I'm not sure I understand the contextand all this 'they' business might be over the top. All we know so far is 'some bird was painting it'. Don't know what she was painting it on, or what for, and it was presumably her own idea to use it.
(,
Thu 22 Sep 2005, 17:36,
archived)
just going on what the Donkey man sayswe`ve never been a bunch to wait for all the facts ;)
if it`s all true, we should all have a banner we paste on every post slamming "Nick" and it`s dubious business practices
- a little banner, mind you, nothing crazy.. in orange and white
maybe Stelios will sue b3ta ..
god it`s all so complex
(if it`s all true, we should all have a banner we paste on every post slamming "Nick" and it`s dubious business practices
- a little banner, mind you, nothing crazy.. in orange and white
maybe Stelios will sue b3ta ..
god it`s all so complex
Reckless_Rik,
Thu 22 Sep 2005, 17:39,
archived)
I get the impression that it's not Nickelodeon that has dubious business practicesBut "some bird" who suffered a momentary lapse of judgement due to lack of hummus.
edit: aw, look, she's made him fitter and given him a medallion. Fair play I say.
(,
Thu 22 Sep 2005, 17:42,
archived)
edit: aw, look, she's made him fitter and given him a medallion. Fair play I say.
aye you`re rightyou`re a very thinkery person.. could just be her that`s a thieving cunt
( Reckless_Rik,
Thu 22 Sep 2005, 17:44,
archived)
hmm. we might blatantly nick other people's work and modify it slightlyBut we're not doing it for commercial gain; it's fairly reasonable use, and the mods remove stuff the copyright holders do complain about-- I remember a Ladybird book FP being removed 'cos the publishers e-mailed Rob.
But what nickelodeon have done... that is for commercial gain. And it's shit of them.
(But what nickelodeon have done... that is for commercial gain. And it's shit of them.
drunkenoaf,
Thu 22 Sep 2005, 17:45,
archived)