Calvin & Hobbes: The Downhill 16 Thomas

[MoviePosterEmpire]

This thread delivers.

Keep defending this shitty ass trace job its delivering the laughs big time.

Still haven't proven it was traced. Comic characters are really easy to draw accurately.

[captainhavoc]

Real fans have respect for Wattersons's wishes. Case closed!

The thieving artist and the printer have both profited here (at a minimum) - to say this is not for profit is an insult to the mostly intelligent people on eb.

Real fans of Pulp Fiction have respect for that license too! You're such a drymounting hypocrite. How do it apply to one person's license and not another?

I can say there is no way Mr. Watterson (who is very much alive) would approve of this comission, retail or not. No way.

How is it any different from any other unlicensed art? You own unlicensed fudge? How is owning that okay but this isn't? Studios and actors go out of their way all the time to turn people down on licensing their fudge.

Reasons in this thread to not care regarding copyright infringement;

Yeah but I'm a huge fan.
Yeah but it's a screenprint.
Yeah but I want it.
Yeah but it'll be public domain in 44 more years.
Yeah but it was barely profitable.
Yeah but I have a tattoo of it.
Yeah but it's not a direct trace.
Yeah but you're just butthurt.
Yeah but I read these growing up.
Yeah but you all flip art.
Yeah but you all own unlicensed art.
Yeah but we'll be doing more C&H but it'll be more exclusive.
Yeah but this was a passion project.

Please explain how this commission is not okay and all the unlicensed art you own isn't? Then you can talk. You can't rail against one instance of copyright infringement and not against others.

JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DOES IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S OK.

jesus drymounting christ, what are you 2?

that's not a rational argument

You're saying it's not okay but you're buying other unlicensed art? You're literally saying that unlicensed art is okay when you buy it...All unlicensed art.

It doesn’t have to be traced. A big difference between some of the examples you listed and this one is that this is obviously drawn to looks as close to BW art as possible.

You have a bunch of art in your collection that was drown with the intention of looking as much like the original image as possible. What's your point? What makes this bad but all of that fudge is okay?

From the EB page for this print:

"Original Price
$40.00"

Yep. Merchandise.

WTF? Do you not know how commissions work? You're paying someone for their talent, not a product.

But Mr. Watterson drew this line, which is defined by the absolute lack of merchandise, period. Sure plenty of other licenses have lines, but that's usually because there are official profits on the other side of it. Not so in this case.

This is your dumbest argument. They're all lines. You can't say one line is darker than another because someone said something in an interview and the other said something through a lawyer and producer.

thread picking up steam

Wait 'til the cease and desist letters start going out from Mr. Watterson's attorney.

Nobody has contacted the actual license holder about an infraction, they just went straight to the artist's employer to try to get him fired because they're kittens.

[MoviePosterEmpire]

But Mr. Watterson drew this line, which is defined by the absolute lack of merchandise, period. Sure plenty of other licenses have lines, but that's usually because there are official profits on the other side of it. Not so in this case.

This is your dumbest argument. They're all lines. You can't say one line is darker than another because someone said something in an interview and the other said something through a lawyer and producer.

That wasn't my argument at all. I said the line is darker because Bill never made any money on merch. George Lucas can't say fudge about bootlegs cuz he slapped Star Wars on damn near everything. If anybody's gonna make a profit on C&H at this point, it should start with Bill. It can end with you if you like, but the precedent is not yours to make.

A license is a license is a license. There is no other line to draw.

[MoviePosterEmpire]

I think there would be vastly less critique on the piece if those involved would stop trying to justify it as being OK and just say, "Yea, we ripped off Bill's IP and we don't give a fudge about what he wants, it's all about what we want."

Very few people involved have been even talking in here. It's all outside observers.

[Diabolos80]

Why aren't you after Rob Jones for ripping off Charlie Brown when that license holder wouldn't give him the license for that art? It makes no sense why you go after one but not others?

Because Schulz is the same as Lucas. He can't say fudge cuz he'll put Peanuts on anything. drymounting diapers if there's money in it.

Also, sorry Rambo

If Schulz said, guys please don't do this, Peanuts is sacred, we'd all be posting pics of Peanuts greeting cards and handy wipes.

[MoviePosterEmpire]

I think there would be vastly less critique on the piece if those involved would stop trying to justify it as being OK and just say, "Yea, we ripped off Bill's IP and we don't give a fudge about what he wants, it's all about what we want."

nail on the head!

and in addition... MAYBE they could have kept it "private" instead of coming to here to gloat. this is what happens. you get fudge for being shitty, the artists gets fudge for being shitty. everyone gets fudge that's involved because it was pretty drymounting shitty thing to do.

I think you owning other unlicensed art and coming in here bashing this unlicensed art for being unlicensed is a shitty thing to do.

[MoviePosterEmpire]

Why aren't you after Rob Jones for ripping off Charlie Brown when that license holder wouldn't give him the license for that art? It makes no sense why you go after one but not others?

Because Schulz is the same as Lucas. He can't say fudge cuz he'll put Peanuts on anything. drymounting diapers if there's money in it.

Also, sorry Rambo

It doesn't matter! How do you not understand that there is no difference. A license is a license. It allows you to let some people to use it or allows you to let no people use it. It doesn't matter how you use it because it works the same way.

[lujborg]

I think there would be vastly less critique on the piece if those involved would stop trying to justify it as being OK and just say, "Yea, we ripped off Bill's IP and we don't give a fudge about what he wants, it's all about what we want."

nail on the head!

and in addition... MAYBE they could have kept it "private" instead of coming to here to gloat. this is what happens. you get fudge for being shitty, the artists gets fudge for being shitty. everyone gets fudge that's involved because it was pretty drymounting shitty thing to do.

I think you owning other unlicensed art and coming in here bashing this unlicensed art for being unlicensed is a shitty thing to do.

And you're entitled to your opinion, deluded as it is. whatever helps you sleep at night chief

[partpat]

This thread delivers.

Keep defending this shitty ass trace job its delivering the laughs big time.

Still haven't proven it was traced. Comic characters are really easy to draw accurately.

[Diabolos80]

Why aren't you after Rob Jones for ripping off Charlie Brown when that license holder wouldn't give him the license for that art? It makes no sense why you go after one but not others?

Because Schulz is the same as Lucas. He can't say fudge cuz he'll put Peanuts on anything. drymounting diapers if there's money in it.

Also, sorry Rambo

It doesn't matter! How do you not understand that there is no difference. A license is a license. It allows you to let some people to use it or allows you to let no people use it. It doesn't matter how you use it because it works the same way.

The difference is that the creators of other properties set the precedent with thier own marketing. It's about respect dude. If Bill had said his piece, while simultaneously making bank off products like Star Wars and Peanuts have, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

[RambosRemodeler]

This thread delivers.

Keep defending this shitty ass trace job its delivering the laughs big time.

Still haven't proven it was traced. Comic characters are really easy to draw accurately.

Of course they are. That's why we all do it for a living.

[wottagunn]

This thread is being bumped every drymounting minute so I guess something is going down.
Should I bother reading all 26 pages or can someone deliver a dotpoint recap for me?

[ajmmck]

This thread is being bumped every drymounting minute so I guess something is going down.
Should I bother reading all 26 pages or can someone deliver a dotpoint recap for me?

Trace jobs, melt downs, double standards, copyright infringements and call outs. Its been pitched to be the feel good movie of the summer

[trarex]

[AliRock110]

Dont own this artwork, realizes I'm in a poster forum full of unliscensed Art. So all I could do is post funny strips. I'm trying to change direction because I see people who are cool with each other in other threads act like it's ok to call each other names and crap on each other's values. So all I'm trying to do is change gears before this devolves any further. Everyone here on both sides is smashing their head on the roof of their glass house standing on the soapbox. Cmon guys, right now we're collectively on the 3rd panel. I just want to get to the 4th.