Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steve Conan Trustrum" data-source="post: 1911028" data-attributes="member: 1620">That's a big part of the problem. You mistakenly believed I was making assumptions. I'm rather certain my position in the matter is rather solid.1) Many of the professionals around here disagree with you, but continue to rage on, as you please.2) How can you still fail to get this? The proof WAS there. It's been verified. The fact that Gary took it down so that you, personally, can no longer see it isn't relevant -- no more so than you, personally, having to see the gun in order for some guy in Denmark to be convicted of murder.Oddly, many of the things you've been saying with concerns to copyright and artist and/or publisher culpability are outright wrong. I suggest you brush up because a "lot" of what you know, if your points thus far are any indication, is common heresay and misconceptions twirled about the Internet on the back of speculations and assumptions.This is what I'm talking about. You have no idea how copyright works. The publisher is a third party existing entirely outside of any arrangement made between Gary and anyone else. The relationship between Justin and Gary has to be legally solid in and of itself, without relying upon third party legal documents that Justin isn't privy to. What would happen if Justin printed the book and this other artist said "hey, you stole my work!" What proof of such an agreement does Justin have? As Justin has clearly stated, Gary isn't the easiest person to get a hold of, so Justin would be left holding the bag without any documentation as to the legality of the piece in question.When a, b and c are all intertwined in the context at hand, you'd better believe you better know how they all interact together within that context, otherwise you're not adding anything to the point. You're speculating and, frankly, most of your speculations to this point have been flat-out erroneous.You are free to conduct your business any way you like. I think, however, you'll soon realise how naive you are if anything you're involved with has to go to court and you're asked to provide paperwork backing up your position. The arguement "I'm a trusting lad who doesn't believe in contracts" doesn't go very far to convince anyone that you're position is the correct and binding one.</blockquote>

Verification