misterspock wrote:Check this out...

The seller has put up a "quantity" of ten TIFF images of Jeff Easley artwork from a calendar.  He took a picture of the calender with his digital camera  (who needs a scanner, anyway?) and then proceeded to digitally eliminate the crease mark.

"I have had quite a lot of practice at fixing images like this and am pretty picky about having a good finished product, so I am pretty sure whoever buys this will be happy."

$45 including "free shipping" gets you a photoshop'd picture from a digital camera of artwork he has no legal right to copy and sell.


** expired/removed eBay auction **

Not that I would ever consider buying something like this, but isn't it legal to take a picture of something and sell it? If I went and took a picture of the Mona Lisa, would I be able to sell it to the highest bidder? Is this truly illegal or (like I would consider) simply in bad taste?

Not trying to be snarky, and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a difference between scanning and taking a picture? I had scanned a counter sheet for a game and uploaded it to Boardgamegeek once, and boy the writer of the game reamed me out in an e-mail, but if I had taken a photo of the same counter sheet (and it was shown to be an obvious photo) there would have been no problem.

** expired/removed eBay auction **


Think I should zap this guy

Traveller wrote:I would.  A softcover PHB and a downloaded adventure?

There was a softcover 3.5 PHB released.  Part of a starter set perhaps?  I forget exactly.  The copy up there looks like the legit softcover 3.5 PHB though.

Edit: Just checked; it was in a box called the Dungeons & Dragons Player's Kit.

Anyone see this already? Appears to be photocopies of char sheets

cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem& ... 0355714820

I'd say the latter...  

What about this?:

** expired/removed eBay auction **

Grug Greyskin wrote:
Concern over the replicated counters and box?  IMO, that is not a copyright problem, they are simply doing their best to replace destroyed or lost contents to provide a complete and playable item.  I would equate this to selling a 2E box set with a photocopy of the Montrous Compendium pages (which are frequently missing).

I dunno. He's asking $115 for the lot so I am assuming he's appealing to collectors... why then not just leave the repros out of the auction and ask a more reasonable price. It seems to me he's trying to get market value for an item that is incomplete and he's hoping his "replicates" "complete" the item...

I don't like it.

TheMilford wrote:
I dunno. He's asking $115 for the lot so I am assuming he's appealing to collectors... why then not just leave the repros out of the auction and ask a more reasonable price. It seems to me he's trying to get market value for an item that is incomplete and he's hoping his "replicates" "complete" the item...

I don't like it.

TBH, I am a big proponent of going after infringers, I just don't see the big deal here.  He has a majority of the original contents of the set and is making it clear what's not original, so I don't have a problem with this listing myself.

I have other issues with this seller per say(i.e I think that he may have shilled some of his other auctions a few months ago), but I think this particular listing is ok.

Busman wrote:
Those looked just like the ones I played with back in the 80s... which I copied myself.  

The fact that there are 70 indicates photocopies. I do not think those sheets came in white either. But my knowledge of all the varioius character sheets can be lacking at times.

Regardless, those sheets are available on ebay all the time for next to nothing. I have at least five or six partially used books that came in various lot purchases. They will never sell, anyway.