Author Topic: Comments  (Read 1181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online slamjim

  • Posts: 1542
  • OLDS6 in 2017!
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #70 on: October 20, 2017, 02:21:56 PM »
Shit like this isn't making you any friends either. Don't forget, there are 2 sides and a middle, and you're stepping on two of them.


Jim

What, you can't take a Trump joke? It was clearly a gag. Not to mention since when is this a me against others here. Think I've been pals with the majority of people here a helluva lot longer than you. Having a debate here doesn't change anything. I'm arguing with Ernie but we've done this tons of times and he's one of my best pals here.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2017, 02:24:33 PM by slamjim »

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #71 on: October 20, 2017, 03:03:22 PM »
It's not a spin off if you don't own it. It's a copy and it's illegal. What part of that do you not understand? If I work at Marvel on Spider-Man and either while I'm working there or after I leave I start putting out my own comic book called Man-Spider with a character named Peter Parkerberg wearing a red and blue suit with a web design and an upside down spider at the center who fights Dr. Squid and the Orange Goblin (not Trump BTW) do you think that is it's own product or a copy of Spiderman with just a few things altered to try to get away with it?
What part of my comments don't you understand?  topps can and DOES pick and choose its battles.  I stated this was a stupid battle to pick and I will be proven right.  I explained why I feel it was a stupid chose.  I stated they had a legal right so your repeating it is illegal seems to indicate you aren't digesting my post.
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: Comments
« Reply #72 on: October 20, 2017, 03:11:06 PM »
Ignoring the fact that I have a vested interest in Old School (as all the other artists should have as well because a good selling OLDS makes other projects a go) if people have not like some of the recent offerings by Topps and if Old School is exactly the type of gags and art you want why would you boycott that? Then they are not going to do fan friendly sets anymore and they are going to push even more towards the modern kid friendly stuff they are now doing. If you are boycotting you boycott the actual products you don't like.
People don't like to feel controlled.  topps stupidly doesn't get that.  We like Halloween wackys and potentially OLDS6.  topps dictates to us you only get OLDS6, hence there will be backlash.  Dont blame the fans for acting on their feelings, blame the idiots who made this decision. 

Please stop only regurgitating the legal side of this as the legal side has nothing to do with the fan point of view.  If you REALLY care that much about OLDS6 being successful and money being available to spend on it and topps copyright being protected, YOU as a worker for TOPPS call out Lost Wackys.....I personally don't care that matt is raking in all that money, it is a free country.  I am just calling out the hypocrisy of the bogus crack down taking place.
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Online slamjim

  • Posts: 1542
  • OLDS6 in 2017!
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #73 on: October 20, 2017, 03:37:24 PM »
What part of my comments don't you understand?  topps can and DOES pick and choose its battles.  I stated this was a stupid battle to pick and I will be proven right.  I explained why I feel it was a stupid chose.  I stated they had a legal right so your repeating it is illegal seems to indicate you aren't digesting my post.

Let me get this straight. You are saying these are all illegal in the grand scheme of things correct? But they are only picking out specific people to target? So Steve Potter, Neil and Luis Diaz but not Mark Pingitore, Mark McCauley (and few other GPK sets) and Matt Stock? The question then is how do you know that they know about all these other things yet? They all may be different levels of problem. For instance Steve Potter was asked to stop and he stopped. Luis Diaz was asked to stop and he continued and now Topps is actually taking him to court. Some of these people are doing it on FB only, some on Ebay only, some specifically on GPK and WP forums. Those last ones are pretty in your face and probably the easiest to find out about. So you honestly don't know if they are picking and choosing any battles at this point. I seriously doubt they are checking FB, Instagram, Twitter and Ebay on a daily basis. But these sites I'm sure they've popped on to on occasion.

As far as me telling on Matt I'm not going to do that. I honestly don't care enough and I don't want him to get shut down. You are the person constantly talking about him and seem peeved about the Lost Wackys. It would be better if you did it. I've been tattled on to Topps on three different occasions all of which ended up being BS so I'm not going to do it to someone else. Luis, Mark, Neil and the other guys can fight there own battles with Topps. Honestly I hope they win because I want to make sets too! And yeah, I don't like  either. I'm getting told the Old School sticker I made can't be used in the set because it resembles in name only some other parody card and then that I can't print up my one card yet everyone else is making their own cards and sets left and right! So they picked and chose me as well it looks like. They don't own Spaghettos so I can print it is I want but they would probably consider it like Neil's Halloween cards and come down on me so, for now, I'm not going to make any. When Topps is dormant on WPs then I can consider it.

Listen. I'm on your side on the emotional level. I want all these people to make sets. I want to make sets. I don't want their sets to interfere with the sets we all are making with Topps (a la certain people making them trying call out us as if we are stealing their designs which is what just happened in the case of Luis doing that to Brent. It was complete BS) and we are going to have a similar situation next week I think when the GPK Halloween online set comes out and when the We Hate The 80s GPK set comes out. What Topps should do is only let us (the people working with them) that being Neil, me and the other guys work up cool sets that work within a financial framework and are approved by them. Topps knows what's coming out and isn't taken by surprise, fans get what they want, the artists work and only the bootleg sets get shut down. A win win. Nothing is illegal or threatening at that point and all of us working within the system benefit (Topps, creators, fans).

Offline Slaytex99

  • Posts: 158
Re: Comments
« Reply #74 on: October 20, 2017, 03:56:35 PM »
Ignoring the fact that I have a vested interest in Old School (as all the other artists should have as well because a good selling OLDS makes other projects a go) if people have not like some of the recent offerings by Topps and if Old School is exactly the type of gags and art you want why would you boycott that? Then they are not going to do fan friendly sets anymore and they are going to push even more towards the modern kid friendly stuff they are now doing. If you are boycotting you boycott the actual products you don't like.

Old School is what I want from Wackys and I will not be boycotting them.  I hope the series is successful so we can see more of it.   :great:

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #75 on: October 20, 2017, 04:06:26 PM »
What, you can't take a Trump joke? It was clearly a gag. Not to mention since when is this a me against others here. Think I've been pals with the majority of people here a helluva lot longer than you. Having a debate here doesn't change anything. I'm arguing with Ernie but we've done this tons of times and he's one of my best pals here.
Agreed that there should be no Dave against the world here.  Dave did NOT make these decisions, we should not shoot the messenger.  He is rationalizing topps point of view so we don't all run off speculating any further.  We may not like it(clearly I don't) but I would be first in line to buy Dave a beer next time I see him!
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #76 on: October 20, 2017, 04:15:18 PM »
Let me get this straight. You are saying these are all illegal in the grand scheme of things correct? But they are only picking out specific people to target? So Steve Potter, Neil and Luis Diaz but not Mark Pingitore, Mark McCauley (and few other GPK sets) and Matt Stock? The question then is how do you know that they know about all these other things yet? They all may be different levels of problem. For instance Steve Potter was asked to stop and he stopped. Luis Diaz was asked to stop and he continued and now Topps is actually taking him to court. Some of these people are doing it on FB only, some on Ebay only, some specifically on GPK and WP forums. Those last ones are pretty in your face and probably the easiest to find out about. So you honestly don't know if they are picking and choosing any battles at this point. I seriously doubt they are checking FB, Instagram, Twitter and Ebay on a daily basis. But these sites I'm sure they've popped on to on occasion.

As far as me telling on Matt I'm not going to do that. I honestly don't care enough and I don't want him to get shut down. You are the person constantly talking about him and seem peeved about the Lost Wackys. It would be better if you did it. I've been tattled on to Topps on three different occasions all of which ended up being BS so I'm not going to do it to someone else. Luis, Mark, Neil and the other guys can fight there own battles with Topps. Honestly I hope they win because I want to make sets too! And yeah, I don't like  either. I'm getting told the Old School sticker I made can't be used in the set because it resembles in name only some other parody card and then that I can't print up my one card yet everyone else is making their own cards and sets left and right! So they picked and chose me as well it looks like. They don't own Spaghettos so I can print it is I want but they would probably consider it like Neil's Halloween cards and come down on me so, for now, I'm not going to make any. When Topps is dormant on WPs then I can consider it.

Listen. I'm on your side on the emotional level. I want all these people to make sets. I want to make sets. I don't want their sets to interfere with the sets we all are making with Topps (a la certain people making them trying call out us as if we are stealing their designs which is what just happened in the case of Luis doing that to Brent. It was complete BS) and we are going to have a similar situation next week I think when the GPK Halloween online set comes out and when the We Hate The 80s GPK set comes out. What Topps should do is only let us (the people working with them) that being Neil, me and the other guys work up cool sets that work within a financial framework and are approved by them. Topps knows what's coming out and isn't taken by surprise, fans get what they want, the artists work and only the bootleg sets get shut down. A win win. Nothing is illegal or threatening at that point and all of us working within the system benefit (Topps, creators, fans).
I would love if your approach in the last paragraph took place but topps seems too disorganized and their judgment too sloppy for this well thought plan to take place.  As I mentioned, I don't care if matt is making money on ebay, I am all for capitalism especially in spite of corporations.  I just don't believe topps knows nothing about it.  Either topps does or doesn't read this forum....pick one....
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Online slamjim

  • Posts: 1542
  • OLDS6 in 2017!
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #77 on: October 20, 2017, 04:31:42 PM »
Agreed that there should be no Dave against the world here.  Dave did NOT make these decisions, we should not shoot the messenger.  He is rationalizing topps point of view so we don't all run off speculating any further.  We may not like it(clearly I don't) but I would be first in line to buy Dave a beer next time I see him!

Dude! Your one of my best pals here! I was wondering if we really were fighting or just debating! Ha. Seriously, I'm on your side I'm just trying to tell everyone why they did what they did! One more thing to be clear on one point and I think this is a big one. The crackdown seemed to really start when they told Luis to stop making his GPK stuff and he continued to make it. Then they sued him. If he goes to court and can prove they are selectively going after him and not others then that shows that Topps is not protecting their copyrights/ trademarks. A company MUST aggressively protect these things as they can actually lose them in certain situations. So the good guys have to go down with the "bad" guys.

I'm happy this debate happened BTW since I'm starting to really think getting Topps to have us come up with set ideas, present them with financial calculations and properly thought out plans would be a great way to go. A few Old School sets a year by me, holiday sets by Neil and so on. Maybe some good old normal modern day regular WP sets with no entertainment stuff on them as well. Leave that for the retail sets. The online sets would be for the longtime fans only. That's what I think everyone would want.

Let's move on from this please!


Offline Baked Bears

  • Posts: 772
Re: Comments
« Reply #78 on: October 20, 2017, 04:51:20 PM »
As much as I am ired, miffed, and pissed about this turn of events, I do not believe a boycott would have the desired effect.  In fact, as SlamJim pointed out, it might possibly have a detrimental effect in regard to future production.  Adding machines don't speak; They only spit out the bottom line.  And that's all that Topps would see.  They would never know the why behind it.  This would have to be communicated directly to Topps. 

And as far as "hearts" go, heart is a large part of this.  From what I've read on the forum, Neil Camera is great at curtailing negativity, and not only comes across as professional, but calm, cool, and collected.  I admire him for this.  (This is just my opinion, and I hope that I am not speaking out of line.)  On the opposite end of the spectrum, though, his enthusiasm is unbridled and shines - no, pours - out like light.  We fans have been excitedly waiting for his set, yet I believe Neil was probably more excited than everybody put together - not for profit or prestige, but simply because he knew he was going to make a lot of people happy, because he could offer a kindness.  Think back to when he solicited suggestions for different types of cards, borders, etc..  Think back to his "Muah ha ha!"s.  This is what Topps trampled underfoot.  And in the overall scheme of things, this is the stuff that truly matters, that makes us who we are and provides us with direction through life, that bubbles back to the surface in old age giving us pause to remark, "Hey, remember when I did such and such?  That was a really good thing."

No, heart does matter.

(Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass and should just shut up.)

 


Offline zerostreet

  • Posts: 43
    • The Art of Robert Jimenez
Re: Comments
« Reply #79 on: October 20, 2017, 05:09:48 PM »
I'm pretty new here and a newbie Wacky artist for sure, so I won't comment on what has transpired (and am actually in the dark about a lot of the details and history) but I can say that do I believe what you've written about Neil is true (and nicely worded!) While I was just doing sketch cards, Neil "friended" me on Facebook and in a couple of years has proven to me to be all you've written below.  :great:


As much as I am ired, miffed, and pissed about this turn of events, I do not believe a boycott would have the desired effect.  In fact, as SlamJim pointed out, it might possibly have a detrimental effect in regard to future production.  Adding machines don't speak; They only spit out the bottom line.  And that's all that Topps would see.  They would never know the why behind it.  This would have to be communicated directly to Topps. 

And as far as "hearts" go, heart is a large part of this.  From what I've read on the forum, Neil Camera is great at curtailing negativity, and not only comes across as professional, but calm, cool, and collected.  I admire him for this.  (This is just my opinion, and I hope that I am not speaking out of line.)  On the opposite end of the spectrum, though, his enthusiasm is unbridled and shines - no, pours - out like light.  We fans have been excitedly waiting for his set, yet I believe Neil was probably more excited than everybody put together - not for profit or prestige, but simply because he knew he was going to make a lot of people happy, because he could offer a kindness.  Think back to when he solicited suggestions for different types of cards, borders, etc..  Think back to his "Muah ha ha!"s.  This is what Topps trampled underfoot.  And in the overall scheme of things, this is the stuff that truly matters, that makes us who we are and provides us with direction through life, that bubbles back to the surface in old age giving us pause to remark, "Hey, remember when I did such and such?  That was a really good thing."

No, heart does matter.

(Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass and should just shut up.)
« Last Edit: October 20, 2017, 05:13:34 PM by zerostreet »
The Art of Robert Jimenez
www.zerostreet.com

Offline Jean Nutty

  • Posts: 3137
Re: Comments
« Reply #80 on: October 22, 2017, 08:25:46 AM »

   

Thank you for your efforts Neil.

Offline vahsurfer

  • Posts: 598
Re: Comments
« Reply #81 on: October 22, 2017, 10:00:18 AM »
Thank you again for all you do!

Offline mikecho

  • Posts: 640
Re: Comments
« Reply #82 on: October 22, 2017, 11:51:31 AM »
Sorry that you couldn't release the new Halloween Pack O' Fun, Neil. If you can't show us what would've been in it, can you at least tell us what would've been in it?

Offline Baked Bears

  • Posts: 772
Re: Comments
« Reply #83 on: October 22, 2017, 01:20:50 PM »
"Candy"  :]

(Okay, sorry for being a smart aleck.)

Offline Baked Bears

  • Posts: 772
Re: Comments
« Reply #84 on: October 22, 2017, 01:23:40 PM »
On another note, Neil is already priming up for a future Halloween set.  Maybe this year's titles will somehow be incorporated into that surprise?
« Last Edit: October 22, 2017, 01:26:44 PM by Baked Bears »

Offline koduck

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1828
  • Make it snappy!
Re: Comments
« Reply #85 on: October 22, 2017, 06:12:19 PM »
Nah, I'm putting the 2017 release to bed.

Offline Baked Bears

  • Posts: 772
Re: Comments
« Reply #86 on: October 22, 2017, 06:22:22 PM »
Nah, I'm putting the 2017 release to bed.

Yeah, in bed six foot under.  But maybe that's just as well, being it's Halloween.  Sigh...

R.I.P.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 03:45:34 AM by Baked Bears »

Offline Baked Bears

  • Posts: 772
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #87 on: October 22, 2017, 06:35:08 PM »
NOTE: I'm using their forum names and not their real names because I never met them before personally, so I feel I don't have the right to use their real names. As a matter a fact, I never met anyone here! I'm just a schmuck from Milwaukee!

If you're concerned about which name to use, I would suggest using the forum member's name to refer to a post by that forum member.  So if Koduck writes a post and you respond, you would be responding to Koduck's post.  If you are referring to an artist or the artist's work, I would refer to the artist by the artist's name.  As you can see below, the title was done by "Neil Camera," not "Koduck."





To be honest, I don't know if there is any real protocol to follow - especially on a forum where members go by "Koduck," "Swiski," "Baked Bears," etc. - however I think what I suggested above makes a certain kind of sense.  (Or maybe it really doesn't matter.)

Oh, and no, you are not a "schmuck" from Milwaukee.  Please, don't disparage yourself that way!  You're a "schmutz" from Milwaukee!



 ;)  (Sorry, man, but you set yourself up for that!)

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: Comments
« Reply #88 on: October 22, 2017, 06:41:43 PM »
Nah, I'm putting the 2017 release to bed.
let matt get a hold of it, he can create ludlow backs, variations, and call it the most secret underground project ever!
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Offline lucidjc

  • Posts: 995
Re: Comments
« Reply #89 on: October 22, 2017, 06:54:14 PM »
let matt get a hold of it, he can create ludlow backs, variations, and call it the most secret underground project ever!

THIS! I would buy from Matt!

jim

Offline Swiski

  • Posts: 806
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #90 on: October 22, 2017, 07:51:25 PM »
If you're concerned about which name to use, I would suggest using the forum member's name to refer to a post by that forum member.  So if Koduck writes a post and you respond, you would be responding to Koduck's post.  If you are referring to an artist or the artist's work, I would refer to the artist by the artist's name.  As you can see below, the title was done by "Neil Camera," not "Koduck."





To be honest, I don't know if there is any real protocol to follow - especially on a forum where members go by "Koduck," "Swiski," "Baked Bears," etc. - however I think what I suggested above makes a certain kind of sense.  (Or maybe it really doesn't matter.)

Oh, and no, you are not a "schmuck" from Milwaukee.  Please, don't disparage yourself that way!  You're a "schmutz" from Milwaukee!



 ;)  (Sorry, man, but you set yourself up for that!)

Yup...and Schmutz was brewed in Milwaukee. I like that better!

Offline Bigmuc13

  • Posts: 298
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #91 on: October 24, 2017, 08:12:04 PM »
I haven't collected anything new since ANS 1 or 2.  I really did like Neil's Pack o' Fun though.  Sad to see it not being sold this year.  What really gets me is that Topps is making the effort to stop this, but does nothing to make a pack that would stop pack searchers from ruining buying anything in the wild.  It shows how little they care about the kid who buys packs in the store and has no idea what a pack searcher is.  I would occasionally buy a pack when a new new series was released to maybe get lucky and get a sketch (I did in one of the early releases many years ago).  But when I realized that every pack in the box was fanned out I stopped looking a long time ago.  I don't know why anyone would buy a pack in the wild. 
Still looking for Series 17

Offline Bigmuc13

  • Posts: 298
Re: Comments
« Reply #92 on: October 24, 2017, 08:22:24 PM »
People don't like to feel controlled.  topps stupidly doesn't get that.  We like Halloween wackys and potentially OLDS6.  topps dictates to us you only get OLDS6, hence there will be backlash.  Dont blame the fans for acting on their feelings, blame the idiots who made this decision. 

Please stop only regurgitating the legal side of this as the legal side has nothing to do with the fan point of view.  If you REALLY care that much about OLDS6 being successful and money being available to spend on it and topps copyright being protected, YOU as a worker for TOPPS call out Lost Wackys.....I personally don't care that matt is raking in all that money, it is a free country.  I am just calling out the hypocrisy of the bogus crack down taking place.

I agree with Ernie on this one.  You can't tell people not to be pissed off if they not getting something they want to get or were expecting to get.  Common sense says keep the customer happy.  Throwing them a little Halloween bone every year did that.  Happy customers = buying customers.  I guess they can look at it like protecting their copyright is top priority right now, but with every decision there will be a consequence.  Did we have the right to get the Halloween stuff for the past few years...maybe not.  But if it was an issue, they should have nixed it day 1.   I think the horse already left the barn on this one.
Still looking for Series 17

Offline Bigmuc13

  • Posts: 298
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #93 on: October 24, 2017, 08:28:22 PM »
I would love if your approach in the last paragraph took place but topps seems too disorganized and their judgment too sloppy for this well thought plan to take place.  As I mentioned, I don't care if matt is making money on ebay, I am all for capitalism especially in spite of corporations.  I just don't believe topps knows nothing about it.  Either topps does or doesn't read this forum....pick one....

If they don't read this forum then how did they know about the Halloween packs?  Weren't they only advertised on this forum and PM's?  I know some older series are sold on ebay, but if they are looking at ebay, then they would see the other bootleg stuff one would think.
Still looking for Series 17

Offline Tom Keen

  • Posts: 185
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #94 on: October 25, 2017, 09:43:39 AM »
If they don't read this forum then how did they know about the Halloween packs?  Weren't they only advertised on this forum and PM's?  I know some older series are sold on ebay, but if they are looking at ebay, then they would see the other bootleg stuff one would think.
The only logical conclusion is that someone complained about the halloween packs.  Topps did not find out by sifting thru this forum. From an outsider looking in, it strikes me that the artist world is a cutthroat world who want attention from their sugar daddy(topps).  Someone in defending themselves or looking out for themselves mentioned this set and topps reacted.  Given that Topps doesn't read this forum, it is fair to assume they have no idea the customers here are angry so we can't fault Topps for that ignorance.  WE can't assume any artists here are conveying this displeasure to Topps either.

Offline vahsurfer

  • Posts: 598
Re: Comments
« Reply #95 on: October 25, 2017, 03:03:36 PM »
Keep in mind, with the pending lawsuit Topps has against the GPK rip off, they HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT; i.e. HAD NC's stuff had a look and feel and let it go, it COULD have blown their other case.... Just my thoughts

It is done and over - I am frustrated as well, but it is time to move forward - He will be doing a 2018 Set!

Offline Tom Keen

  • Posts: 185
Re: Comments
« Reply #96 on: October 26, 2017, 02:58:36 PM »
Keep in mind, with the pending lawsuit Topps has against the GPK rip off, they HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT; i.e. HAD NC's stuff had a look and feel and let it go, it COULD have blown their other case.... Just my thoughts

It is done and over - I am frustrated as well, but it is time to move forward - He will be doing a 2018 Set!
I don't have any point of reference on any lawsuits Topps has filed but if they are in fact "being consistent" and trying to curtail all knockoffs of wackys, they sure have done a crappy job as Lost wackys are all over ebay and these private sets have existed for years.  Is it a legal fact that Topps has this consistency concern or just a bunch of speculation here? I really doubt some small spinoffs of 100 sets or less of anything would count as not being consistent as nobody has time to chase down every little knockoff.

Offline DrDeal

  • Posts: 2121
Re: Comments
« Reply #97 on: October 27, 2017, 03:03:41 AM »
I don't have any point of reference on any lawsuits Topps has filed but if they are in fact "being consistent" and trying to curtail all knockoffs of wackys, they sure have done a crappy job as Lost wackys are all over ebay and these private sets have existed for years.  Is it a legal fact that Topps has this consistency concern or just a bunch of speculation here? I really doubt some small spinoffs of 100 sets or less of anything would count as not being consistent as nobody has time to chase down every little knockoff.

There may be a difference in how Topps reacts to Lost Wackys which feature previously created unpublished wackys and Newly created parody's which look like wackys and were and produced/ sold by their own artists.  Lost Wackys may be viewed as a "Tribute" while the Newly created sets may be viewed as Competition.


Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: Comments
« Reply #98 on: October 27, 2017, 05:10:47 AM »
There may be a difference in how Topps reacts to Lost Wackys which feature previously created unpublished wackys and Newly created parody's which look like wackys and were and produced/ sold by their own artists.  Lost Wackys may be viewed as a "Tribute" while the Newly created sets may be viewed as Competition.
Lost wackys are a direct infringement on copyright as they are images created by topps whether used or not.  The distribution and selling of them is direct competition for consumer $.  I will enjoy watching topps lose their lawsuits because they allowed this to happen.  I don't believe they have no idea about the lost wackys.  As a tribute to wackys, I am going to start printing up and selling shirts, let's see how well that is received.
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Offline Bigmuc13

  • Posts: 298
Re: Comments
« Reply #99 on: October 27, 2017, 07:04:16 AM »
Lost wackys are a direct infringement on copyright as they are images created by topps whether used or not.  The distribution and selling of them is direct competition for consumer $.  I will enjoy watching topps lose their lawsuits because they allowed this to happen.  I don't believe they have no idea about the lost wackys.  As a tribute to wackys, I am going to start printing up and selling shirts, let's see how well that is received.

Yeah, the word 'tribute' is not a good choice. Infringement is infringement if the company that is being infringed upon chooses to act on it. 
Still looking for Series 17

Offline DrDeal

  • Posts: 2121
Re: Comments
« Reply #100 on: October 27, 2017, 01:14:07 PM »
Yeah, the word 'tribute' is not a good choice. Infringement is infringement if the company that is being infringed upon chooses to act on it.


My point is Topps may view Lost Wacky's differently than other releases that look like wackies.

Offline bandaches

  • Posts: 3599
  • I had wacky sketch addiction!
    • Visit my Wacky Pack Website
Re: Comments
« Reply #101 on: October 27, 2017, 03:35:52 PM »

My point is Topps may view Lost Wacky's differently than other releases that look like wackies.
...and my point is that it exactly goes against consistent protection of the copyright assuming such consistency is actually necessary.  There is no way I can see how Neil's halloween sets are more of an infringement than someone taking actual titles created by topps and printing and distributing them for profit like was done with lost wackys.
Contact me at bandaches@yahoo.com as I have tons of wackys for sale!

Offline crackedjerk

  • Posts: 857
Re: 2017 Halloween Pack O Fun
« Reply #102 on: November 09, 2017, 07:46:34 PM »


I'm happy this debate happened BTW since I'm starting to really think getting Topps to have us come up with set ideas, present them with financial calculations and properly thought out plans would be a great way to go. A few Old School sets a year by me, holiday sets by Neil and so on. Maybe some good old normal modern day regular WP sets with no entertainment stuff on them as well. Leave that for the retail sets. The online sets would be for the longtime fans only. That's what I think everyone would want.



That sounds great to me!

 

anything