comics on c-d rom

[matrix]

Thanks for those links Lew, I will look at purchasing one or two of those.

I do understand your views as well. The main point I was trying to make is, how do you get the average person to appreciate they have more than just a box of Beanos, or Tammys etc in the loft, becausce for most I am sure they do not see what a lot of members on here see in respect to the artwork and history of the comics.

There may be a lot of info to access, the internet, books, etc, but how do they make a move towards it if all they see is a box of comics and not all the hard work that has gone in to produce it.

I hope this makes sense as its hard to explain in writing.

[Marionette]

My point is that you don't need piracy in order to gain knowledge about the history of comics. Like most people here, I've been a collector all my life and any knowledge I've gained has come from books on comics, blogs and forums like these, and by buying the old comics themselves.

The pro-piracy opinion seems to suggest that without illegal CDs and downloads, future generations will be ignorant of comics history. That's clearly not the case, otherwise none of us would know about the comics that existed before our time. If anything, it's now easier than it's ever been to learn about the history of comics, thanks to interactive forums and suchlike.

Publishers tend to turn a blind eye to the odd page or three being used to illustrate an online article about comics, but making entire runs of comics available on CD or for download is just taking the mickey. No one needs every issue of, for example, TV Comic on an illegal CD to discover what an enjoyable comic it was. A select few issues from various years would do that. Buy the back issues you can afford, like the rest of us did. They won't crumble to dust in 50 years like some think they will. (Unless they're stored in the wrong conditions.) And if you do find comics are aging too fast, there's no law against scanning and storing files for your own reading pleasure.

Excuse me? I was under the impression that the argument was that it was illegal. Now it's okay to publish online according to an arbitrary standard you've made up, because the publisher wouldn't notice?

I fear that your high horse has fallen off the moral high ground.

[Lew Stringer]

Excuse me? I was under the impression that the argument was that it was illegal. Now it's okay to publish online according to an arbitrary standard you've made up, because the publisher wouldn't notice?

I fear that your high horse has fallen off the moral high ground.

Please don't claim I've made things up. Where did I say they wouldn't notice? What I meant, obviously, was that they're usually ok with a few pages being used to illustrate an article. It's a world of difference between that and scanning an entire comic or series to distribute.

If "fans" want to support pirate comics, that's up to them, but let's not pretend it's a noble cause for the good of the comics community when all it boils down to is a sense of entitlement to have something purely because they want it.

[Marionette]

Please don't claim I've made things up.

What else am I to assume from the statement "Publishers tend to turn a blind eye"? You are assuming that they don't mind because they can't be bothered to prosecute every usage. You suggest that the limit to this is "the odd page or three". Who is making these judgement calls if not you?

Also, still illegal.

ETA: you added stuff after I replied, so:

If "fans" want to support pirate comics, that's up to them, but let's not pretend it's a noble cause for the good of the comics community when all it boils down to is a sense of entitlement to have something purely because they want it.

The argument I met when I first came here was that any moral motivations I might have to do with preserving creative work were trumped by that fact that it was illegal. Your "odd page or three" is as illegal as anything I am talking about. The difference is quantity, not quality.

Also, I can't speak for anyone else, but my intentions have nothing to do with entitlement, other than that I believe the people who created this work should be entitled to it not being lost to history. The pristine collections of a few collectors notwithstanding.

[Lew Stringer]

Please don't claim I've made things up.

What else am I to assume from the statement "Publishers tend to turn a blind eye"? You are assuming that they don't mind because they can't be bothered to prosecute every usage. You suggest that the limit to this is "the odd page or three". Who is making these judgement calls if not you?

Also, still illegal.

You're the one making assumptions with no knowledge of conversations I've had with publishers.

And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias.

[Marionette]

You're the one making assumptions with no knowledge of conversations I've had with publishers.

And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias.

I'm making assumptions because you didn't say "I've talked to this person at this publisher and they have given general permission for so much". You said "Publishers tend to turn a blind eye", which is a statement of assumption.

Also, it doesn't matter what individual people in the publishing industry might say. Whether they mind or not, it's still illegal.

[Lew Stringer]

You're the one making assumptions with no knowledge of conversations I've had with publishers.

And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias.

I'm making assumptions because you didn't say "I've talked to this person at this publisher and they have given general permission for so much". You said "Publishers tend to turn a blind eye", which is a statement of assumption.

Also, it doesn't matter what individual people in the publishing industry might say. Whether they mind or not, it's still illegal.

I'm really not interested in your made-up spin on what I actually said.

[Marionette]

I'm really not interested in your made-up spin on what I actually said.

What you actually said is that something illegal is acceptable in certain circumstances. That's the point.

[Lew Stringer]

I'm really not interested in your made-up spin on what I actually said.

What you said is that something illegal is acceptable in certain circumstances. That's the point.

No I didn't. Nice try though.

[Tin Can Tommy]

Publishers tend to turn a blind eye to the odd page or three being used

Excuse me? I was under the impression that the argument was that it was illegal. Now it's okay to publish online according to an arbitrary standard you've made up, because the publisher wouldn't notice?

I fear that your high horse has fallen off the moral high ground.

Then is it illegal when selling a comic on ebay to have pictures of it? If it is illegal then publisher's turn a blind eye towards that as well and rightly so.

And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias.

Lew, what do you mean by this that we should only discuss sensitive subjects when our username is our real name?

[Marionette]

What you said is that something illegal is acceptable in certain circumstances. That's the point.

No I didn't. Nice try though.

I'm not going to get into an "oh yes you did" "oh no I didn't" without resorting to glove puppets.

We are never going to see eye to eye because I am fundamentally about sharing the things I enjoy, and you are about keeping them to yourself. I am open to other opinions than my own, you are rude to anyone who disagrees with you. I don't think we are going to be friends.

[Lew Stringer]

I'm not going to get into an "oh yes you did" "oh no I didn't".

We are never going to see eye to eye because I am fundamentally about sharing the things I enjoy, and you are about keeping them to yourself. I am open to other opinions than my own, you are rude to anyone who disagrees with you. I don't think we are going to be friends.

Suits me. Why would I want to be friends with an anonymous stranger who misconstrues what I say?

I've never even conversed with you until today and your first comment to me was "I fear that your high horse has fallen off the moral high ground". And now you're claiming that just because I won't indulge in pirating comics I'm lacking a generous nature.

Sounds like you're the one with rude manners, not me.

Anyway, this has strayed off topic and I've had my say on the subject so I'll move on from this thread.

[-MikeD-]

And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias.

Lew, what do you mean by this that we should only discuss sensitive subjects when our username is our real name?

That's an interesting point. Most folks I talk to on the internet are hiding behind an alias, I get to know their personality through their online correspondence, which may or not reflect what they're like in real life. But I guess this also applies to folks who use their real names. The only real difference is that posters using their real name are less likely to engage in full-frontal trolling.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

Sorry this controversial thread [which I started in a total act of innocence] has descended into bittersweet conflict, which I hope will resolve soon.



On a happier note, I've made a decision: I have very good copies of SPARKY 1969-70, and sometime in the future I intend scanning them all in hi-res [600 dpi] and transferring the imagery to DVD.

I intend producing multiple copies of these and sending them out [at my cost] to places like central libraries or the British Library in London, as items of Historical interest. Maybe they will reject them, in which case I will try and found my OWN organization of collecting comics data on c-d rom/DVD. Not for profit, but simply to try and rescue old comics from near-total oblivion, which WILL happen if nobody takes steps to try and prevent this.


I may even have to advertise this idea on here [if it's acceptable to Al and the other moderators] in order to hopefully obtain material from comics enthusiasts and try and establlish a system that will ensure that these older comics can at least be seen by SOMEONE after we are all gone.


It goes without saying that stacks of comics salted away in cupboards [ no matter how good the condition] after the original owners are gone may well be uncerimoniously dumped into a skip by whoever inherits these decades-old comics and may regard them as junk, , which does not bode well for future Historians of 20th-Century UK comics.

[paw broon]

"And I'm not even going to bother discussing it any further with anyone who hides behind an alias." Lew Stringer.
Aw well, off the topic. Easy way out, imo.
By the way, I'm Stephen Montgomery and as you can see, I live in Scotland. I've been involved in comics for decades, running a shop, organising marts and cons, running a comics fanzine, writing for a con brochure, been on radio, tv. and interviewed in various papers - all about comics. I've met and chatted business with various publishers at the highest level, and with comics creators at all levels, both British and American.
All that embarrassing disclosure just so anyone who needs a real name to talk to can feel nice and comfy.
None of the above is in any way important or germane to the topic in hand and I wrote it to show how foolish it can appear, trotting out one's "true" i/d and background just so someone wont go in the huff and stop discussing comics with a nom de plume. And, as the subject was raised by Lew, on most comics forums and certainly the ones with which I'm involved - British, American, French and Italian, (and, another piece of completely useless info. - I'm an administrator on a comics download site and forum and neither I nor my associates would condone for long the tone of some of the comments made on this topic and, on occasions on certain others), most members use a pen name or an abbreviation of their name, including high end and highly respected writers and researchers on comics. Some, mainly creators, prefer their own names and that's fair enough and a good idea on their part. To cease discussing a topic because you don't know who you are dealing with is plain rude.
Back to the original topic, comics on cd-rom. Is it either completely illegal or isn't it? And Lew is correct to an extent, in that publishers will "allow", or, "turn a blind eye" to a panel, page, perhaps 2 pages, being used for illustrative or criticism purposes.
But that "turn a blind eye" to the practice is a bit misleading. Publishers will "allow" the use of their material for criticism and illustration purposes but turning a blind eye would suggest something different - a recognition of breach of copyright being acceptable. And as I said previously, illegal is what we make of it. So, I'm still unsure why it would be wrong to scan comics for sharing with comics fans - comics which, for reasons best known to management, are being withheld from the public. In fact, A.P material is in a right mess and the current rights holders have little or no idea to what those rights refer or where the originals might be or even whether they exist pre-1960, it is alleged. So how can this material be made available except by owners of the titles doing it themselves. Please don't ask me for sources. In any case my main contact has gone back to writing and had to give up his office, so the phone no. gets me only to a very efficient and frightening secretary nowadays.
As for not having to have a complete run of a title to appreciate the work on the 2 or 3 page strips within, that, I'm afraid is cobblers as far as action serials are concerned. One can appreciate the art easily enough from a smallish number of pages, although a run would enable the reader to tell if a bit of high quality is maintained. But these are comics and the story is just as important and how can anyone appreciate, or otherwise, the quality of writing from a small sample?

To illustrate the "orphaned" material out there, I'm a Phantom phan, quite besotted with the character and have a a good collection of the comics and reprints, all legally produced and purchased but there was, for some years a drought in the reprints, so I resorted, like many others, to the Indrajal, Indian comics which were scanned and put on the internet. Lots of un-reprinted material. Eventually and recently, Hermes put out a series of hardback books reprinting the strip from the start. I bought them, so no-one has lost out.
Please excuse the rant but I got a bit annoyed there for a minute and might have stopped making sense. Feel free to pile in, nicely, of course. I'm getting on a bit.