| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Pedro Silva writes:
<SNIP>
> My main concern and why I kept voting "unsure" was that this parody has the
> LEGO(r) logo on it.
<SNIP>
Sorry to nit-pick, and maybe I'm just badgering the point, and maybe the images
were changed before they were uploaded. But the enhanced image that I saw (as
I did not look at these images until after they were re-uploaded) makes me
think that they have not been changed, except for the image labled 'for
blinds.' It seems the creator wanted to make sure that everyone was aware that
the LEGO logo was in fact NOT in the picture, but a parody of the LEGO logo,
with the word LOGO written in.
--Anthony
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Anthony Sava writes:
> Sorry to nit-pick, and maybe I'm just badgering the point,
> and maybe the images
> were changed before they were uploaded.
Yes you are, and yes they were.
The original image had the LEGO logo in it not a parody. But even the parody
is a technical violation of the fairplay document... one that lots of people
do (similar parodies or distortions that is) but a violation nevertheless.
Stop nitpicking and stop badgering, that would be my request.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.publish, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.publish, Anthony Sava writes:
>
> > Sorry to nit-pick, and maybe I'm just badgering the point,
> > and maybe the images
> > were changed before they were uploaded.
>
> Yes you are, and yes they were.
>
> The original image had the LEGO logo in it not a parody. But even the parody
> is a technical violation of the fairplay document... one that lots of people
> do (similar parodies or distortions that is) but a violation nevertheless.
>
> Stop nitpicking and stop badgering, that would be my request.
Lar,
Less typing, more clicking. I want everyone to be able to see my pics soon. ;-)
Jude
FUT .o-t.debate cause it ain't worth it even though you are right
|
|
|
