Remove it, or the next sound you will hear is from my lawyers:warning

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Funny pic! :1orglaugh :thumbsup

I guess it has your shit back on it...

For gfy's sake I have the original [no-one who arrived later will make sense of this thread otherwise]:


http://hentaidemon.com/gfy/baddog-dead-yet.jpg

Looking much better:winkwink:

Funny you bitch'd out.

loll..hilarious

t3h p[_]n|<z

listen up fuckface... dont try to shrug off what you did..

you may have an issue with lloyd, but removing a rightful owners watermarks is unacceptable.. PERIOD...

Fitty............

He who laughs last ................

:firehair:firehair:firehair

oh noooooooo

That was a fun thread. After last night it was like reading the end of a comedy.

http://ilsgcash.com/shoplifter.jpg

Aren't you essentially doing the exact same thing that J.F.K. was opposed to? You're hosting his image with watermarks and urls removed. Shouldn't he be DMCA'ing your host now?

I'll pull it, np. J.F.K?

well, in order for the thread to make sense, leave it up for now. Thanks for asking :thumbsup

That's what I figured. Right on.

You can't be fucking serious. He blurred out the watermarks and thought people wouldn't think anything of it? OMG this dude is insane!

AFIK, it's fine to parody photos unless it is expressly written that the image may not be altered in any form.

However, removing watermarks is not smart - they are there to show ownership.

Yet, I find it strange that the owner of the photo hasn't asked for it to be removed from public view and deleted. JFK - even though your thread has made it clear you are not happy with the image being stolen and used, you have not asked for it to be removed. In fact, you have just done the opposite. So in fact, you condone it?

You can take it down later, when the thread fell off the main page. Appreciate it thanks !

what would you call this ?
I have posted it in other threads as well. I dont mind people using the shots for "parody" as you say, BUT leave the watermark and copyright alone, unless it was previously arranged otherwise.

sure np JFK

Apologies for not reading the entire thread :Oh crap

I just read your post above saying to leave it cos the thread wouldn't make sense.

I'm outta here as quickly as I popped in :winkwink:

Without reference the backstepping of the target [since hotlinked] of the original post makes this thread confusing.

threads like this remind me why i always go outta way to put watermarks back in if i gotta cropem out ;)

so... whats the point in removing the watermark for a forum post?

just asking

Its all good, thanks for popping in :thumbsup

i've contemplated leaving the watermark out of a few because if they were offended i didn't want them thinking they were endorsed by fubar and gettting pissy with jfk...

BB email me pls jkedvessy at hotmail.com :thumbsup

done....

I always use Julius' pics on boards and my blog, but I always give him a hardlink on top of leaving the watermark.........JFK is one of the most respected dude and greatest guy in this business and doing something like that was fucking lame........ :(

Greedy motherfucka!

Weird that JFK keeps bumping this thread, so I don't mind helping. Bump for JFK. ;)

They stolenerr my jobbs!

That's not true. Parody is protected under Fair Use precisely because copyright owners would not allow their works to be changed.

Still it's a low class move in this case, legal or not.

Yup, photoshopping a copyrighted image does not fall under fair use / parody. It's copyright infringement. :2 cents:

If he had created his own image, as a parody, using his own content. It would be a parody and covered under fair use.

That's not the way I understand it. Image manipulation for satire or parody is allowed under current copyright laws. Not that it matters because in this example who is going to put it to the test anyway? No one.

lawyers my ass.... :2 cents:

Well I'm not a lawyer. :2 cents:

You have lawyers growing in your ass?