(Post a new comment)

	llama_treats 2008-02-11 05:02 pm UTC (link)
	Be nice. After all, understanding shit that's been spelled out for her in small words is hard. :( (Reply to this)

	major_dallas 2008-02-11 05:51 pm UTC (link)
	Love her reply :rolleyes: (Reply to this)

julian_black
2008-02-11 06:37 pm UTC (link)

I was trying to type a response that said, "You're a complete fucking moron," only in a nicer way. So it's just as well she deleted her comment; I was failing badly in my attempt.

But here's her comment, for the record, and for ongoing lulz:

so flipping confused ...
annephoenix
2008-02-11 10:01 am UTC (link)

as far as I can tell Paramount and Gene Roddenberry never clamped down on fannish activities because fans weren't making any money off them.

But what about the MEGABUCKS Emerson ("If I can meet Harry Potter fans' needs and make money at the same time, why shouldn't I?") and presumably Melissa make off advertising on their sites? I doubt the Lexicon book would ever have made a six-figure income .. or at least not a yearly one. So it's clearly not about profiting from JK's fans from HP-related things, because WB and JKR have always made open declarations of support for Mugglenet and TLC ... well, like they did at some point openly support the Lexicon.

To be honest, I have NO idea about the legal whatsits of this case. None, and I will be v interested in the outcome of the hearing. But since the public media/press lawyers tend to consider this a landmark case, maybe it does have more merit than f_w would make one think? Maybe not ;). I truly don't know! What confuses me is all the contradictions -- I have a HP encyclopedia on my bookshelf, so *that* is not the problem; lots of people make money off HP fans so *that* can't be the main issue; JK wants to write her own book, but it's a capitalist society so *that* can't be the problem (no one ever said competition was illegal and I think it's clear we'd all buy JK's book anyway) ... I'm just so confused about what the problem actually is at this point??!!

RDR is a big problem *lol* ... What a weirdo. But again, that doesn't have anything to do with legality right? I mean just because someone is stupid that doesn't mean they're criminal. Criminally stupid, maybe ... I can only repeat: will be watching the case with interest as clearly some of the legalese types think both sides have enough merit for it to actually go to court.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	puipui 2008-02-11 08:24 pm UTC (link)
	You should post it there, just for the record. I think that would be lovely. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	llama_treats 2008-02-11 09:02 pm UTC (link)
	She can't handle four comments from people who don't agree with her? I think that may be a record. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	narcissam 2008-02-11 09:19 pm UTC (link)
	I think it was just three when she deleted! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	llama_treats 2008-02-11 09:25 pm UTC (link)
	I think we should give her a prize of some sort. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	major_dallas 2008-02-11 10:29 pm UTC (link)
	it was, one of the four comments was a reply from her to you so only 3 comments and gone, just like that LOL (Reply to this)(Parent)

	rhrsoulmates 2008-02-11 11:12 pm UTC (link)
	Want me to post a "Would someone repost the deleted comment?" comment in that thread? ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	julian_black 2008-02-11 11:27 pm UTC (link)
	ROFL! Be my guest... (Reply to this)(Parent)

vorpal_blade
2008-02-12 03:52 am UTC (link)

It doesn't matter if they're becoming millionaires from the ads on their sites. They're not making money by re-selling JKR's own words. All of the people who made money from books they wrote ABOUT HP are okay, too, and will never be sued by JKR or the WB. Nothing Emerson or Melissa does infringes on JKR's copyright. You don't have to be a lawyer to understand that, yet some people keep acting like the author of a book about Christian symbolism in the HP books should have been sued because she was making money off the HP universe. Sure she was--with her own writing about HP.

This ain't brain surgery, people... Think of it this way: if certain fandom people have managed to become lawyers, the law isn't that hard to understand.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	onaga 2008-02-12 04:04 am UTC (link)
	To be fair, I think that post is more about the nasty people who write about stuff that ends up on FW than about FW itself. On the other hand, that deleted comment was really fucking stupid. So I think your point stands. (Reply to this)(Thread)

narcissam
2008-02-12 04:50 pm UTC (link)

She seems to feel that something nasty regarding Sectus ended up here, though? And not about how much money they raised? Perhaps she meant the cancellation of Sectus getting brought into Lexicon wank, particularly in the creepy way Diamonderm brought it up.

There was one wank earlier where Heidi got all miffed because Elinor dared to set up an HP convention without coming to Heidi for permission, but I don't think that put Sectus in a bad light at all.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	thecheese 2008-02-13 05:44 am UTC (link)
	By "here" you mean F_W and not your own journal, right? I haven't seen anything nasty about Sectus anywhere, even after the cancellation was announced. Of course, people will make the connection between that and the Lexicon case and wonder. Is that what she means? The earlier thing with Heidi just ended up with Heidi being wanked (again), not Sectus. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	pyratejenni 2008-02-13 06:36 am UTC (link)
	I think she's lumping Sectus in with the RDR wank because of SVA's assocation with Sectus. I remember, "Dude, stay home"-type comments when SVA's con schedule was brought up in the one of Cleo's first posts. (Reply to this)(Parent)

white_serpent
2008-02-13 07:01 am UTC (link)

I don't think she's mad at us.

Based on her other comments, I think she's lamenting that major HP sites which will not be named couldn't be bothered to mention Sectus at all (and one even edited it out) when they were going to have the convention, but once it was cancelled, they linked that all over.

Thus, it ended up as part of the discussion on f_w. What bastards those news sites are, etc.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

annephoenix
2008-02-15 11:58 am UTC (link)

*waves*
Clearly I am too nosy for my own good. But it's the Brighton comment that drew me to follow your name to your journal since afaik I am the only person to straddle both HP fandom and Brighton. (For the record I did not post that "wank" nor do I have any idea who might have - obviously up to you to believe me or not!)
I deleted my earlier comments because I posted in a moment of madness and wasn't truly invested in getting involved. I also regretted pulling the whole "six figure" Mugglenet quote into the debate because I agreed with subsequent comments that it was not relevant to the wank in question. So I backtracked ... which I do realise is a mistake in f_w etiquette, but seemed like the best thing to do to stop myself from answering back and digging myself an even deeper hole!
I was indeed the Sectus registrations officer but resigned last August and have had nothing to do with the company, committee or discussion of a 2009 event since then and was as surprised as everyone else to get the cancellation e-mail. This is easily verifiable on my journal where I am happy to friend you (although it is incredibly boring and consists mostly of photos of my horses). Why would I do that? In fact why bother writing a comment that will probably get twisted to turn me into a puppy eating monster once more? Simply because the intention of my original comment was genuine. Yes, of course I can see the legal differences between selling a book and selling ad space, etc etc etc; however I can also see that there are lawyers very interested in both sides of the case. Whether it is *morally* right to sell a book repackaging ideas is another kettle of fish altogether and my opinion is probably in accord with the fandom majority on that point, so that certainly isn't something we need to argue about.
Sooo ... hmmmm ... is my hole deep enough to be a grave or can I stop digging?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

narcissam
2008-02-15 02:18 pm UTC (link)

Sorry, the Brighton comment had nothing to do with you at all, but with someone entirely different whom I thought might be trolling. As it is, that person turns out not to be even living in Britain anymore. The mods can tell your IP doesn't match allthat_jas btw. I'm not a mod, but one tells me you don't match.

Yeah, we get nasty when someone deletes comments/posts. It's usually seen as proof of bad faith. I can see now what your perspective was. Can I offer you my apologies?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	annephoenix 2008-02-15 02:28 pm UTC (link)
	No apologies necessary as I really should know better! I think emotions versus logic are battling a rough fight for me in this particular wank ... so I'll do my best to shut up ;). gags self (Reply to this)(Parent)

Eva Amurri Nude
(Anonymous)
2009-10-06 06:37 pm UTC (link)

[url=http://ctgmusic.com/artist.php?id=18038]Emmanuelle Chriqui nude[/url] Emmanuelle Chriqui nude (http://ctgmusic.com/artist.php?id=18038)
[url=http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/index.php?Itemid=141&func=view&catid=11&id=275]Megan Fox nude[/url] Megan Fox nude (http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/index.php?Itemid=141&func=view&catid=11&id=275)
[url=http://vegweb.com/index.php?action=profile;u=123368]Sophie Monk Nude[/url] Sophie Monk Nude (http://vegweb.com/index.php?action=profile;u=123368)
[url=http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showuser=28046]Kristen Stewart nude[/url] Kristen Stewart nude (http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showuser=28046)
[url=http://nmsua.edu/forums/profile.php?id=1675]Maria Menounos Nude[/url] Maria Menounos Nude (http://nmsua.edu/forums/profile.php?id=1675)
[url=http://finalsayanforum.com/v2forum//index.php?showuser=7662]Khloe Kardashian Nude[/url] Khloe Kardashian Nude (http://finalsayanforum.com/v2forum//index.php?showuser=7662)
[url=http://forums.plexapp.com/index.php?/user/14072-keeley-hazell-naked/]Keeley Hazell Naked[/url] Keeley Hazell Naked (http://forums.plexapp.com/index.php?/user/14072-keeley-hazell-naked/)
[url=http://forums.fuse.tv/thread.jspa?messageID=31911]Kristen Cavallari Nude[/url] Kristen Cavallari Nude (http://forums.fuse.tv/thread.jspa?messageID=31911)
[url=http://macplus.net/forums/index.php?showuser=17111]Eva Amurri Nude[/url] Eva Amurri Nude (http://macplus.net/forums/index.php?showuser=17111)

(Reply to this)

Khloe Kardashian Nude f
(Anonymous)
2009-10-10 12:19 am UTC (link)

http://ctgmusic.com/artist.php?id=18061 - Khloe Kardashian Nude
http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/index.php?Itemid=141&func=view&catid=11&id=276 - Holly Madison nude
http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showuser=28338 - Emily Scott Nude
http://lancasterfarming.com/node/2311 - Gillian Jacobs nude
http://urbanministry.org/user/maria-menounos-nude - Maria Menounos Nude
http://mothersclick.com/user/sophie_monk_nude - Sophie Monk Nude
http://mostlywater.org/user/kristen_cavallari_nude - Kristen Cavallari Nude
http://hernashville.com/her/keeley-hazell-naked - Keeley Hazell Naked
http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/user/837 - Kristen Stewart naked
http://progressiveu.org/blog/54456-asd - Megan Fox naked

(Reply to this)

Barack Obama’s Inaugural Address
(Anonymous)
2009-11-08 05:38 am UTC (link)

I stand here today humbled by the task before [url=http://www.bawwgt.com]dofus kamas[/url], grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our [url=http://www.bawwgt.com]cheap dofus kamas[/url]. I thank President [url=http://www.bawwgt.com]dofus power leveling[/url] for his service to [url=http://www.bawwgt.com]buy dofus kamas[/url], as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

(Reply to this)