Re: sales@mrpinball.com.au Warning letter about doing backglass with direct ink.

Well, you would need to own the painting first. Then use a scan to
repair a portion of it. Then you would be making an accurate
comparison.

-cody
--CAGPB4

On Nov 15, 10:53 am, "Dan Beck" <biscuitbecks@*nospam*cableone.net>
wrote:
"Chris Hibler" <ch...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:ebaa6c3d-f711-4f8e-9440-79a9b680c71b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm not a lawyer...I just hate what the dingo does to people with good
intentions. I think the hippie has an angle there.

Why would using a colorspan printer to restore a used Paragon BG be
any different from using a paintbrush to restore a used Paragon BG?

Hi Chris,

I would like to friendly quibble with you over that last point.  You know I
am not an attorney, either.  So I scan the Mona Lisa with a scanner and sell
the product, or I get a piece of wood and paint the Mona Lisa with a brush,
and sell the product.  Do you think the Louvre would approve?  In principle
I do not see a whole lot of difference between Paragon and the Mona Lisa.

In my opinion if John reproduces art (not belonging to him in any way), and
sells it, and not keep it for himself, he has violated the law.  Until he
gets permission from the rightful owners of artwork (jerk(s) that they may
be) he is going to have infringement issues.  My feeling is some owners of
artwork would be more willing to work with John, than others; Gottlieb LLC
comes to mind.

I think Bryan Kelly is onto something in regards to how well John uses his
head...

Regards,
Dan

.

Relevant Pages