On 2006-06-12, Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I didn't say he was plagerizing.
I didn't say *you* said that, but it's certainly being said.
> Malicious is also not the right word, as
> that would indicate some kind of attack. You probably mean no criminal
> intent
Both, actually, considering the tone this whole thing has been taken to
by the various trolls. And, again not the very explicit and direct link
to the original author.
>> Now, once the artist had been appraised of the situation, did he
>> contact Roy? That is an indication of his perception of the situation -
>> infringement, faux pas, or traffic driver.
>
> Whether or not the author contacted him is irrelevant.
Um, considering it's the artist's work, I'd say his opinion on the
matter is the *most* relevant.
> Roy knows he's
> infriging, yet he continues to do so. That seems to indicate that he
> believes it's ok to infringe until he's ordered not to.
Or that he's not doing anything wrong until and unless told otherwise
by the only person with rights in the matter. Neither of us will ever
know unless he tells us. Like the original artist, I can't be arsed to
care enough to ask.
> It would be a regrettable mistake if he took it down when it was pointed
> out, but the fact that he continues is just pig headed stubborness. Can't
> let us "win".
You are aligning yourself with the other trolls on the group? "Careful
with the company you keep" and all that...
--
Sincerely,
Ray Ingles (313) 227-2317
"Remember when we had that war on drugs and now there aren't
any drugs anymore?" - dameron
|
|
