Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (7899.201)
    Fuck you, Revolver. Fuck you very much.

    Revolver, the guys who completely screwed us over with their distribution strategy of Iron Sky in UK, just got awarded at Screen Awards for their ‘clever’ DVD marketing of Iron Sky. The award shows two things: the absolute disrespect for filmmakers and audience, and that the distribution industry is its’ own worst enemy. Here’s an article from Screen International.

    The more you screw a filmmaker, the more creative you are – the Revolver saga continues
  2.  (7899.202)
    Crosspost from the movie thread:

    ***

    Uah, a slight threadjack, but with Iron Sky there's been this certain quotient of utter nutbags who saw all kinds of weird references and conspiracies behind the film. I think this is the best one so far in terms of sheer elaborateness. Paranoid schizophrenia is not a laughing matter, but damn, this guy got me at the Batman logo :D

    11-3-2012 Nazi Sympathizer Sarah Palin in ‘Iron Sky’
  3.  (7899.203)
    @Vorn - what I especially love about that rant is the continual typo astrolab for astrolabe. Seriously, Astrolab should be the Iron Sky sequel just to fuck the bloke around.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2012
     (7899.204)
    Just picked up IRON SKY on DVD at Target, for fuck's sake! Yay!
    Of course, I went checking for one particular scene...



    LOVED the film, silly, amazing and dedicated to telling its story! Bravo.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2012
     (7899.205)
    •  
      CommentAuthordorkmuffin
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2012
     (7899.206)
    @Sizer, do something! That's uncool.
    •  
      CommentAuthorVornaskotti
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2012 edited
     (7899.207)
    Uh, shit, I'll poke the guys, see if they can do anything about it. Fuck these people.

    EDIT: Hmm, maybe this is a good hook for it: "For copyright protection to attach to a later, allegedly derivative work, it must display some originality of its own. It cannot be a rote, uncreative variation on the earlier, underlying work. The latter work must contain sufficient new expression, over and above that embodied in the earlier work for the latter work to satisfy copyright law’s requirement of originality."
  4.  (7899.208)
    Where the shit did she get that image in the first place O_o
    •  
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2012 edited
     (7899.209)
    No idea; the largest one I've ever posted is about 576x900 pixels, so she's working with a tiny crap image if she's trying to sell it as a print.

    Also, in a response sent to my wife (who made an account to call her out on it), she (and I am paraphrasing to avoid any legal problems with sharing something from a private email), she claims it is derivative work because:
    A: she significantly alters and expands on the source work, and also requires a lot of time and skill
    B. Doesn't know if Jane is actually my wife, and may be a faker/internet lurker troll.
    C: never expected anyone to look at it; the example poster is one she did to teach herself better Photoshop skills, and she needed an example service to put on her page.
    D: Nobody has ever purchased this so she hasn't made a penny on any of it.

    Total bullshit, or is there a thread of legal foundation for her to stand on? I'm checking with other people more law-smart than me, but I thought I'd toss this out to the crew for feedback.

    Please hold off on any carpet bombing of her site until I can get some actual legal advice, so that she cannot claim harassment from this end.
  5.  (7899.210)
    I can't believe she even copied your logo on the poster. What an asshat.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2012
     (7899.211)
    Yeah, I saw it. Anyone with legal training able to tell me if she has a leg to stand on?

    Also, in a response sent to my wife (who made an account to call her out on it), she (and I am paraphrasing to avoid any legal problems with sharing something from a private email), she claims it is derivative work because:
    A: she significantly alters and expands on the source work, and also requires a lot of time and skill
    B. Doesn't know if Jane is actually my wife, and may be a faker/internet lurker troll.
    C: never expected anyone to look at it; the example poster is one she did to teach herself better Photoshop skills, and she needed an example service to put on her page.
    D: Nobody has ever purchased this so she hasn't made a penny on any of it.

    Total bullshit, or is there a thread of legal foundation for her to stand on? I'm checking with other people more law-smart than me, but I thought I'd toss this out to the crew for feedback.

    Please hold off on any carpet bombing of her site until I can get some actual legal advice, so that she cannot claim harassment from this end.


    It's over, good wins, thief decides to take it down, not wanting to have a "misunderstanding", blah blah blah. Winning stroke: Director of IRON SKY drops her a comment, tells her I did the poster for HIM, not her to fuck up, and voila! Problem solved. What a fucking waste of time, but thanks to all for advice and support!
  6.  (7899.212)
    A: she significantly alters and expands on the source work, and also requires a lot of time and skill
    Jesus christ, seriously? The only thing that was changed was the face. It takes maybe ten minutes to swap that out in GIMP.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPaul Sizer
    • CommentTimeDec 22nd 2012
     (7899.213)
    She left in the original model's hand also. I also loved that she felt she was giving me proper credit by leaving my name on the piece. Wow, thanks for bastardizing my stuff and giving visual credit to me. The scary thing was, she indicated she was planning on doing this with a range of different "old posters"; she had a sample of an altered Bollywood poster as well.

    Yeah, I'm glad it's over with little fuss, as any effort towards her was a time waster. I never see the need to be a bigger asshole in cases like this, but that level of entitlement and stupidity really grates on me.
  7.  (7899.214)
    Iron Sky is playing on MC3 & MC3HD (Movie Channel 3) right now (it's just ending) and later on today (1PM PST)
  8.  (7899.215)
  9.  (7899.216)
    •  
      CommentAuthordispophoto
    • CommentTimeMay 12th 2013
     (7899.217)
    um... i have to say, i was waiting to finally see the film, and last weekend i rented it (yay!)

    after 15 minutes, i turned it off & watched "Frankenweenie" instead.

    the reason: they only had subtitles for the German-speaking sections, and NONE for the english. was the post-production budget THAT stingy?
  10.  (7899.218)
    What the... yeah, as far as I know, it should definitely have the full complement of subtitles. I wonder if the rental dvd was the shitty Revolver release...
    •  
      CommentAuthordispophoto
    • CommentTimeMay 12th 2013
     (7899.219)
    i'll drop by my rental place within the next couple of days to check out the distributor label on the case and let you know.
  11.  (7899.220)
    Now crowdfunding - Iron Sky sequel!

    Iron Sky The Coming Race