Copyright? 18 and older only!

[saktrnch]

Or this?

 

[Just Another Sign Guy]

uhm yeah...if you are going to cite rulings or even a 'judge's opinion' in an attempt to support an erroneous position and understanding of basic legal concepts that define our profession i would recommend a little more than....

Actually there was a standard mentioned in one Judge's opinion that he gave

inform yourself, know your profession. when you hear so many of us talking about industry standards and minimum knowledge required this is why...

absolutely frightening

 

[btropical.com]

the size of the girl makes her a shorty , sorta a snooki type . turn her around

 

[The Vector Doctor]

The link that SAS provided reveals something that is too similar to what you did.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

uhm yeah...if you are going to cite rulings or even a 'judge's opinion' in an attempt to support an erroneous position and understanding of basic legal concepts that define our profession i would recommend a little more than....

Actually there was a standard mentioned in one Judge's opinion that he gave

inform yourself, know your profession. when you hear so many of us talking about industry standards and minimum knowledge required this is why...

absolutely frightening

I had the class 5 yrs ago, would it be reasonable to assume that I would need to cite court rulings and references in a Signs forum website 5yrs down the road when I hadn't even started doing anything in terms of Illustrator or design work other then embroidery? Certainly not the work that would have led me here before.

I don't even know if I kept my Con Law II books. There might also be a reason within there that might reconcile why they ruled the way that they did that I'm sure I'm not remembering. It could have also been overturned in a later case for all I know. We certainly didn't study all the cases that are out there.

That was also a contract case in essence(should the sell still go through, contract still valid), not something that would normally apply to this situation, but for the fact of what constitutes "reasonable person" was brought up.

You would be surprised about the court decisions on past rulings, rulings that you and/or I may not agree with, but at one time were on the books. I want to remember having somewhat of a heated moot court when we had to use that case for the mock case that we were doing.

Rulings like "Law of the Apex" which allows miners to follow the vein from their property where ever it leads even to other people's property. I don't know if that has been overturned yet or not, I know there were some revisions to the 1872 Mining Act in 1976, 2007 and 2009. I think the Law of the Apex is still technically good law, just not followed by Industry Standards of today. I would consider rulings like this one to be an erroneous position, but at one time it was(and might still be, please feel free to check on that) good law even though it may not be observed by industry standards(I can understand why, that would be a Pandora's Box for whomever opened that). Do you think a reasonable person should think that they can follow(in this case minerals) items from there land into other people's land? I don't, but at least at one time and maybe even still, a reasonable person was able to think that way.

As to what was in the Judge's opinion on what to gauge copyright infringement. I wouldn't even know where to begin looking for that one. It could be in one of my law books or in my law&economics books(not quite the same thing as straightforward law books. You examine on which is economically efficent for you, go through the contract or violate it, pay the damages and do something else), that would be looking for a needle in a haystack.

It could have also been an "and" test, meaning more then one variable had to be satisfied in order for it to pass, or it could have been the converse of that as an "or" test. Meaning this variable or that variable had to be satisfied to pass the test.

 

[threeputt]

your safe, your stripper has much bigger breasts and she only has one leg!

According you that logic, she has only one boob.

 

[ddarlak]

According you that logic, she has only one boob.

that crossed my mind..... didn't want to go there, poor thing only has one leg....

 

[WildWestDesigns]

that crossed my mind..... didn't want to go there, poor thing only has one leg....

But at least she is still trying to "work", got to give her credit for that.

 

[wetgravy]

there are plenty of sillouettes out there. Heck, just ask someone to sit down or cradle a chair backwards, snap the shot and outline it. Bing bang boom ... just as good ... no copyright.