 | | Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
What's this? (URL) there any truth to this, or is this just the UK equivalent to the Weekly World News? ~Grand Admiral (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch) !
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
Wow, that would be interesting if LEGO was taking a position against the site after Brad J. had made favorable statements about the site at BricksWest. jt (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) That article is scary. I would be very disappointed if it was forced to close down. :-( I just might spend a few evenings saving the entire contents on my hard drive while it's still up. (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Even aside from how TLG may pursue the matter, the article reads as so much newsrag hype. The author throws around all these shocking terms and veiled accusations but doesn't even mention the fact, much less the implications, that these are (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure he actually praised the BT directly (in fact he mentioned that there are people who have a problem with it), but offered support for BPS's *creativity*. He said that TLC trusts its brand to its fans, "even BPS"-- that's not to say (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) I don't know for sure, but it reads like trash, and looks like trash; it probably is trash. Especially given that we've had Brad J's nod of approval, and Brendan specifically so. This is almost certainly some yahoo speculating from no more (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Yes, and "Oh no, these pedophiles have links to the Brick Testament!!!" Well, they probably have links to MSN.COM as well, if they're using IE. Depicting Bible stories as Brendan does, is a wonderful artistic endeavour. If we start saying, (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
Mark Sandlin wrote in message ... (...) Yes. Kevin ---...--- NEW Grey Heritage Facade kit! (URL) TOWN PLANNING information: (URL) Lego parts store: (URL) Guild of Bricksmiths(TM): (URL) Lego Web page: (URL) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) That's not an unreasonable interpretation, though one needs to be careful to avoid baby-with-the-bathwater reasoning. Brendan can hardly be held accountable for the actions of his audience, just as Martin Scorsese can't be blamed for (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) I think the issue is one of *propriety ownership*. The "minifig" image is intellectual property of TLC and a direct reflection of their brand, and we all know how protective TLC is about their brand (rightly and justifiably so). If they see (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Shoes (was Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Well, CLEARLY wearing footwear does. EVERYONE knows that! (1) See what shoes did to Imelda Marcos? QED. 1 - Apologies to any "Life of Brian" or "Red Shoe Diaries" fans out there XFUT o-t.fun... any more SERIOUS replies ought to go to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Grumble. Well, your assessment is correct (based on precedent), but I still don't like it! Here's a more abstract question--if I buy a LEGO product, am I automatically entering into a "fair use" contract respecting TLG's ideas of propriety? (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Shoes (was Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) As I recall, there was an old lady who lived in a shoe. (...) What does quantum electrodynamics have to do with it?!? (...) Eek! I thought I'd set FUT ot.debate. Obviously the computer made an error. Dave! (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) At what point do I agree to their "fair use" policy? When I purchase a product, as long as I am not violating any copyright, or patent issues where does TLC have any sway over how I use these products. I sign no agreement at time of purchase, (...) (21 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) UK. Last night at approximately 3:43am, a crack squad of American and British intelligence officers and LEGO lawyers stormed into my house and interrogated me under harsh lighting conditions before dragging me away kick and screaming. I have (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) We'll keep a registration open for ya'! 8?) Matt (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Harsh lighting conditions? Oh man, the rest I can see, but that is going too far! James (FUT O-T.fun) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
Hey, seriously... What is going on with this stuff? Does the community need to rally support for Mr. Smith? -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) I appreciate the concern, but I don't have any reason to believe that anything in that article is anything close to the truth. From what I could tell, it was first published on 9 February, so if there was actually some move on behalf of The (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) That's a relief!!!!!!! :-) The Brick Testament is a major part of the reason why I got out of my Dark Ages. (which is, when I noticed how huge and interesting the Lego internet community was) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) It pains me to say it, but the Sunday Mail is actually a Glasgow based Scottish paper [sister to the Daily Record]. The story is typical of the anti-paedophile hysteria which grips UK tabloids [whilst exploiting the sexuality of (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Darn! You're doing this too? I thought I had an original... Back to the drawingboard, Chris (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Call it "art", and you can do what you like! ;) Is there a right to free speech in Legoland? Scott A (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) LMAO! At least you'll have lots of time in the slammer to concoct further morally depraved and indifferent dioramas. Here's an idea for you - a woman captured and held against her will, made to wear scanty and sexually alluring clothes, bound (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) This is ridiculous. Although I'm not a fan of the Brick Testaments or Brendan Powell Smith himself, I find that this issue is brainless. A LEGO website that recreates a respected book throughout the world shouldn't be treated as such. I'm sure (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) I'm glad you put a winky there-- that is one of my hot buttons-- "artists" hiding behind the First Amendment while they purvey filth and obscenity-- and then *I* have to support it! (NEA in the US) (...) What about TLC's rights? You know, (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) It's funny how differently we see things. I see these artists not as "hiding behind the First Amendment," but insted standing on the shoulders of the giants who made the First Amendment so and proudly declaring their work in the Land Of The (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) When I had a run-in with the legal dep't many years ago, it was because I used the name LEGO, and their logo in my movie, as well as some other names that they had trademarked. They said that if I removed the names and logos from the movie, (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Most of BPS's scenes in the BT *aren't* MOCs, but rather pics of minifigs with talk bubbles, and some cases they are in rather offensive poses (to which, no doubt, drew the pedaphiles). The *minifig* is most definitely a trademark of TLC, and (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) There is a tricky situation here with respect to trademarks I think. If I say "I have built a pornographic mosaic using LEGO bricks." I am simply making a statement of fact. I should even be able to advertise this fact (since it is an accurate (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Wow, John--this is one of those rare moments when you and I are in complete agreement (at least with the NEA part). I can think of absolutely no reason whatsoever that the government should provide public funding for artists. Having said that, (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
I thought that the patented part of the basic brick was the tubes Lester (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Maybe a few decades ago, but not anymore. At least, not unless the patent can legally be ignored by 10+ other brands! Dave! (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) That assumes a particular definition of MOC. One could argue that "Take hairpiece A, put it on top of head B, on torso C, with legs D" is as much a MOC (albeit a very simple one) as "Take brick A, stick it on plate B, etc". Bruce (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Well, John, maybe you just don't understand art ? Don't forget that not so long ago, many great artists were considered doing filth and obcenity too... These artists are now the great ones that we study in art school. Artists, in my opinion, (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) That's a tricky accusation, and it's circular reasoning besides! There are many examples of "art" that I "understand," but I still find them to be garbage. (...) Although in the broad sense your statement can be true, but it is at least as (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Perhaps, but then again, I *was* an Art Major in kollege... (...) Gotcha. Go ahead and try and list one, and you will instantly realize what I am talking about. (...) Right, and the same applies to the question "what is art?" The bottom line (...) (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Good luck in court;-) JOHN (21 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Yeah, it's not like TLC have printed "LEGO" on every stud or something... :) Best regards, /Tobbe (URL) SPAM when e-mailing) (21 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
