›

IMDb Bond Refugees

1234568»

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I'm certainly not questioning any of this. It's up to the owners of this board to make the rules.

    But regardless of that, I wonder why uploading, say, a single still or frame from one of the movies to illustrate a point should be a copyright infringement, if that's the reason for the ban, while screenmusings.org does just that one-hundredfold all the time, for almost all of the Bond movies, and scores of others to boot, maintaining (apparently with none of the copyright holders contesting them) that it is all subject to the "fair use" doctrine. If they were wrong, I dare say they'd been gone long ago.

    MI6 is semi-official, unlike other sites, so thems the rules. We all know the films inside out here, so it's unlikely you'll need a still to illustrate a point anyway.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,078
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I'm certainly not questioning any of this. It's up to the owners of this board to make the rules.

    But regardless of that, I wonder why uploading, say, a single still or frame from one of the movies to illustrate a point should be a copyright infringement, if that's the reason for the ban, while screenmusings.org does just that one-hundredfold all the time, for almost all of the Bond movies, and scores of others to boot, maintaining (apparently with none of the copyright holders contesting them) that it is all subject to the "fair use" doctrine. If they were wrong, I dare say they'd been gone long ago.

    I believe the member had two accounts. Which is why one of them has been revoked.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,084
    OK, I'm not talking about a current case. Just wondering (being a lawyer) about the reasons for the rule, not questioning the consequences of violation.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    OK, I'm not talking about a current case. Just wondering (being a lawyer) about the reasons for the rule, not questioning the consequences of violation.

    We have missed a lawyer here.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,344
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    OK, I'm not talking about a current case. Just wondering (being a lawyer) about the reasons for the rule, not questioning the consequences of violation.

    We have missed a lawyer here.

    A fellow lawyer! Well, I wish I was one and do have a Masters in Law.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    RC7 wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I'm certainly not questioning any of this. It's up to the owners of this board to make the rules.

    But regardless of that, I wonder why uploading, say, a single still or frame from one of the movies to illustrate a point should be a copyright infringement, if that's the reason for the ban, while screenmusings.org does just that one-hundredfold all the time, for almost all of the Bond movies, and scores of others to boot, maintaining (apparently with none of the copyright holders contesting them) that it is all subject to the "fair use" doctrine. If they were wrong, I dare say they'd been gone long ago.

    MI6 is semi-official, unlike other sites, so thems the rules. We all know the films inside out here, so it's unlikely you'll need a still to illustrate a point anyway.
    What do you mean by semi-official? Just Asking.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    QuantumOrganization wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I'm certainly not questioning any of this. It's up to the owners of this board to make the rules.

    But regardless of that, I wonder why uploading, say, a single still or frame from one of the movies to illustrate a point should be a copyright infringement, if that's the reason for the ban, while screenmusings.org does just that one-hundredfold all the time, for almost all of the Bond movies, and scores of others to boot, maintaining (apparently with none of the copyright holders contesting them) that it is all subject to the "fair use" doctrine. If they were wrong, I dare say they'd been gone long ago.

    MI6 is semi-official, unlike other sites, so thems the rules. We all know the films inside out here, so it's unlikely you'll need a still to illustrate a point anyway.
    What do you mean by semi-official? Just Asking.

    The site runners are affiliated with EON at times, and need to keep their wishes in mind. That's all.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I see another bit of Mass Debation, is taking place.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,084
    Thunderpussy wrote: »
    I see another bit of Mass Debation, is taking place.
    Debation. Is that a word? But then, nothing better than enlarging one's vocabulary.

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    I like to enlarge many things ;)
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,084
    Thunderpussy wrote: »
    I like to enlarge many things ;)
    Like some famous people known for keeping their tip up?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,919
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    Now might also be a good time to point out the ban against posting Eon-owned images. If that's still in effect. Can't imagine that would be obvious to newcomers, so worth stating here so everyone knows about it.
    I did gloss over that item as well--will avoid that in the future.

  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,919
    CountJohn wrote: »
    Any word on February's most mentioned Bond film from Rich the Bruce?
    Today's still the 27th, but I can confirm there will be closure for the Most Mentioned Bond Film of the Month's played out on IMDb. Probably 1 March. Not earlier than the 28th.

    For those whose memories dimmed, it started like this. From @rich_bruce 's account.

    2012
    October - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    November - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    December - QUANTUM OF SOLACE

    hello-my-name-solace-featured-image-800x300.jpg
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,919
    2013 was a volatile year for the IMDb James Bond Board. Still, overrun by Swiss Marc.

    2013
    January - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    February - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    March - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    April - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    May - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    June - WORLD WAR Z*
    July - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    August - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    September - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    November - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    December - QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    * - Arbitrarily designated a Bond Film for this year.

    Swiss-Made.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.