• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
Sign in to follow this  
Stature

Story Monday January 1, 2018

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

How about a relatively low powered, purely mechanical. air riffle?  Perhaps a Red Rider BB Gun?

Probably would be something between in difficulty.

33 minutes ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

It may not do much damage to most humans, but Susan could put out a vampire's eye with that.

Putting out an eye with magical weapon might be lethal for vampire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Probably would be something between in difficulty.

Putting out an eye with magical weapon might be lethal for vampire.

The BBs migth do more damage than normal for their anti-vampire qualities as well.

Appropos of nothing, friends showed me about half the first season of "Assassination Classroom" this weekend...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tom Sewell said:

I've wondered what would happen if Susan put a prop Star Trek phaser in her chest.

We've theorized about it before, more to the point of having something like a crossbow in the chest. If it was preloaded with a bolt it might allow for one good ranged shot, or maybe it could fire magic bolts repeatedly even if it wasn't preloaded.

Dunno how Dan would feel about guns though, even if a phaser would be appropriate for Susan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Paramount would sue her for producing unauthorized memorabilia reproductions.

Copyrights don't apply to temporary magical copies. And do you really think Susan doesn't own an authorized reproduction phaser? Fry's Electronics was selling laser pointers styled like TOS phasers twenty years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:

Copyrights don't apply to temporary magical copies. And do you really think Susan doesn't own an authorized reproduction phaser? Fry's Electronics was selling laser pointers styled like TOS phasers twenty years ago.

Meh. The Pharaoh is just sore because no-one is considering a shoulder mounted crocodile launcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

Meh. The Pharaoh is just sore because no-one is considering a shoulder mounted crocodile launcher.

Ah...  No.  Just No.

 

Sorry, the game master/designer plus my history as a carrier of shoulder launched ADA missiles in me just tripped a few circuit breakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ProfessorTomoe said:

Wouldn't that be biowoofare?

In the case of the dog launcher, yes, but that is a specific subset of biowarfare that the entire category of crocodile throwers doesn't fit into. As the Pharaoh will inform you, Sobek himself strenuously objected to Set and all the other canine-headed deities monopolising the art of artillery-propelled animal warfare, stating that they were all barking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Paramount would sue her for producing unauthorized memorabilia reproductions.

Perhaps more importantly, they might not be happy with Dan making use of an item from Star Trek as more than a quick gag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Old Hack said:

In the case of the dog launcher, yes, but that is a specific subset of biowarfare that the entire category of crocodile throwers doesn't fit into. As the Pharaoh will inform you, Sobek himself strenuously objected to Set and all the other canine-headed deities monopolising the art of artillery-propelled animal warfare, stating that they were all barking.

Here I thought you were referring to the inimitable Dobie-o-matic (pinterest link)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vorlonagent said:

Here I thought you were referring to the inimitable Dobie-o-matic (pinterest link)

Heh.  For some reason this reminds me of the Doberman Disguise Kit which was posted in response to towns passing bans on whole breeds instead of dealing with dogs as individuals.  It had four poofy fake-fur anklets, a sort of poofy fake-fur vest around the shoulders, and a hat with a poof on the top of the head and fake floppy ears with poofy fur along the bottom edges.  And of course the final picture of a Doberman in full disguise was actually a real Standard Poodle with the same haircut.  :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Tom Sewell said:
18 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Paramount would sue her for producing unauthorized memorabilia reproductions.

Copyrights don't apply to temporary magical copies.

Mainly because DGB made sure noone in copyright industry knows about magic.

6 hours ago, ChronosCat said:
18 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Paramount would sue her for producing unauthorized memorabilia reproductions.

Perhaps more importantly, they might not be happy with Dan making use of an item from Star Trek as more than a quick gag.

You think that wouldn't be fair use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

You think that wouldn't be fair use?

Well, I'm no layer, but based on what I've read, if a main character was regularly using a functional weapon that looked like a Phaser and was called a Phaser, it would be copyright infringement. As EGS is a for-profit work of fiction, I believe Fair Use would only come into play if the story/stories the Phaser appeared in was/were parody.

(Of course, whether Paramount/CBS would ever find out, or care enough to sue is another question. EGS is relatively obscure after all, and companies sometimes let people get away with little things like this.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, ChronosCat said:

companies sometimes let people get away with little things like this

Just an tangentially related note.  Companies can and some times do let Copyright violations fly.  Trademarks, on the other hand, have to be defended tooth and nail against all violations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, mlooney said:
20 hours ago, ChronosCat said:

companies sometimes let people get away with little things like this

Just an tangentially related note.  Companies can and some times do let Copyright violations fly.  Trademarks, on the other hand, have to be defended tooth and nail against all violations.

In that case, Xerox would be more dangerous than Paramount ... wait. It is trademarked. CBS Studios Inc.

Still, this was apparently let be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, hkmaly said:
On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 9:21 PM, mlooney said:
On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 8:40 PM, ChronosCat said:

companies sometimes let people get away with little things like this

Just an tangentially related note.  Companies can and some times do let Copyright violations fly.  Trademarks, on the other hand, have to be defended tooth and nail against all violations.

In that case, Xerox would be more dangerous than Paramount ... wait. It is trademarked. CBS Studios Inc.

Still, this was apparently let be.

The Xerox trademark wouldn't be a concern, as trademarks are for specific uses and kinds of trade (though it is possible to file a trademark with a wide set of applications), though the CBS Studios Inc trademark would be relevant.

As for the phaser website there, either CBS's lawyers haven't heard of it, or don't believe there is sufficient overlap with their trademark, which is possible, as the CBS trademark is for "handheld toy energy weapons" while the phaser website is a HTML5 gaming framework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Drasvin said:

As for the phaser website there, either CBS's lawyers haven't heard of it, or don't believe there is sufficient overlap with their trademark, which is possible, as the CBS trademark is for "handheld toy energy weapons" while the phaser website is a HTML5 gaming framework.

... in fact, would their "handheld toy" trademark apply on working weapon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Drasvin said:

As for the phaser website there, either CBS's lawyers haven't heard of it, or don't believe there is sufficient overlap with their trademark, which is possible, as the CBS trademark is for "handheld toy energy weapons" while the phaser website is a HTML5 gaming framework.

Ah, but the little space guy is shown with what is clearly a hand-held phaser-type gun, so even if the name passed, the picture probably wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CritterKeeper said:
4 hours ago, Drasvin said:

As for the phaser website there, either CBS's lawyers haven't heard of it, or don't believe there is sufficient overlap with their trademark, which is possible, as the CBS trademark is for "handheld toy energy weapons" while the phaser website is a HTML5 gaming framework.

Ah, but the little space guy is shown with what is clearly a hand-held phaser-type gun, so even if the name passed, the picture probably wouldn't.

I suspect that generally they would have hard time applying the trademark on any picture, no matter how obviously it's accompanied with the "phaser" name.

What the trademark is usable for is to prevent other company producing and selling toys named phaser.

Of course, IANAL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this