[geoffk]

Right, but that's a trademark case.  Trademark and copyright are separate bodies of law and offer different types of protection.  Example--Mickey Mouse is an original creation of Walt Disney.  Copying a Mickey Mouse cartoon (say "Steamboat Willie") is an infringement of copyright.  Mickey is also used as a trademark, standing for the Walt Disney Company.  The trademark is registered with the trademark office in the US and elsewhere, and is widely recognized by the public as a mark in Theme Parks, Movies and other entertainment.

If I created a mouse-like character of my own (say "Geoff Gerbil"), Disney might complain if it was too close to Mickey in appearance.  This would be an infringing derivative work on the copyright side.  If I used it to sell movies, books, etc. it would also be a confusingly similar trademark on the trademark side.

In the McDonalds' case--and probably Tolkien as well, there was no copyright angle at all, it was strictly a trademark issue.
 

[prinz]

I greatly admire the works of the Morphers on this site...Nadine is wonderful to look at morphed or not...  I didnt take up morphing because of issues like this.. I will stick with my own creations in pen and ink and poser. regards PE  

[tndvrs]

Just plain simple,..........

I have a cd with 160 MP3s on it
I can't give it away, I can't sell it.
I dumped it in a thrash can.
Now my friend sees this and he asked me what I have dumped.
"Oh its an old CD with some good music on it".

Without saying anything he takes it............

Now where was I........................

I am not quilty.........huh  

[melonie_charm]

based on a couple of comments buried in this thread, and the fact that the BEA or any privately owned website is entitled to set any policy it chooses, I'll throw another possibly applicable legal term out there for discussion purposes ...

"Quid Pro Quo"
 

[geoffk]

QUID PRO QUO - Lat. 'what for what' or 'something for something.' The concept of getting something of value in return for giving something of value. For a contract to be binding, it usually must involve the exchange of something of value.

I guess this is kind of like the "it's free advertising" argument that pops up once in a while.  If Nadine's folks feel that the usage here is fair (i.e. that there's "Quid pro quo"--some value to them in allowing it) they may do so.  Unfortunately, if they don't feel that way, the decision is pretty much up to them.  Of course we could "retaliate" by banning material from the BEA at Nadine's site, but I doubt that they're posting much of that.
   

[Kowalski]

is that anything like Tit For Tat?

[melonie_charm]

Quote:
I guess this is kind of like the "it's free advertising" argument that pops up once in a while.  If Nadine's folks feel that the usage here is fair (i.e. that there's "Quid pro quo"--some value to them in allowing it) they may do so.  Unfortunately, if they don't feel that way, the decision is pretty much up to them.  Of course we could "retaliate" by banning material from the BEA at Nadine's site, but I doubt that they're posting much of that.

Again, strictly for discussion purposes, a different perspective on Quid Pro Quo might be that Nadine and other models of similar position in regard to strict copyright enforcement and "fair use" interpretation deciding to allow the BEA "nothing" are still receiving "something" rather valuable in return i.e. continued free promotion directly to big boob afficionados via continued discussion here at BEA.

To take the role of devil's advocate for a couple of minutes, consider the following.  Attracting the attention of an equal number of big boob afficionados via paid placement with search engines would definitely cost Nadine's webmaster big bucks every month!  But by current BEA policy, models who choose to forbid posting and "fair use" of their pictures at BEA effectively sacrifice absolutely "nothing".  This provides an incentive for other models to take the same position in regard to pic posting and "fair use" at BEA as they have absolutely nothing to "lose" in doing so and new paid memberships will still be "gained" from BEA surfers who find the models' pay websites via BEA's continued free promotion (even if it is now only text based discussion with links). Eventually this could lead to the possibility of BEA becoming nothing more than a text based BBS.  Tats are no fun if all the Tits are gone!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

True dat Mel, true dat!    

[geoffk]

Quote:

Again, strictly for discussion purposes, a different perspective on Quid Pro Quo might be that Nadine and other models of similar position in regard to strict copyright enforcement and "fair use" interpretation deciding to allow the BEA "nothing" are still receiving "something" rather valuable in return i.e. continued free promotion directly to big boob afficionados via continued discussion here at BEA.

That's certainly true to some extent.  Nadine does benefit from forum discussions, recommendations and so forth--even if they can't be illustrated.  Banning the very mention of her name or website would certainly hurt her, possibly more than the picture ban is worth.  It would be a fairly painful restriction to enforce, though.  Her name comes up in all kinds of discussions. Moreover, even though we can't post her pictures here, they're still of considerable interest to the community, so people like to get news about what she's doing and how she looks.  So it's a tradeoff--is it worth hurting ourselves in order to hurt her (for enforcing rights which she certainly has)?  Finally, in fairness to Nadine, she didn't clamp down until there was clear abuse (i.e. esentially the full posting of a current set).

If we want to prevent this from happening again, probably the best thing would be an overall posting policy for pictures.  (No complete sets.  No more than XXX pictures per model/thread. etc.)  Essentially this policy would be to codify what the BEA considers to be fair use.  A copyright owner might still object, but at least we could tell them honestly that we have a fair use policy strictly in place for *all* models (and show them what it is).
 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Was not the offending party a new member?  

[geoffk]

I think that he was fairly new, but it doesn't matter.  He wasn't violating any existing policy at the time.  In fact, several older members were urging him on.

Palomine and others have basically said that it's not the fault of the poster, and, to the extent that the BEA doesn't have any general fair use policy, I have to agree.
 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I asked only out of curiousity.  However, at the same time, I honestly think most of us can identify what is reasonable and what is not.  I like to think models appreciate some advertisement on their behalf, but not when the store is being given away.  

[Sadistyk]

Quote:
I asked only out of curiousity.  However, at the same time, I honestly think most of us can identify what is reasonable and what is not.  I like to think models appreciate some advertisement on their behalf, but not when the store is being given away.  

I agree 100%.  It's a shame though.  I still miss seeing her morphs(yes, the morphs done of her).

[DrHyde]

Regardless of not being able to post them at the BEArchive, you can find them just about anywhere nowadays. There's a saying that software programmers use: "Once the product leaves our factories, it's beyond our control." I know of several places you find them if you really want to search, but being a member of Bettie and Nadine's site more than once, it just makes sense to join the site. It feels better anyway knowing that they'll be bringing out more pics because we support them. Yeah, what the newbie did was irresponsible, but its not really all that bad when you look at it from a distance.

[rtpoe]

One other thing we should keep in mind is that a good model's website will always have a few free sample pics available. Many of us have modest free sections in our galleries, for example. And both Nadine and Bettie post a few pics from each update in their free areas.

Such "free" pics should be OK for posting.

rtpoe

p.s. Any word on whether we can post morphs of Nadine?