 | | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) Well, let's back up a moment. I am suspicious of anything such as a "book of the year" award, *especially* if it is open to a public vote. What the public likes is often quite silly and rarely serious. I would hope that a winner of such an (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) A good writer of fiction and propaganda, yes. And to be fair, that's all he claims to be. When pressed, he doesn't claim to tell truth. My issue with him is that he doesn't disclaim very well at all and the credulous are (perhaps deservedly (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) I think this book is great! It's a good thing that it won. It will give it a publicity that will make it even more popular. Terry (22 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, (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) I have not read the book, but a friend of mine use to get his daily (weekly? whatever) e-mail message. Moore was quite a good writer. Much more coherent than say, a Rush Limbaugh. I'll have to get the book, now. :-) -->Bruce<-- (22 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 (22 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! (22 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 (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) With due respect, John, what book would you call "worthy" of the award? Have you read either of Moore's books, or have you only read what other conservatives have said about them? I've previously noted Moore's really unfortunate tendencies to (...) (22 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, (...) (22 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 (...) (22 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 (...) (22 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, (...) (22 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 (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) If by "personal agenda", you mean to encompass the nation... " Moore's triumph was boosted by a strong telephone vote from the public, who were invited to participate in the awards for the first time this year. Until now only those in the (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) I agree. How sad. Instead of choosing a book *worthy* of the award, let's choose a book that pushes our personal agenda. Merit really never entered into it. JOHN (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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, (...) (22 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 (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Freedom from information
|
|
(...) ...and now it's UK "book of the year": Moore wins Book Of The Year (URL) bit of a worry really. Scott A (22 years ago, 25-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
|
|
(...) Darn! You're doing this too? I thought I had an original... Back to the drawingboard, Chris (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
