Stage Select

The MEGASHOCK Saloon Thread 3: Chinder Chagger Edition


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, DangerousJ said:

Sorry you can't eat many cheeseburgers anymore.

The hilarious part about that is I've told them to give me a cheese burger and fries the day before and they did, and I wasn't much into red meat generally. I see your humor hasn't changed. Honestly, I needed that. Thank you. XD

Edited by Emptyeyes_
Link to comment

damn, Minister Jap and other channels got some new juicy dirt to talk about today.... August Alsina apparently plays for the other team?!

man that raises some questions there....anyway, yeah some of youtube today is like the modern-era of National Enquirer tabloid shit....and I will admit to loving every damn trashy minute of it.

edit---well technical difficulties at the moment...he'll be back; AM has a vid on it from last night as well; I haven't seen that one yet.

new link

 

Edited by MillionX
Link to comment
3 hours ago, RSG3 said:

"Copywrite law exists to protect content creators!" Then how come content creators are the #1 individuals that get fucked over by copywrite law?

Because most content creators don't do their due diligence to protect their content when signing deals, which usually means getting a lawyer to look over any contracts you potentially will sign. That photographer SHOULD own the copyright to a picture he took because how else does he eat? He's not claiming to own Ariana Grande's image or likeness, just the photo he took of it and the work he probably put in to make the picture look like it does.

 

I don't know the specifics of the case, but I bet if she'd just asked him if she could use the picture he'd probably have been cool with it, or at least offered to sell it to her, but she probably didn't, and that sort of thing is a case in point as to why copyright laws exist.

Edited by DoctaMario
Link to comment
44 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

Copywrite law is purposefully obtuse to trap people in it. My argument isn't to abolish copywrite. My argument is to make it work for creators, the people it's supposed to work for. 

It does work for creators. It's not the law's fault creators don't cover their asses and do the work to protect themselves.

 

How would you change it though, out of curiosity?

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, zatalcon3 said:

Don't cook because you will likely be eating by yourself. Just go to whole foods.

The corniness for this reply. It's as if you're too young to be here. 

 

A Cisco aura I'm sensing from you no less. I hope you're not that person. The world and its characters. I'll deal....

Edited by Emptyeyes_
Link to comment

There are some days where I wish I was born a bit earlier to experience a show, movie, whatever in its prime. This time it’s Columbo. 
 

 

The ace attorney breakdown from the culprit, the glove reveal, the fact that the episode just ends with a hard cut to credits. Everything about this clip is entertaining to me. If every episode from this show ended like that, I think I would’ve really enjoy it.

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, BornWinner said:

There are some days where I wish I was born a bit earlier to experience a show, movie, whatever in its prime. This time it’s Columbo. 
 

 

The ace attorney breakdown from the culprit, the glove reveal, the fact that the episode just ends with a hard cut to credits. Everything about this clip is entertaining to me. If every episode from this show ended like that, I think I would’ve really enjoy it.

For me, I'd rather watch Jackie Gleason! : D

Link to comment
3 hours ago, DoctaMario said:

It does work for creators. It's not the law's fault creators don't cover their asses and do the work to protect themselves.

 

How would you change it though, out of curiosity?

I'd have it written in plain English to start, you shouldn't need a lawyer to translate it for you just to even begin the process. That's dumb as fuck and we both know it. Many artists just coming up don't even have the money for a lawyer who can actually navigate this mess. 

 

It doesn't work for creators or it wouldn't fuck so many of them over. If they lose more often then they win then there is clearly a problem and blaming it on the multitude of artists instead of the people taking advantage of it is some bullshit. Period. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

It doesn't work for creators or it wouldn't fuck so many of them over. If they lose more often then they win then there is clearly a problem and blaming it on the multitude of artists instead of the people taking advantage of it is some bullshit. Period. 

This is the complete opposite of the specific case you're complaining about though.

Ariana Grande didn't create the photograph, therefore she doesn't have rights to it unless she gets them from the creator.  That's kind of the baseline.

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, IcyBlackDeep said:

This is the complete opposite of the specific case you're complaining about though.

Ariana Grande didn't create the photograph, therefore she doesn't have rights to it unless she gets them from the creator.  That's kind of the baseline.

That was only one example of what I'm talking about, and it's a weird one since it's a photo. Like I guess he owns the photo but he doesn't own her image, my complaint, or more observation was they it's very strange you can own a photo of someone but the person in the photo has no rights to said photo even tho it's them in the photo. Dude ain't got shit without Ariana and other celebs. He needs her and other celebs for his photos or else he'd be a landscape photographer. He very much needs them. They are the value, not his photos, however nice they may be. 

 

And how far should that be allowed to go? Paparazzi make a regular mess of society chasing these people down to take photos of them, and the only reason those photos get bought is because of who is them, meaning the subject matter is the value, so their making money on someone else's image and face. They get to own your photo but you don't get to own your face? 

 

It's why I said the entire thing is a mess. It extends far beyond just picture taking. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment

Spider-man's Greatest Moments:

 

First appearance of the black alien costume  (ASM 252) (1984)

clean.jpg

 

The alien costume debuted  in this issue though chronologically it first appeared in Secret Wars #8 published a few months later.

In that story, Spider-man reached into a machine that generated a costume similar to the Julia Carpenter spider-woman.

 

24_24.jpg

 

After Secret Wars ended, Peter returned to earth and used the costume.

It responded to his thoughts to come on and off, produced its own webbing from its own mass, and could imitate other clothing.

 

While Peter was initially excited, the costume would envelop him while sleeping and force him to go webslinging.

Soon, Pete goes to Reed Richards and learns that the costume is ALIVE! 

 

And thus after removing it, The amazing Bag-man is born (for just one issue )  (ASM 258)

 

lO9TnplPRw75ZOJ_BnbV-HZk9RykFvDdgBfFmuJ1

 

For the next 50 some issues, Peter uses a cloth version of the black costume made by the Black Cat.

However, in the new Web of Spider-man, the costume returns and mimics his old costume, and while trying to fight it, some 3rd rale Vulture wannabees named Vulturions try and fight him. This takes him to a church where he finds that..

 

Z8Bi0pJpJL7t5GdPt5zeIoVlS3_gO8PNf1b6TO9L

 

However, while the symbiote bonded to him , it gained some emotions and saves Pete from being inured by the bells.

 

c3dmLvrIbFisu0o3FVWaU-m8uu707WoYIIPcIOz0

y1pcmpKctuKdUhtGIFSdfoLvxk1mEGrci74hv1Mr

 

Note: Peter will use a black costume until ASM 300 where a venomous journalist makes his debut.

Some of these scenes (church bell) and the nightmare Pete has in ASM 258 are homaged in Spider-man TAS  "The alien costume"  parts 1-3 in the first season.

 

ZO6IqGaaa7rKwWrWwzsmCww-BMSb3zpF4J0ih7oY

3:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_Yoik2WfEQ

 

 

Edited by DangerousJ
Link to comment
1 hour ago, RSG3 said:

I'd have it written in plain English to start, you shouldn't need a lawyer to translate it for you just to even begin the process. That's dumb as fuck and we both know it. Many artists just coming up don't even have the money for a lawyer who can actually navigate this mess. 

 

It doesn't work for creators or it wouldn't fuck so many of them over. If they lose more often then they win then there is clearly a problem and blaming it on the multitude of artists instead of the people taking advantage of it is some bullshit. Period. 

You haven't really said how you would change it how it isn't "working for creators" though. How are the creators "losing more often than they win" because of copyright laws? If anything, those laws are how they get paid and how they get restitution if someone tries to steal their work.

 

41 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

And how far should that be allowed to go? Paparazzi make a regular mess of society chasing these people down to take photos of them, and the only reason those photos get bought is because of who is them, meaning the subject matter is the value, so their making money on someone else's image and face. They get to own your photo but you don't get to own your face? 

 

It's why I said the entire thing is a mess. It extends far beyond just picture taking. 

There are aspects of this that were legalized so that more creatives could get paid for their work. If I record and produce a track for someone, I don't have rights to the composition of the song itself (unless I helped them write it, but let's say in this instance that I didn't), but I DO own the copyright to the sound recording of that song which includes the tracks I recorded of arrangements I, more often than not, played and created. If there are studio musicians in the picture, that's usually the pool they get paid from on the back end. The artist in question can make a deal with me to get those rights or that we split them, and if they want the stems, they have to pay for that separately, but that part of the law is to make sure that my work is compensated fairly. I'm kind of surprised you're against this tbh.

Edited by DoctaMario
Link to comment
3 hours ago, HD-Man said:

Dude's GF's and wives on FB discussing the size of another man's dick online. And me, in my boredom am stirring the pot. I ain't shit, well rather, them hoes ain't shit 😂

The sheer amount of women I see snitching on themselves over social media in recent years has been pretty jarring.  We knew a pastor's wife who was constantly talking about being holy and posting thirst traps.  Surprisingly she ended up blowing up her marriage to get it from Tyrone.

Link to comment

Well that was odd... I fell asleep for what seemed like a long time, so for a while I was thinking it's already the early morning hours of Wednesday....even got a bowl of "breakfast" cereal ready to go.  I didn't notice until checking youtube and noticing a notification for an upcoming video that still had the date of 11/22....surreal moment there when for a moment I was thinking ---"...but that's yesterday....???"

 

Anyway, apparently they have a new writer/director for the future Blade film as they try to save it...

 

It will be hilarious (and deliciously embarrassing for Disney/Marvel) if Mahershala Ali eventually gets fed up and just leaves the project.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, DoctaMario said:

You haven't really said how you would change it

That's cuz I don't really have a solution, but I don't have to know how to fix my car to know when it's not working right. 

 

But no I'm not really sure to fix it. I can't answer your question. Sorry. 

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, RSG3 said:

That's cuz I don't really have a solution, but I don't have to know how to fix my car to know when it's not working right. 

 

But no I'm not really sure to fix it. I can't answer your question. Sorry. 

Sounds like you're saying something to the effect of "If we catch some team cheating at basketball, then we should redesign the game of basketball to combat that situation." I'm not really even clear on what you think the problem is, and that was my purpose in asking you how you'd change it.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Chadouken said:

What if I take a picture of my balls and post it on Twitter? Who owns the rights to that?

If I'm understanding the way the law works per the Ariana Grande situation, If you take a picture of your own balls and put it on Twitter then you own the rights to that.  But if Ariana Grande takes a picture of your balls and you decide to put that picture up then she can sue you for putting up a picture of your own balls that she took. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, DoctaMario said:

Sounds like you're saying something to the effect of "If we catch some team cheating at basketball, then we should redesign the game of basketball to combat that situation." I'm not really even clear on what you think the problem is, and that was my purpose in asking you how you'd change it.

It's more like we've caught many teams cheating multiple times to the pointnits clear the current games ruleset is not effective at curbing cheating behavior. 

Edited by RSG3
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Chadouken said:

What if you took a picture of somebody ELSE'S balls and posted it on Twitter? Could Twitter claim ownership because it's their platform, or could you claim ownership because it's your picture? Or could whoever's balls it is claim ownership because it's their balls? 🤔

 

What a fucking conundrum.

In the absence of a contract that says otherwise, the creator owns the copyright.  Unless the creator was paid to create the work, in which case the person paying them owns the copyright ("work for hire").

The rights Twitter gets are whatever is in their Terms of Service, which I'm not going to read but undoubtedly give them at least the right to display it on their own site.

The ball owner does not have any claim of ownership, but in this particular case they could probably go after you under various revenge-porn statutes and the like.  Maybe some kind of defamation too.

 

(The trickier bit is if you take a picture of something that is itself copyrighted.  Then you've probably made an unauthorized copy.  Unless it's fair use.  Fair use is a mess.)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
  • Create New...
Stage Select