b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Supergroups » Message 8351722

[challenge entry] Lubricated Goat + Seahorses =

Lubricated Goatse Horses :D

From the Supergroups challenge. See all 392 entries (closed)

(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:04, archived)
# What the...
*checks what the competition is this week*

Horse-se.cx?
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:05, archived)
# best of all the meme collisions
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:06, archived)
# I'VE GOT ONE:
MERZBOW + THE GEROGERIGEGEGE =

MERZGEGEGE.
OR:
GEROGERIBOW.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:07, archived)
# I was trying to merge another band with The Tony Danza Tapdance Extravaganza
but decided against it
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:12, archived)
# I figure I'll just throw the most obscure bands around and get ignored.
C.C.C.C. + DRUMCORPS = C.C.CORPS
THE SKULL DEFEKTS + SHIT AND SHINE = SHIT DEFEKTS.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:15, archived)
# Bolt Thrower + Napalm Death = Napalm Thrower
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:16, archived)
# Babyland + Tit Wrench = Tit Land.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:17, archived)
# Everyone's a winnar in Tit Land
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:24, archived)
# TIT BABY
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:27, archived)
# Oh!
I love Napalm Death! :D
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:29, archived)
# Hello again :]
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:33, archived)
# I am going to see them THIS FRIDAY

yay!
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:37, archived)
# Lucky! They're ace live. They played loads of stuff off Scum when I saw 'em.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:39, archived)
# Yeah!

I think this'll be about the eighth time I see them or something.

Never knew Jesse Pintado lived in Holland until he died....
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:44, archived)
# errrrrrrr
no.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:11, archived)
#
no
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:12, archived)
# Waiter! This is NOT what I ordered!
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:13, archived)
# go away now
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:14, archived)
# No thanks, I'm full.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:16, archived)
# Why hasn't anyone ever taken legal action against Zoo and Nuts for stealing from B3ta?
They'd be covered under international copyright law and surely they'd have a case if they kept the original image files.

When you optimize your images to be uploaded you loose information, right? So having the original file with that missing information proves you're the creator, doesn't it?

Why not teach them a lesson and give the money to a kitten rescue or something.

/son-of-a-lawyer-thinking blog
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:18, archived)
# Cos taking legal action involves having money?
I don't know. Ask Riverghost or Archie.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:20, archived)
# Nuts are actually being very nice now and paying us money
for the images used...Zoo can fuck off
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:22, archived)
# Strangely enough
My job today involved ringing Zoo. And Nuts. I was very very tempted to say 'And by the way - bastards!' before hanging up, but thought the boss wouldn't be too impressed.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:26, archived)
# haha :)

Zoo are the enemy now..viva la NUTS!! :D
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:28, archived)
# so are Zoo still printing our stuff?
If they are, having Nuts all legitimate with us is a far stronger argument and threat to them.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:30, archived)
# not sure to be honest

you're making a tidy profit from them :D

I'm still waiting on my money
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:34, archived)
# I've had vouchers
no cash yet. But Archie has so I'm hopeful!
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:36, archived)
# Perhaps not least
because I'd bet that at least half the work on here is based on other people's source images in the first place, which makes a copyright argument slightly suspect. Also Zoo are now crediting the people from B3ta who made the images (which seems to be Happy Toast, The Great Architect + Guest of the Week). Unless it's Nuts that's crediting.


Edit: Nuts it is. Sod Zoo.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:23, archived)
# because they've been paying us for our work for the last 3 or 4 weeks
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:29, archived)
# Unless the b3ta image
has been created using entirely original drawings or photographs, then the b3tan who made has no claim over the copyright of the image. You cannot claim ownership of an image you made by cobbling together stuff you found on a google image search.

Even with completely original work, although you may technically hold copyright over the work you create, you still need to be able to fund legal action to prove this. And the magazine publishers have more lawyers and deeper pockets than you.

Also, they have actually been asking for permission recently.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:42, archived)
# Really? I know documentaries that use copyrighted footage have trouble, but do collages?
And I wonder how much they could really be bothered to get their lawyers involved.

And I think you can get a lawyer involved if there's money for him to make in the process.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:48, archived)
# Or why not just get Getty Images involved if they're the only copyright holders who can gripe
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:53, archived)
# I don't believe this is correct.
A collage can be created from external work and still stand as an original piece in its own right.

I suspect it would be grist for the lawyers.

Edit: Ahhh, the gentle touch of mindpiss.
(, Wed 7 May 2008, 21:54, archived)