupid and silly. I wonder if that was the prevailing opinion of adults at the time.

BumChex · « **Reply #20 on:** March 25, 2015, 01:07:29 PM »

Quote from: Joe G. on March 25, 2015, 11:04:43 AM

It's interesting that the reporter described Wackys as meaningless, ridiculous, stupid and silly. I wonder if that was the prevailing opinion of adults at the time.

Adults probably all thought the same thing.

Fanatical_and_Sickly · « **Reply #21 on:** March 25, 2015, 01:46:32 PM »

Quote from: BumChex on March 25, 2015, 09:54:11 AM

Overall I don't think we are going to have any lawyers knocking at my door over this picture. I don't plan on selling copies so it shouldn't matter at all. I'm also not charging any money for the forum so I'm making no profit of a picture. It's probably the same for using the logo for Wacky Packages. Topps hasn't come after me either.

Selling or profiting is really only a part of it, and not the sole criteria.

But back to the picture - looks very staged to me. I think I shredded just about every pack I opened just tearing open those wrappers! 😛

70s_Kid · « **Reply #22 on:** March 26, 2015, 03:25:12 PM »

I love it. I pass chrome wackies around at work and most of them remember them as kids and post them on their cubes!

BumChex · « **Reply #23 on:** March 29, 2015, 07:43:53 PM »

I just got the Photo. Pretty cool since it's the original. I have to travel this week so hopefully next weekend I can scan it without all watermarks on it.

BlunderBreadGirl · « **Reply #24 on:** March 30, 2015, 11:53:11 AM »

I like it too! I enjoy how nice and neat the situation is with the wrapper, stickers and puzzle all in line. Probably not an improvised shot

But cool! BBG

bigtomi · « **Reply #25 on:** March 30, 2015, 03:48:22 PM »

Quote from: BlunderBreadGirl on March 30, 2015, 11:53:11 AM

I like it too! I enjoy how nice and neat the situation is with the wrapper, stickers and puzzle all in line. Probably not an improvised shot But cool! BBG

Didn't really think too much about it, but I tend to think this was an impromptu shot. It just doesn't matter...It just doesn't matter...It just doesn't matter...

BlunderBreadGirl · « **Reply #26 on:** March 31, 2015, 04:26:33 PM »

Impromptu or staged? Discuss.... Girl or boy? Discuss... Looks like a girl to me.

lucidjc · « **Reply #27 on:** March 31, 2015, 04:29:01 PM »

Quote from: BlunderBreadGirl on March 31, 2015, 04:26:33 PM

Impromptu or staged? Discuss.... Girl or boy? Discuss... Looks like a girl to me.

Staged...Where's the gum? Its Pat...We just don't know?

DrDeal · « **Reply #28 on:** March 31, 2015, 05:54:30 PM »

Quote from: Fanatical_and_Sickly on March 25, 2015, 01:46:32 PM

Selling or profiting is really only a part of it, and not the sole criteria.

But back to the picture - looks very staged to me. I think I shredded just about every pack I opened just tearing open those wrappers! 😛

I agree this looks staged. I think most kids would remove the wrapper and look through the card without the wrapper.

sco(o)t · « **Reply #29 on:** March 31, 2015, 06:38:42 PM »

Quote from: BlunderBreadGirl on March 31, 2015, 04:26:33 PM

Impromptu or staged? Discuss.... Girl or boy? Discuss... Looks like a girl to me.

Looks kind of staged... the front of the stickers are facing away so can't be seen easily by the child. They seem to be bending the stickers back slightly to peer over the top to see the title. But, on the other hand, that sure looks like my, "damn, I still didn't get a Bit-O-Money sticker after 20 packs" expression I remember having opening Series 6. This looks like a girl to me, but most of my male schoolmates and friends, including myself, had similar hairstyles and length in the mid to late '70s. Could go either way.

bigtomi · « **Reply #30 on:** March 31, 2015, 07:35:00 PM »

Quote from: BlunderBreadGirl on March 31, 2015, 04:26:33 PM

Impromptu or staged? Discuss.... Girl or boy? Discuss... Looks like a girl to me.

I'm quite certain it's a girl. Staged or not? Not certain now. Still leaning towards a natural shot.

Joe G. · « **Reply #31 on:** March 31, 2015, 09:25:09 PM »

Boy
Staged

BumChex · « **Reply #32 on:** March 31, 2015, 10:22:25 PM »

Quote from: Joe G. on March 31, 2015, 09:25:09 PM

Boy
Staged

Yes, I believe you are right. Regardless, it hard to find pictures of Wacky's in the 70's. We had Dynomite magazine and a couple other articles that Greg posted but this seems to emphasize how cool these were back then. Maybe I'm over thinking this but that is what I thought looking at the picture.

Paul_Maul · « **Reply #33 on:** April 01, 2015, 03:57:34 AM »

Another good pic...

Kook · « **Reply #34 on:** April 01, 2015, 06:17:00 AM »

Quote from: Paul_Maul on April 01, 2015, 03:57:34 AM

Another good pic...

(Image removed from quote.)

What a nice stack of 3 OS boxes! Oh, to have a time machine...

P.S. Notice the Kung Fu poster in the background right above the kid's head. I used to love that show.

News:

Author Topic: Picture of wacky past (Read 15222 times)