So I actually went through the trouble of consulting an IP attorney:
1) you may sell USED mtg cards, all unsealed cards are covered by first-sale principle. You must indicate items as USED.
2) Painted alters EXTEND the original art, and are derivatives of the original art. this is similar to painting a beard on a Mona Lisa and reselling it.
2.5) You cannot draw your own version of Elspeth, this is considered fan-art and hence derivative. However, you can use random picture of a girl in armor, preferably created prior to the MTG art it replaces, it will be much harder to present it as a derivative this way.
3) Direct printing on top of a used MTG card is only acceptable if the content does not use MTG related information (mana symbol/texts). ie. putting a mana symbol on your print/printing a mana symbol is a direct violation of copyright and trademarks since mana symbols are trademarked.
4) You cannot modify existing WOTC card art by changing clothing/background, this is a direct derivative work and in violation of copyright law.
5) Wizards of the Coast owns trademarks in TRADING CARD GAME, and the MTG MANA SYMBOLS, they do not own associated trademarks on art.
6) If you sell a USED, foil sticker/non-foil sticker, in which the sticker does not display ANY of WOTC art or WOTC words, it is okay. This assumes that you are an agent of the original artist, are the original artist yourself, or have the copyright/distribution rights to the materials that you print on these stickers. This is equivalent to changing the aesthetics of the card without altering the function. eg. putting a sticker on your used skateboard and reselling it, or painting a funky pattern on your AUDI, and reselling it as a used AUDI. Approval or permission from WOTC in this regard is irrelevant.
6.5) Printing WOTC art as a sticker is a clear copyright violation regardless of what the art is, and what card you put the sticker on.
7) BRANDING your alteration with a signature, digital or otherwise, could be seen as a way of subverting MTG brand names. So the branding you see such as "destruction productions", or "alteredprints" should be avoided at all costs. eg. you cannot put the AUDI rings on your KIA and call it an AUDI car.
8) WOTC cannot prosecute you for creating a derivative work of their card if you do not change the function of the card. If you turn a Birds of Paradise into a Jace, the Mind sculptor, you are clearly counterfeiting. this also assumes you are not creating a derivative artwork in the card art. (see above)
9) WOTC has published articles on how to handle altered cards, as well as tournament rules relating to them, which is an indirect recognition that they exist in large quantities and indirectly legitimizes their existence. A outright ban would be more appropriate given their eBay transgressions.
10) If WOTC is unable to prove that you own the non-WOTC art, they cannot prosecute you for it.
11) WOTC may, under suspicion that you are undermining MTG and MTG art as a whole, prosecute sellers who sell altered cards by stating that somehow altered art defaces the MTG reputation. But this is arguable, and no solid ground exists.
12) threatening sellers with legal action without legal grounds qualifies for anti-SLAAP as individuals are often intimidated by corporations with large legal budgets.
13) "fair-use" applies to educational or satirical scenarios, and cannot be used to support a case where the seller is using original WOTC art as part of their alterations. ie hand painted alters showing ANY part of the original art (border-painting), or digital stickers with WOTC art.
14) please note that WOTC policy regarding counterfeits: "any card that is marked" is a counterfeit. which means all signed cards, all cards not in 10/10 mint condition are counterfeits under this definition. Although this definition is certainly far from objective, it would explain why they act the way they do. It could also be used against them as this definition on counterfeit cards is more or less a joke.
Please ensure that you are either well versed in IP law or have consulted a lawyer yourself on EACH case before reporting. Blind reporting as a result of personal preferences is irresponsible, and only causes more damage done by WOTC as WOTC is clearly not a "thinking" organization. If you cannot prove that a person does NOT own a piece of art, you should not persecute them as you are liable for damages as much as WOTC.
Martin Durham is just some dude from the D&D department, he is in legal now, and clearly does not understand law. WOTC copy and pastes replies to VERO takedowns and do not address them separately to relate to the violation/lack-thereof in each scenario. This is typical corporate sloppiness. Their VERO takedown requests also do not contain text, it's simply a "kill these item numbers" request. Their threats are general, and unthoughtful. You should consider the list above as a guide to legal issues and apply to yourself as necessary.
I'm trying to understand this. So if I have someone change everything but the border and text, I am not creating a derivative of the art, or am I?
Okay, here is where I am having trouble swallowing it. I own a card, and I should be able to do with it whatever I want because it is my property even if it is derivative. Where the law comes in should be the sale of such item*. Steve altering and creating the derivative work is just him performing a doodle service so there should be no issue under the logic that I can do what I want with my property. It is the sale of such an item that I can see having legal issues.
Wow, I had no idea that Tiger Balm had that in it, and I knew a lot of hippy-chicks that adored the stuff. LOL.
yea, if steve is altering something he owns (the art/distribution rights to the art), then he is okay.
You own the card, but not the distribution rights for the art on the card. So if you change the art a little (a derivative), and distribute it, then it isnt.... it becomes IMPOSSIBLE not to claim the original work of art as part of your art. you're never gonna get a jury to believe you are selling a painted border, although you may certainly claim to do so, and claim that the border has NOTHING to do with the art in the middle lol.
Yes REAL Tiger Balm (medicated sticky patch for arthritis) = 2% real tiger ash, my friend's dad saved some from the 1980s he showed me a patch the other day it blew my mind... the recent ones use catmix, which is a cheap low cost alternative.
I'm trying to understand this. So if I have someone change everything but the border and text, I am not creating a derivative of the art, or am I?
As long as it doesn't somehow reference the previous art or use copyrighted mtg symbols then no a complete alter is still fine even under the loosest definitions of this.
I'm trying to understand this. So if I have someone change everything but the border and text, I am not creating a derivative of the art, or am I?
if you cover the original art totally (ie, your art does not depend on wizards art, and does not act in symmetry to wizards art in an obvious way), then it is not derivative. If you stick a Aerosmith poster over Mona Lisa, it is now just Aerosmith.
My understanding on the matter being discussed here, and my conclusion, is that, as long as WotC doesn't take a clear and official position regarding alters, the alter community would be safe while keeping with the activity as usual. As long as they do not delcare alters %100 illegal in competitions (assuming a scenario in wich they clearly starts an alter hunting) and still allowing us to attend at the official events and sell/trade/take a seat and alter cards, and keep telling us that certain alters are allowed (based on a %100 gamerules-infringement basis), they are clearly not in position of bringing the matter to a legal floor. In fact, I don't belive that's what they actually want. Not even a pinch. What I think that's happening here is that an isolated case of missunderstanding among some parties (a proxy seller, a civil reporter, and a potential -and probable- uninformed WotC employee) got inflated to a potentially scandal-size right here, at this post. Probably the world of WotC and the alter community still spinning around as normal outside this thread. My call would be to not make this a new "end of world as known" thing and keep managing ourselves under the way we used to until WotC puts itslef in a more serious position regarding the matter and makes an official announcement, if such thing ever happens.
My advice would be: Let's not take this more seriously than what it truly is: A speculative topic about uncertain facts. Personally, I'll not change the way I managed myself about alters, unless this becomes an official and legal thing, wich I doubt it will.
EDIT: Also, if you ppl love alters as much as I do (or at least respect them as another colorful facet of our beloved game) report responsibly to avoid annoying WotC at the point that they decide to nip the problem in the bud by making the entire scene an illegal thing "for good".
My understanding on the matter being discussed here, and my conclusion, is that, as long as WotC doesn't take a clear and official position regarding alters, the alter community would be safe while keeping with the activity as usual. As long as they do not delcare alters %100 illegal in competitions (assuming a scenario in wich they clearly starts an alter hunting) and still allowing us to attend at the official events and sell/trade/take a seat and alter cards, and keep telling us that certain alters are allowed (based on a %100 gamerules-infringement basis), they are clearly not in position of bringing the matter to a legal floor. In fact, I don't belive that's what they actually want. Not even a pinch. What I think that's happening here is that an isolated case of missunderstanding among some parties (a proxy seller, a civil reporter, and a potential -and probable- uninformed WotC employee) got inflated to a potentially scandal-size right here, at this post. Probably the world of WotC and the alter community still spinning around as normal outside this thread. My call would be to not make this a new "end of world as known" thing and keep managing ourselves under the way we used to until WotC puts itslef in a more serious position regarding the matter and makes an official announcement, if such thing ever happens.
My advice would be: Let's not take this more seriously than what it truly is: A speculative topic about uncertain facts. Personally, I'll not change the way I managed myself about alters, unless this becomes an official and legal thing, wich I doubt it will.
EDIT: Also, if you ppl love alters as much as I do (or at least respect them as another colorful facet of our beloved game) report responsibly to avoid annoying WotC at the point that they decide to nip the problem in the bud by making the entire scene an illegal thing "for good".
The takedowns are wide spread (this should be evident by now from the number of sellers who commented on this post). If it's an misunderstanding, it's as a result of WOTC's legal department's crusade to stop alters. You will have noticed that popular eBay sellers such as Alteredprints, Spell_scoop, Comicmania (all >1000 feedback), etc are all gone as a result of this crusade, I didnt even know they go after paint alters until this thread. So I would avoid making sweeping generalizations about how this is about "speculative topic about uncertain facts" unless you have something specific about what is speculative, and what is uncertain, and what is fact.
As for whether WOTC's stance, there is a disparity, between marketing, gaming, and legal as previously mentioned, and obviously it would be nice for them to officially overlook it. But I would NEVER expect WOTC to officially comment on this as it could be seen as giving "permission" to violate their copyright. Meanwhile legal department is working hard to nail alterers.
As for whether WOTC wants this to go to court, they probably do not. The first time I got shut down on eBay I sent them a counternotice form which allows them 2 weeks time to sue me in court or let me continue to sell. They reponded with some threats, I threatened them back etc and nothing happened.
The second time I got shut down, they used the VERO-trademark category, on eBay there is no way to counternotice a trademark VERO takedown, so basically they slam your eBay account and get off free.
Still, the most prominent alterers who sell at ebay haven't been took down (Marta Molina, and many others that I know they sell the stuff there but I can't recall their names since I'm not an EBay regular, but an intermittent buyer), have them? It is important to make it clear that we have two different groups of ppl modifying cards: Those who made hand-made alterations, and those who print imagery on the cards. While the first group promotes a handcrafted labor that's almost a romantic thing that WotC has never proven to be against of in the past, the second group takes, in almost the cases, other people's Ip and print it for a pretty much mechanical pursuit of profit that generally has nothing to do with an artistic movement, involving few if none skills in the process.
As a pretty involved person in the alteration community, I haven't heard of hand-made alter artists getting in trouble due to their labor, while it is well known that ppl printing onto cards have been persecuted since ever.
Still, the most prominent alterers who sell at ebay haven't been took down (Marta Molina, and many others that I know they sell the stuff there but I can't recall their names since I'm not an EBay regular, but an intermittent buyer), have them? It is important to make it clear that we have two different groups of ppl modifying cards: Those who made hand-made alterations, and those who print imagery on the cards. While the first group promotes a handcrafted labor that's almost a romantic thing that WotC has never proven to be against of in the past, the second group takes, in almost the cases, other people's Ip and print it for a pretty much mechanical pursuit of profit that generally has nothing to do with an artistic movement, involving few if none skills in the process.
As a pretty involved person in the alteration community, I haven't heard of hand-made alter artists getting in trouble due to their labor, while it is well known that ppl printing onto cards have been persecuted since ever.
Yes, like I said, I didnt know they were taking down hand painted alters until this thread. But both are equally illegal, it's just a matter of whose rights they trample. (assuming the sticker people do not have artist permission, and some do). Despite your preference for the romantic notions of painting the art vs. stickers, both have a HUGE following (stickers dominate the token/land category cuz they can be produced in large volumes). I know sticker cards with steve argyle that sold >300$, while I have also personally bought from Marta Molina cards >200$. Mind you, Marta Molina tends to paint over the entirety of the WOTC art, hence making her alters non-derivative.
As for whether the sticker people are stealing other people's IP, it is certainly probable given the previous thread about the backlash from MTG artists who had their non-MTG art ripped by Alteredprints/capncader (but this is the ONLY example that we are publicly aware of), WOTC unfortunately will not be in a position to file VERO takedowns for non-WOTC art, as they are not verified rights owners but continue to do so under the impression that the entire end-product is a derivative work.
That is the point of the thread:
WOTC, the Entire end-product sold on eBay is a used, modified MTG card of the same name, it is not a new product, it is not a new TCG, and if the artwork/text is non-derivative/direct copies, then you dont have a case. Stop using ebay VERO trademark loopholes to nail people at random! If you are going to declare items as "counterfeit", find the courage to give people a chance to file counternotices.
it's clearly both of their responsibilities, and eBay's reporting system must be jam packed with reports.
Also, this thread is about ebay VERO takedowns, so, if WOTC was hunting on eBay, you'd think they go after serious counterfeiters before they go after the painters.
it's clearly both of their responsibilities, and eBay's reporting system must be jam packed with reports.
Also, this thread is about ebay VERO takedowns, so, if WOTC was hunting on eBay, you'd think they go after serious counterfeiters before they go after the painters.
I belive (and hope) this bussines will end with the printers and will leave us (handpainters) in peace, in case they decide to go furter.
Sorry guys, but how you can be so sure that WOTC is behind the Ebay reports? From what I read in this thread it is actually us, the hand painters, who break the law in some cases and not the printers.The printers cover the whole card with someone else's art that doesn't belong to WTOC, so why they went after them and not after the hand painters who in many cases did extensions of the card's art (which belong to WOTC).So they went against the printers first, which is not their business anyway, and didn't touch any of the hand painters?
Other than that, the people who got their Ebay blocked, only have a name of a guy who works for WOTC, how you can be so sure that this is actually him? It can be someone who decided to go onto a crusade against printed altered art, he could just find a name of a WOTC employee from Google and make the reports.I doubt if Ebay can validate that he is actually that guy.
If they actually did go against hand painted art that would bring huge negativity against WOTC and I'm talking about the people who spend thousands of dollars to buy a power nine and had it altered by an artist like Klug. Imagine these people's anger if they learn that their set of Force of Will painted by Terese Nielsen (for some hundreds of dollars) is now officially illegal.Why they would do such a thing? Pimping a card or deck is a sign of how huge the game's popularity is, why kill it?
Until I see an official statement by WOTC, I'll take as granted that their policy haven't change.
Sorry guys, but how you can be so sure that WOTC is behind the Ebay reports? From what I read in this thread it is actually us, the hand painters, who break the law in some cases and not the printers.The printers cover the whole card with someone else's art that doesn't belong to WTOC, so why they went after them and not after the hand painters who in many cases did extensions of the card's art (which belong to WOTC).So they went against the printers first, which is not their business anyway, and didn't touch any of the hand painters?
Other than that, the people who got their Ebay blocked, only have a name of a guy who works for WOTC, how you can be so sure that this is actually him? It can be someone who decided to go onto a crusade against printed altered art, he could just find a name of a WOTC employee from Google and make the reports.I doubt if Ebay can validate that he is actually that guy.
If they actually did go against hand painted art that would bring huge negativity against WOTC and I'm talking about the people who spend thousands of dollars to buy a power nine and had it altered by an artist like Klug. Imagine these people's anger if they learn that their set of Force of Will painted by Terese Nielsen (for some hundreds of dollars) is now officially illegal.Why they would do such a thing? Pimping a card or deck is a sign of how huge the game's popularity is, why kill it?
Until I see an official statement by WOTC, I'll take as granted that their policy haven't change.
Please, before posting, actually read the thread. Martin Durham is/was the RPG Project Manager for D&D 4th Edition. His name is in the book. Secondly, the VERO program with Ebay stands for Verified Rights Owner. This is a well-documented thing WotC has been doing.
Sorry guys, but how you can be so sure that WOTC is behind the Ebay reports? From what I read in this thread it is actually us, the hand painters, who break the law in some cases and not the printers.The printers cover the whole card with someone else's art that doesn't belong to WTOC, so why they went after them and not after the hand painters who in many cases did extensions of the card's art (which belong to WOTC).So they went against the printers first, which is not their business anyway, and didn't touch any of the hand painters?
Other than that, the people who got their Ebay blocked, only have a name of a guy who works for WOTC, how you can be so sure that this is actually him? It can be someone who decided to go onto a crusade against printed altered art, he could just find a name of a WOTC employee from Google and make the reports.I doubt if Ebay can validate that he is actually that guy.
If they actually did go against hand painted art that would bring huge negativity against WOTC and I'm talking about the people who spend thousands of dollars to buy a power nine and had it altered by an artist like Klug. Imagine these people's anger if they learn that their set of Force of Will painted by Terese Nielsen (for some hundreds of dollars) is now officially illegal.Why they would do such a thing? Pimping a card or deck is a sign of how huge the game's popularity is, why kill it?
Until I see an official statement by WOTC, I'll take as granted that their policy haven't change.
It is certainly possible for people to engage in anti-competitive actions on eBay against other sellers: ie. as an alteration seller, you see someone selling MTG cards that compete with yours, and then you file VERO against them and put WOTC. Since WOTC is a registered VERO, there is no review of their rights or the complaint, they just straight nail your auctions. ie. I can go fill out a VERO form right now on an eBay item, fake a signature, and put martin durham as the guy to contact, and the item will still get nailed. You can google this sort of thing, people have posted examples of repeatedly getting nailed by VERO only to eventually find out it was done by another eBay seller. EVIL!!!
However, the thread starters have posted statements from WOTC legal department on this issue. Perhaps not 100% of the reports are WOTC, but certainly a fair number, and we dont have a way of telling which is which.
It's also about what they chose to tolerate and what they dont tolerate. So while terese nielson might be selling alters illegally, WOTC may not be pursuing her for it whereas other sellers are not so lucky. Remember that the rights owner reserves the rights to file charges against those parties who violate their rights, but it certainly does not mean they are robotic and file sweeping VERO takedowns on everyone.
To clarify, if you read through this ENTIRE thread, only 1 person and 1 person only is complaining about having their auctions taken down. Not another single person has come forward in this matter saying the same. They say others have also, but there is quite literally ZERO proof of this. Hearsay at best. I feel like this is 1 person that got targeted with a bunch of token printers. If WotC's stance was that alters are a NO NO, then Starcity Games certainly would have cancelled the remaining Open Schedule's alter tables, being their biggest asset in the US. In addition to that, every alter painter I know still in fact has their auctions up on eBay.
@Everyone
When forming an opinion on this you must look at all of the context clues as well. All of them currently lead back to one single person. Until we get a C&D or see an official document, I feel everyone should disregard this thread completely until that point.
To clarify, if you read through this ENTIRE thread, only 1 person and 1 person only is complaining about having their auctions taken down. Not another single person has come forward in this matter saying the same. They say others have also, but there is quite literally ZERO proof of this. Hearsay at best. I feel like this is 1 person that got targeted with a bunch of token printers. If WotC's stance was that alters are a NO NO, then Starcity Games certainly would have cancelled the remaining Open Schedule's alter tables, being their biggest asset in the US. In addition to that, every alter painter I know still in fact has their auctions up on eBay.
@Everyone
When forming an opinion on this you must look at all of the context clues as well. All of them currently lead back to one single person. Until we get a C&D or see an official document, I feel everyone should disregard this thread completely until that point.
If you have read the whole thread, you will also have noticed that I mentioned Spell_scoop, comicmania, and alteredprints were all shutdown by ebay at one point, this list is not exhaustive, dtdcustoms, destruction productions, mindcraft studios, newbeins, mooschms, all went through it.
If you haven't cruised ebay for the last few months, and are ignorant of who has been shut down and who hasn't, please do not assume this is all heresay.
Oh look! One of their websites is still functioning: http://comicmaniacustoms.wordpress.com/ "By request of Wizards of the Coast, I will no longer be making or selling altered MTG cards."
As for whether SCG and other gaming stores continue to give away their own custom tokens, it's a tolerance issue, not a legal issue. it is completely illegal to produce tokens which uses the intellectual property of WOTC, (using their power toughness configurations etc). But it's better to tolerate these people who hosts large tournaments are are prominent, than a faceless ebay seller.
If you do not know the law, or havent been caught yet, please do not assume you are not breaking the law.
I see you have some ebay items there, if you would like to slap a power/toughness box on your ebay art pieces, I can report you to WOTC, and we can see how that goes for you if you wanna try it. If it's all heresay, then nothing will happen right? You only get a 7 day suspension of selling ability the first time around, no harm done.
If you have read the whole thread, you will also have noticed that I mentioned Spell_scoop, comicmania, and alteredprints were all shutdown by ebay at one point, this list is not exhaustive, dtdcustoms, destruction productions, mindcraft studios, newbeins, mooschms, all went through it.
If you haven't cruised ebay for the last few months, and are ignorant of who has been shut down and who hasn't, please do not assume this is all heresay.
Oh look! One of their websites is still functioning: http://comicmaniacustoms.wordpress.com/ "By request of Wizards of the Coast, I will no longer be making or selling altered MTG cards."
As for whether SCG and other gaming stores continue to give away their own custom tokens, it's a tolerance issue, not a legal issue. it is completely illegal to produce tokens which uses the intellectual property of WOTC, (using their power toughness configurations etc). But it's better to tolerate these people who hosts large tournaments are are prominent, than a faceless ebay seller.
If you do not know the law, or havent been caught yet, please do not assume you are not breaking the law.
I see you have some ebay items there, if you would like to slap a power/toughness box on your ebay art pieces, I can report you to WOTC, and we can see how that goes for you if you wanna try it. If it's all heresay, then nothing will happen right? You only get a 7 day suspension of selling ability the first time around, no harm done.
There's a difference here though, comicmania was altering WotC art making it more sexualized/NSFW content and printing it on stickers and putting it on cards and selling them... WotC especially has a big problem with adult content being shown on cards that are claiming to be tournament legal...which they weren't generally legal as they were considerably thicker than a standard foil card.
Painted alters are simply extending the art of a card thusly modifying the original art to show more background, and etc. WotC generally doesn't have a problem with these alterers or the cards themselves, but seeing a half-naked Teysa would definitely set someone's alarm bells off... as well as seeing Chandra with big boobs... and suddenly wearing less than we've seen her character wear... :/
Context is key regarding these shutdowns and Comicmania was shut down because of the content they were producing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
If you have read the whole thread, you will also have noticed that I mentioned Spell_scoop, comicmania, and alteredprints were all shutdown by ebay at one point, this list is not exhaustive, dtdcustoms, destruction productions, mindcraft studios, newbeins, mooschms, all went through it.
For example: Oh look! One of their websites is still functioning: http://comicmaniacustoms.wordpress.com/ "By request of Wizards of the Coast, I will no longer be making or selling altered MTG cards."
As for whether SCG and other gaming stores continue to give away their own custom tokens, it's a tolerance issue, not a legal issue. it is completely illegal to produce tokens which uses the intellectual property of WOTC, (using their power toughness configurations etc).
If you haven't cruised ebay for the last few months, and are ignorant of who has been shut down and who hasn't, please do not assume this is all heresay.
If you do not know the law, or havent been caught yet, please do not assume you are not breaking the law.
If you would like to slap a power/toughness box on your ebay art pieces, I can report you to WOTC, and we can see how that goes for you if you wanna try it. If it's all heresay, then nothing will happen right?
Maybe you didn't read my post very carefully. I didn't say SCG tokens. I said alter tables. The tables that they sell to alterers to paint cards and make 3D tokens by cutting up cards. This has nothing to do with their tokens, which they do in fact have permission from WotC to make. Anyway, irrelevant to my point entirely.
Also thank you for the list of talent-less hacks that steal fantasy art from google and print it on stickers and inevitably got caught. However, that also is irrelevant to my point. I'm speaking about artists here, not people that wish they were artists.
This thread, which is the topic here, has only 1 person complaining of being shut down. By saying there are multiple people without showing any evidence... that is... hearsay, no? Would that hold up in court as evidence? I'm just some ignorant person but when I type 'hearsay' into the google it says that's what it is. Guffaw.
All I am saying is i'd like to see a bit more proof that WotC is in fact wasting time and money going after painted alters, because I doubt very much that they are. Pure speculation of course, but it is far from baseless and ignorant.
I cruise eBay all the time, I just don't look for stolen google/Deviant art tokens and fake foils. None of the artists I know of have had a problem, besides the one posting here. And having been around the country doing this for SCG and other stores since 2009 and I know or know of quite a few. In fact, the starter of this is in a facebook group with 137 other eBay sellers of painted alters, including myself. Only one speaking up there also.
If selling painted alters on eBay is a problem, it must be a secret.
Maybe you didn't read my post very carefully. I didn't say SCG tokens. I said alter tables. The tables that they sell to alterers to paint cards and make 3D tokens by cutting up cards. This has nothing to do with their tokens, which they do in fact have permission from WotC to make. Anyway, irrelevant to my point entirely.
Also thank you for the list of talent-less hacks that steal fantasy art from google and print it on stickers and inevitably got caught. However, that also is irrelevant to my point. I'm speaking about artists here, not people that wish they were artists.
This thread, which is the topic here, has only 1 person complaining of being shut down. By saying there are multiple people without showing any evidence... that is... hearsay, no? Would that hold up in court as evidence? I'm just some ignorant person but when I type 'hearsay' into the google it says that's what it is. Guffaw.
All I am saying is i'd like to see a bit more proof that WotC is in fact wasting time and money going after painted alters, because I doubt very much that they are. Pure speculation of course, but it is far from baseless and ignorant.
I cruise eBay all the time, I just don't look for stolen google/Deviant art tokens and fake foils. None of the artists I know of have had a problem, besides the one posting here. And having been around the country doing this for SCG and other stores since 2009 and I know or know of quite a few. In fact, the starter of this is in a facebook group with 137 other eBay sellers of painted alters, including myself. Only one speaking up there also.
If selling painted alters on eBay is a problem, it must be a secret.
First of all, SCG is a prominent host of MTG events, it would benefit MTG to please them, you will find that many online card stores have their own custom tokens. As for your tables example, if they contained any WOTC IP it's still infringement (but if you can prove SCG indeed has permission, then perhaps they have permission). But hey, have you seen SCG's official signed authorization document from WOTC? I sure haven't. Maybe thats heresay too! it's all heresay! But like above, I reiterate that there is a tolerance issue between who WOTC persecutes, and who WOTC doesn't persecute. If you have the rights, you choose how to exercise those rights.
You assume the lack of people speaking up is directly = lack of an issue.
Your assumption of heresay is subjective.
I also said this is the first paint alter I heard about being nailed by WOTC. I'm glad he made a post about this so we have it on record. I also indicated that what he does is clear infringement in a prior post. Maybe this is the start of something, maybe not, if we revisit this thread a year from now and no further record of paint sellers being VEROed exist, then we can assume that it's an isolated incident. But heresay?
Who you decide to call artists and who you decide to call talentless hacks are simply subjective.
The case of talentlessness can be applied to many without an objective scale, including your own art. But I will forego the comments on your own art as opinions are subjective.
and BTW, here's something objective for you. Your use of the word TCG on your listings is a trademark infringement on WOTC, who owns the word TCG = "Trading card game", all other card games are "collector's card games". If you are selling a WOTC compatible product, you need authorization. If you are selling your own brand of products, which is what it seems to look like, you are unfortunately branding it with WOTC IP. It's like selling AUDI brand oven mittens.
you are also welcome to take on my challenge with your "tokens" if you doubt that this thread is real. Like I said, the consequence is small. WOTC might not even waste their time on you. -> in which case you can even tell me it's all heresay and I got nothing on ya! But seek your own legal advice. I'm not going to enourage you to make what is already illegal even more illegal.
There's a difference here though, comicmania was altering WotC art making it more sexualized/NSFW content and printing it on stickers and putting it on cards and selling them... WotC especially has a big problem with adult content being shown on cards that are claiming to be tournament legal...which they weren't generally legal as they were considerably thicker than a standard foil card.
Painted alters are simply extending the art of a card thusly modifying the original art to show more background, and etc. WotC generally doesn't have a problem with these alterers or the cards themselves, but seeing a half-naked Teysa would definitely set someone's alarm bells off... as well as seeing Chandra with big boobs... and suddenly wearing less than we've seen her character wear... :/
I'm certainly not defending comicmania or their alterations, it's simply an example of another seller who clearly violated WOTC IP, including his commissioned art pieces by drake, which are derivative from WOTC characters as well as his obvious de-clothing of WOTC art. But infringement is infringement, extended borders directly borrow from whats on WOTC art (or else what are they extending?). Derivative works are direct copyright infringements. The infringement is on the sale scale, but perhaps you can make a case there about how sexualizing cards defames WOTC, which is easy to suggest, but require actual data in a court of law to prove.
Perhaps paint alters take more time or less time depending your own abilities. I guess it give some people grounds to assign subjective romantic notions or nobility to them vs stickers. In a court of law, paint and sticker all adhere to the card, and if they depend on the art to function, or use a WOTC character, then they are derivative of the art/IP and violate copyright/IP laws. So theoretically WOTC legal is simply fulfilling their legal obligations by nailing painters as well as sticker-ers. (This case was made by comicmania earlier in march). If you want to make legal paint alters, look at what Marta Molina sells, she covers the entire art, and doesnt seem to use WOTC characters. (Although she does use simpsons etc... but WOTC is not the rights owners there so they lack rights as well as legal jurisdiction for prosecution since I believe she is foreign, spanish?)
Their tokens have the permissions printed on them. With the WotC copyright. Would they do that illegally as such a large company? Seriously? Give me a break.
Yes, TCG is trademarked, let me go fix that quick. What was I thinking. The WoW TCG confused me. Maybe they are paying royalties. They probably are. I actually made these as business cards. Thanks for telling me.
I may be talent-less myself but at least i'm trying. It is a whole lot easier to completely rip off someone more competent at it I suppose. I guess people are just really good at things, no practice or training necessary.
I also cover the entire card because I am aware of the way laws work. The thing about Art Law (those printed alters don't fall under this) you are missing however is that when you paint something on a card, it may be IP or infringement to some degree, but there is also a thing called "Appropriation". The amount of gray area in all of this subject matter is huge. When you put a sticker over 95% of a card you can't call it appropriation, but if you paint over 95% of a card that is a different story. Quite like Marta Molina does.
Also, there is nothing subjective about taking someone else's art, printing it out, doing nothing else to it, and calling it your own and selling it. That is art? In what world? I believe Counterfeiting is what you were looking for.
Also, the correct spelling is "hearsay". I looked it up in this here Dictionary book since we are going to be nit-picky about things.
Well, it has been enough of the matter in those therms. What the title of this thread announces is a controversial assertion. What we've got here is few if none proof of such thing actually happening in the community. Those people who have new and official information about this, feel free to post it (but ONLY if having a way to link to and/or probe the sources.) Please, refrain from posting uninformed assertions or expressing mere opinions from now on. In case the aforementioned isn't observed, this thread will get locked. -BBull
So, I have about thirty of the alters that are considered illegal that I purchased from a large online retailer, including two of the "limited" Liliana of the Veil. Should I keep these as novelties or ask for a refund as the retailer claimed these were done with all artists being compensated?
So, I have about thirty of the alters that are considered illegal that I purchased from a large online retailer, including two of the "limited" Liliana of the Veil. Should I keep these as novelties or ask for a refund as the retailer claimed these were done with all artists being compensated?
Make contact with the site in wich you've made those purchases and ask for input.
I think it is important to inform the community that a statement by Wizards of the Coast that something infringes their copyright(s) is a statement of OPINION by Wizards of the Coast.
Altering the images on lawfully obtained cards has, to my knowledge, never been declared illegal in a court of law by a U.S. Judge. Indeed, a
good faith argument could be advanced that such alters constitute "fair use" under copyright law and are entirely lawful.
Further, in the event that a U.S. court did at some future point actually issue an opinion that alterations constitute infringement under US copyright law, this does not mean that such activity would be unlawful in all non-US jurisdictions. Indeed, there are international jurisdictions that do not recognize the validity of copyright law.
I may be late to the party, but I feel like Fair Use is a legitimate defense in alter cases. (IAAlmostAL, getting a certificate in IP along with my JD, however, nothing in this post is legal advice, just discussion).
An oft-used defense of fair use in derivative works cases is that "the secondary use adds value to the original--if the quoted matter is used as raw material, transformed in the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings--this is the very type of activity that the fair use doctrine intends to protect for the enrichment of society." Altering a card can very easily encompass one or all of the categories listed, and should be pretty easy to defend.
Another element of fair use involves damage done to the value of the original work, which WotC would have a fairly hard time arguing in court, even with a lax standard of review.
If I wasn't in class all day, I'd search up some precedent to **** back at WotC legal. Hell, if I was out of school already I'd take a case like this pro bono just for fun.
For people who are getting these emails: Try arguing fair use?
EDIT: LEE v. A.R.T. COMPANY, 125 F.3d 580 is an interesting precedent that can be applied to this case - where an original work is consumed to create a derivative work. Also, first sale doctrine might be an affirmative defense in the ebay seller cases. This is fun
I'm trying to understand this. So if I have someone change everything but the border and text, I am not creating a derivative of the art, or am I?
yea, if steve is altering something he owns (the art/distribution rights to the art), then he is okay.
You own the card, but not the distribution rights for the art on the card. So if you change the art a little (a derivative), and distribute it, then it isnt.... it becomes IMPOSSIBLE not to claim the original work of art as part of your art. you're never gonna get a jury to believe you are selling a painted border, although you may certainly claim to do so, and claim that the border has NOTHING to do with the art in the middle lol.
Yes REAL Tiger Balm (medicated sticky patch for arthritis) = 2% real tiger ash, my friend's dad saved some from the 1980s he showed me a patch the other day
As long as it doesn't somehow reference the previous art or use copyrighted mtg symbols then no a complete alter is still fine even under the loosest definitions of this.
if you cover the original art totally (ie, your art does not depend on wizards art, and does not act in symmetry to wizards art in an obvious way), then it is not derivative. If you stick a Aerosmith poster over Mona Lisa, it is now just Aerosmith.
My advice would be: Let's not take this more seriously than what it truly is: A speculative topic about uncertain facts. Personally, I'll not change the way I managed myself about alters, unless this becomes an official and legal thing, wich I doubt it will.
EDIT: Also, if you ppl love alters as much as I do (or at least respect them as another colorful facet of our beloved game) report responsibly to avoid annoying WotC at the point that they decide to nip the problem in the bud by making the entire scene an illegal thing "for good".
The takedowns are wide spread (this should be evident by now from the number of sellers who commented on this post). If it's an misunderstanding, it's as a result of WOTC's legal department's crusade to stop alters. You will have noticed that popular eBay sellers such as Alteredprints, Spell_scoop, Comicmania (all >1000 feedback), etc are all gone as a result of this crusade, I didnt even know they go after paint alters until this thread. So I would avoid making sweeping generalizations about how this is about "speculative topic about uncertain facts" unless you have something specific about what is speculative, and what is uncertain, and what is fact.
As for whether WOTC's stance, there is a disparity, between marketing, gaming, and legal as previously mentioned, and obviously it would be nice for them to officially overlook it. But I would NEVER expect WOTC to officially comment on this as it could be seen as giving "permission" to violate their copyright. Meanwhile legal department is working hard to nail alterers.
As for whether WOTC wants this to go to court, they probably do not. The first time I got shut down on eBay I sent them a counternotice form which allows them 2 weeks time to sue me in court or let me continue to sell. They reponded with some threats, I threatened them back etc and nothing happened.
The second time I got shut down, they used the VERO-trademark category, on eBay there is no way to counternotice a trademark VERO takedown, so basically they slam your eBay account and get off free.
As a pretty involved person in the alteration community, I haven't heard of hand-made alter artists getting in trouble due to their labor, while it is well known that ppl printing onto cards have been persecuted since ever.
Yes, like I said, I didnt know they were taking down hand painted alters until this thread. But both are equally illegal, it's just a matter of whose rights they trample. (assuming the sticker people do not have artist permission, and some do). Despite your preference for the romantic notions of painting the art vs. stickers, both have a HUGE following (stickers dominate the token/land category cuz they can be produced in large volumes). I know sticker cards with steve argyle that sold >300$, while I have also personally bought from Marta Molina cards >200$. Mind you, Marta Molina tends to paint over the entirety of the WOTC art, hence making her alters non-derivative.
As for whether the sticker people are stealing other people's IP, it is certainly probable given the previous thread about the backlash from MTG artists who had their non-MTG art ripped by Alteredprints/capncader (but this is the ONLY example that we are publicly aware of), WOTC unfortunately will not be in a position to file VERO takedowns for non-WOTC art, as they are not verified rights owners but continue to do so under the impression that the entire end-product is a derivative work.
That is the point of the thread:
WOTC, the Entire end-product sold on eBay is a used, modified MTG card of the same name, it is not a new product, it is not a new TCG, and if the artwork/text is non-derivative/direct copies, then you dont have a case. Stop using ebay VERO trademark loopholes to nail people at random! If you are going to declare items as "counterfeit", find the courage to give people a chance to file counternotices.
btw Alteredprints aka capncader is still selling his stolen art:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/151125296817?ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1436.l2649
And This proxy Jace guy.... WOTC is letting him get away, he sold several sets of foil P9s, and foil jace proxys already. I dunno how many times I reported this guy....
http://www.ebay.com/itm/271281617726?ssPageName=STRK:MESINDXX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1436.l2648
good job WOTC, goodjob!
it's clearly both of their responsibilities, and eBay's reporting system must be jam packed with reports.
Also, this thread is about ebay VERO takedowns, so, if WOTC was hunting on eBay, you'd think they go after serious counterfeiters before they go after the painters.
Other than that, the people who got their Ebay blocked, only have a name of a guy who works for WOTC, how you can be so sure that this is actually him? It can be someone who decided to go onto a crusade against printed altered art, he could just find a name of a WOTC employee from Google and make the reports.I doubt if Ebay can validate that he is actually that guy.
If they actually did go against hand painted art that would bring huge negativity against WOTC and I'm talking about the people who spend thousands of dollars to buy a power nine and had it altered by an artist like Klug. Imagine these people's anger if they learn that their set of Force of Will painted by Terese Nielsen (for some hundreds of dollars) is now officially illegal.Why they would do such a thing? Pimping a card or deck is a sign of how huge the game's popularity is, why kill it?
Until I see an official statement by WOTC, I'll take as granted that their policy haven't change.
CARDS FOR SALE HERE!.
My alterted cards Gallery.
My Alters Blog.
Please, before posting, actually read the thread. Martin Durham is/was the RPG Project Manager for D&D 4th Edition. His name is in the book. Secondly, the VERO program with Ebay stands for Verified Rights Owner. This is a well-documented thing WotC has been doing.
It is certainly possible for people to engage in anti-competitive actions on eBay against other sellers: ie. as an alteration seller, you see someone selling MTG cards that compete with yours, and then you file VERO against them and put WOTC. Since WOTC is a registered VERO, there is no review of their rights or the complaint, they just straight nail your auctions. ie. I can go fill out a VERO form right now on an eBay item, fake a signature, and put martin durham as the guy to contact, and the item will still get nailed. You can google this sort of thing, people have posted examples of repeatedly getting nailed by VERO only to eventually find out it was done by another eBay seller. EVIL!!!
However, the thread starters have posted statements from WOTC legal department on this issue. Perhaps not 100% of the reports are WOTC, but certainly a fair number, and we dont have a way of telling which is which.
It's also about what they chose to tolerate and what they dont tolerate. So while terese nielson might be selling alters illegally, WOTC may not be pursuing her for it whereas other sellers are not so lucky. Remember that the rights owner reserves the rights to file charges against those parties who violate their rights, but it certainly does not mean they are robotic and file sweeping VERO takedowns on everyone.
But this thread was started by hand painter people who got nailed lol...
To clarify, if you read through this ENTIRE thread, only 1 person and 1 person only is complaining about having their auctions taken down. Not another single person has come forward in this matter saying the same. They say others have also, but there is quite literally ZERO proof of this. Hearsay at best. I feel like this is 1 person that got targeted with a bunch of token printers. If WotC's stance was that alters are a NO NO, then Starcity Games certainly would have cancelled the remaining Open Schedule's alter tables, being their biggest asset in the US. In addition to that, every alter painter I know still in fact has their auctions up on eBay.
@Everyone
When forming an opinion on this you must look at all of the context clues as well. All of them currently lead back to one single person. Until we get a C&D or see an official document, I feel everyone should disregard this thread completely until that point.
Lord of the Rings themed Gauntlet of Power!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=755668414463274&set=a.670062773023839.1073741827.282121408484646&type=1&theater
Winner announced January 18th 2014.
For Sale:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/brandonbrownart/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
Commission slots available!
PM or FB message me for details!
If you have read the whole thread, you will also have noticed that I mentioned Spell_scoop, comicmania, and alteredprints were all shutdown by ebay at one point, this list is not exhaustive, dtdcustoms, destruction productions, mindcraft studios, newbeins, mooschms, all went through it.
If you haven't cruised ebay for the last few months, and are ignorant of who has been shut down and who hasn't, please do not assume this is all heresay.
Oh look! One of their websites is still functioning: http://comicmaniacustoms.wordpress.com/
"By request of Wizards of the Coast, I will no longer be making or selling altered MTG cards."
As for whether SCG and other gaming stores continue to give away their own custom tokens, it's a tolerance issue, not a legal issue. it is completely illegal to produce tokens which uses the intellectual property of WOTC, (using their power toughness configurations etc). But it's better to tolerate these people who hosts large tournaments are are prominent, than a faceless ebay seller.
If you do not know the law, or havent been caught yet, please do not assume you are not breaking the law.
I see you have some ebay items there, if you would like to slap a power/toughness box on your ebay art pieces, I can report you to WOTC, and we can see how that goes for you if you wanna try it.
There's a difference here though, comicmania was altering WotC art making it more sexualized/NSFW content and printing it on stickers and putting it on cards and selling them... WotC especially has a big problem with adult content being shown on cards that are claiming to be tournament legal...which they weren't generally legal as they were considerably thicker than a standard foil card.
Painted alters are simply extending the art of a card thusly modifying the original art to show more background, and etc. WotC generally doesn't have a problem with these alterers or the cards themselves, but seeing a half-naked Teysa would definitely set someone's alarm bells off... as well as seeing Chandra with big boobs... and suddenly wearing less than we've seen her character wear... :/
Context is key regarding these shutdowns and Comicmania was shut down because of the content they were producing.
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
Maybe you didn't read my post very carefully. I didn't say SCG tokens. I said alter tables. The tables that they sell to alterers to paint cards and make 3D tokens by cutting up cards. This has nothing to do with their tokens, which they do in fact have permission from WotC to make. Anyway, irrelevant to my point entirely.
Also thank you for the list of talent-less hacks that steal fantasy art from google and print it on stickers and inevitably got caught. However, that also is irrelevant to my point. I'm speaking about artists here, not people that wish they were artists.
This thread, which is the topic here, has only 1 person complaining of being shut down. By saying there are multiple people without showing any evidence... that is... hearsay, no? Would that hold up in court as evidence? I'm just some ignorant person but when I type 'hearsay' into the google it says that's what it is. Guffaw.
All I am saying is i'd like to see a bit more proof that WotC is in fact wasting time and money going after painted alters, because I doubt very much that they are. Pure speculation of course, but it is far from baseless and ignorant.
I cruise eBay all the time, I just don't look for stolen google/Deviant art tokens and fake foils. None of the artists I know of have had a problem, besides the one posting here. And having been around the country doing this for SCG and other stores since 2009 and I know or know of quite a few. In fact, the starter of this is in a facebook group with 137 other eBay sellers of painted alters, including myself. Only one speaking up there also.
If selling painted alters on eBay is a problem, it must be a secret.
Lord of the Rings themed Gauntlet of Power!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=755668414463274&set=a.670062773023839.1073741827.282121408484646&type=1&theater
Winner announced January 18th 2014.
For Sale:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/brandonbrownart/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
Commission slots available!
PM or FB message me for details!
First of all, SCG is a prominent host of MTG events, it would benefit MTG to please them, you will find that many online card stores have their own custom tokens. As for your tables example, if they contained any WOTC IP it's still infringement (but if you can prove SCG indeed has permission, then perhaps they have permission). But hey, have you seen SCG's official signed authorization document from WOTC? I sure haven't. Maybe thats heresay too! it's all heresay!
You assume the lack of people speaking up is directly = lack of an issue.
Your assumption of heresay is subjective.
I also said this is the first paint alter I heard about being nailed by WOTC. I'm glad he made a post about this so we have it on record. I also indicated that what he does is clear infringement in a prior post. Maybe this is the start of something, maybe not, if we revisit this thread a year from now and no further record of paint sellers being VEROed exist, then we can assume that it's an isolated incident. But heresay?
Who you decide to call artists and who you decide to call talentless hacks are simply subjective.
The case of talentlessness can be applied to many without an objective scale, including your own art. But I will forego the comments on your own art as opinions are subjective.
and BTW, here's something objective for you. Your use of the word TCG on your listings is a trademark infringement on WOTC, who owns the word TCG = "Trading card game", all other card games are "collector's card games". If you are selling a WOTC compatible product, you need authorization. If you are selling your own brand of products, which is what it seems to look like, you are unfortunately branding it with WOTC IP. It's like selling AUDI brand oven mittens.
you are also welcome to take on my challenge with your "tokens" if you doubt that this thread is real. Like I said, the consequence is small. WOTC might not even waste their time on you. -> in which case you can even tell me it's all heresay and I got nothing on ya! But seek your own legal advice. I'm not going to enourage you to make what is already illegal even more illegal.
I'm certainly not defending comicmania or their alterations, it's simply an example of another seller who clearly violated WOTC IP, including his commissioned art pieces by drake, which are derivative from WOTC characters as well as his obvious de-clothing of WOTC art. But infringement is infringement, extended borders directly borrow from whats on WOTC art (or else what are they extending?). Derivative works are direct copyright infringements. The infringement is on the sale scale, but perhaps you can make a case there about how sexualizing cards defames WOTC, which is easy to suggest, but require actual data in a court of law to prove.
Perhaps paint alters take more time or less time depending your own abilities. I guess it give some people grounds to assign subjective romantic notions or nobility to them vs stickers. In a court of law, paint and sticker all adhere to the card, and if they depend on the art to function, or use a WOTC character, then they are derivative of the art/IP and violate copyright/IP laws. So theoretically WOTC legal is simply fulfilling their legal obligations by nailing painters as well as sticker-ers. (This case was made by comicmania earlier in march). If you want to make legal paint alters, look at what Marta Molina sells, she covers the entire art, and doesnt seem to use WOTC characters. (Although she does use simpsons etc... but WOTC is not the rights owners there so they lack rights as well as legal jurisdiction for prosecution since I believe she is foreign, spanish?)
Yes, TCG is trademarked, let me go fix that quick. What was I thinking. The WoW TCG confused me. Maybe they are paying royalties. They probably are. I actually made these as business cards. Thanks for telling me.
I may be talent-less myself but at least i'm trying. It is a whole lot easier to completely rip off someone more competent at it I suppose. I guess people are just really good at things, no practice or training necessary.
I also cover the entire card because I am aware of the way laws work. The thing about Art Law (those printed alters don't fall under this) you are missing however is that when you paint something on a card, it may be IP or infringement to some degree, but there is also a thing called "Appropriation". The amount of gray area in all of this subject matter is huge. When you put a sticker over 95% of a card you can't call it appropriation, but if you paint over 95% of a card that is a different story. Quite like Marta Molina does.
Also, there is nothing subjective about taking someone else's art, printing it out, doing nothing else to it, and calling it your own and selling it. That is art? In what world? I believe Counterfeiting is what you were looking for.
Also, the correct spelling is "hearsay". I looked it up in this here Dictionary book since we are going to be nit-picky about things.
Lord of the Rings themed Gauntlet of Power!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=755668414463274&set=a.670062773023839.1073741827.282121408484646&type=1&theater
Winner announced January 18th 2014.
For Sale:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/brandonbrownart/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
Commission slots available!
PM or FB message me for details!
Make contact with the site in wich you've made those purchases and ask for input.
Altering the images on lawfully obtained cards has, to my knowledge, never been declared illegal in a court of law by a U.S. Judge. Indeed, a
good faith argument could be advanced that such alters constitute "fair use" under copyright law and are entirely lawful.
Further, in the event that a U.S. court did at some future point actually issue an opinion that alterations constitute infringement under US copyright law, this does not mean that such activity would be unlawful in all non-US jurisdictions. Indeed, there are international jurisdictions that do not recognize the validity of copyright law.
An oft-used defense of fair use in derivative works cases is that "the secondary use adds value to the original--if the quoted matter is used as raw material, transformed in the creation of new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understandings--this is the very type of activity that the fair use doctrine intends to protect for the enrichment of society." Altering a card can very easily encompass one or all of the categories listed, and should be pretty easy to defend.
Another element of fair use involves damage done to the value of the original work, which WotC would have a fairly hard time arguing in court, even with a lax standard of review.
If I wasn't in class all day, I'd search up some precedent to **** back at WotC legal. Hell, if I was out of school already I'd take a case like this pro bono just for fun.
For people who are getting these emails: Try arguing fair use?
EDIT: LEE v. A.R.T. COMPANY, 125 F.3d 580 is an interesting precedent that can be applied to this case - where an original work is consumed to create a derivative work. Also, first sale doctrine might be an affirmative defense in the ebay seller cases. This is fun
G MGC
WB Teysa Tokens
BR Wortsnort
UG 23.5-No Edric
URG Noncombo Animar
GUB Damia Stax
WBR Alesha Hatebear Recursion
WBR Daddy Tariel
UBR [Je]love-a Your Deck
GWU Almost Critterless Enchantress
WUB Sydri+Artifacts=WUB
WURG Glint-Eye Combo