Quote from: TECSHARE on January 27, 2015, 04:29:53 AM

Quote from: smoothie on January 27, 2015, 04:05:10 AM

LOL I like how you overlook your own mispeak in saying that people judged him first and then I show you where I did not judge him initially until he started to show how we operates in light of opposition (cussing, being childish) then when it came out that he was misrepresenting himself that is when he showed that he operates in a shady manner saying that he does original work when he then admits he uses clip art.

The funny thing is that you already claimed to KNOW how WC was doing the engraving for the stencil...then you back pedaled to say "he could do it with ...". Sorry buddy you contradict yourself on so many levels it is funny.

As I asked before are you and Goat brothers as you both have a similar way of trying to retort, get owned, then make like you never were wrong in your presumptions/statements.

Please try harder TECHSHARE as you can't admit that I did approach him professionally and without judgement.

You obviously can't take being wrong, sorry I mean you can't take being proven wrong in your claims.

I did not misspeak. You did not judge him from the first moment. You did however judge him later WITHOUT PROOF, only suspicions. Suspicioins are not proof. This is the definition of guilty until proven innocent. I did not backpedal, this is just more bullshit you are tacking on to make it sound as if I did. There is not a shred of proof in any of your statements. It is 100% clear you are here to troll. Just because you imagine all of these things doesn't make them facts. If I was wrong I would admit it, but I am not. You are wrong, and it will be proven conclusively within the next few days.

Quote from: smoothie on January 27, 2015, 04:10:34 AM

Him using CLIP ART

and then...

Saying he tailors his designs to his customers and he does custom work is proof enough for me that he operates in a shady manner.

They are not the same.

ORIGINAL != DERIVATIVE WORK as he never said that. Now he would be operating on a technicality which he and we all know is bullshit as what he was going for was GENUINE ORIGINAL WORK.

Just like he will say "I HAND CARVE ALL OF MY WORK". When really he should be saying "I HAND CARVE SOME OF MY WORK BUT MOST OF IT IS HAND CRAFTED USING MACHINE TOOLS". This is obvious mispeak to give the impression that he is actually hand carving his work.

It is like the salesman that will say anything to get you to buy that car but really he knows most of what he says isn't true.

But some of what he says is true so that makes it okay. lol

Yeah right.

A DERIVATIVE WORK is not ORIGINAL nor is it CUSTOM. It is simply that....DERIVATIVE WORK/CLIP ART/COPY.

You can keep covering your ears and eyes to the truth but in the end the truth will ring free. Perhaps you may or may not be around to hear it and if you are I suspect you will ignore it or find some way to justify what WC has done to be "OKAY".

Your expectations that every single action he does from start to finish be defined as "hand carving" is unrealistic and disingenuous. Just because he uses hand guided rotary tools for part of each project does not mean he is not also hand carving his work on the same piece. Doing so in no way makes his statement of hand carving untrue at all, because he in fact does "hand carve all of his work".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work

"In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work (the underlying work). The derivative work becomes a second, separate work independent in form from the first. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality to be original and thus protected by copyright. Translations, cinematic adaptations and musical arrangements are common types of derivative works."

Again, I am a professional graphic designer and I am VERY WELL INFORMED in copyright law as it is part of my job and my training. A derivative work is the property of the creator of the derivative. There is no grey area. This is a fact. What other bullshit theories can you drum up to justify this mob Smoothy? You seem to be willing to spend all night posting accusation after accusation all the while not providing proof of anything, just theories.

Quote from: alani123 on January 27, 2015, 04:17:46 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 27, 2015, 12:23:45 AM

You do know that video, even compressed was about 2 GB right? It took nearly 2 days to upload and process.

Sorry for only replying to this part of your post, but as someone who does video editing I can't resist giving my two cents on this.

To be brief: Any and I mean ANY video can be reduced to a few hundred megabytes with proper compression.

There's no way uploading a 1 hour and 20 minutes video could take 2 days. And WC is no exception to that, he has no excuse. He could have simply googled "video compression" and found a technique in 2 minutes instead of waiting 2 days to "upload".

Just my 2 cents.

Right, because Youtube doesn't limit your upload speed or anything right? Also it certainly doesn't take forever for youtube to process that video does it? Additionally if he uploaded some grainy low def video you know DAMNED WELL people would be crying about how there is not enough detail and he is trying to hide something.

Please post where I judged him prior to his shady actions. I only posted what I thought when the existing evidence was presented at every step of the way. An opinion is not a judgement. I can be quite harsh but as you can see I did give the guy enough ability to prove himself in his claims. That never happened even until this day.

This is also coming after the guy threw me under the bus claiming my physical bit coin artwork was copied from deviant art, which it is not and I have proven him wrong in this. The guy operates on hypocrisy in that he does not like it that nubbins did not approach him directly to get answers but then it comes to talking about my work he is willing to throw me under the bus and not give me the same professional approach I did him.

This is all on the tails that all of that clip art that he used was never ever talked about until a 3rd party found it on the web. Then he admits "yes I used clip art...ha ha ha".

Let's break down your supposed derivative work definition:

Quote

"In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyright-protected elements of an original, previously created first work (the underlying work). The derivative work becomes a second, separate work independent in form from the first. The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality to be original and thus protected by copyright. Translations, cinematic adaptations and musical arrangements are common types of derivative works."

So does the following equate to "The transformation, modification or adaptation of the work must be substantial and bear its author's personality to be original and thus protected by copyright."?

I DO NOT THINK IT FITS THAT DEFINITION IN THIS SPECIFIC EXAMPLE. Wasn't there another lion image he jus copy and pasted? lol...

Wow he put a spin on the design's angle and put a couple of BTC in there.

Yes so original. lol Cheesy

Then Woodcollector has the gall to say this:

LINK: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=927942.msg10189078#msg10189078

Quote

Everything commissioned is tailored to speak to the client directly. Sometimes they have an idea already, other times they give me just a concept like they want it to symbolize something like movement like "Transcendence" .

It all revolves around who the client is as a person, their passions, what makes them tick, then i tailor the art to speak directly to them, something that embraces all that they are as a human being.

Please spare me all of this high horse crap that you are so experienced in this field blah blah blah. As I could care less.

I've worked on music and if someone took a piece of copywritten music and changed one single note that would be considered "original" is bullshit.

The word "substantial" is subjective as what you would determine as substantial and what I would are likely in two different galaxies.

In my view those two images above do not differ enough to be considered original. But more so just a simple copy with a few small modifications.

Shit the guy didn't even come up with the BTC as it is the community's to use.

Wow he cut a circle out of the design and put it in wood. Yes so original. Couldn't be done with a laser... Roll Eyes