Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBC)   You used a picture of a penny? That'll be $1200 please   (cbc.ca ) divider line
    More: Asinine, Gordon Lightfoot, Royal Canadian Mint, canadian cents  
•       •       •

24606 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Sep 2012 at 7:37 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



94 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-11 09:20:23 AM  
"Blame Canada, it seems that everything went wrong since Canada came along"

This is stupid, I am rather surprised Canada can hold a trademark/patent/copyright. I don't think the US can do that with anything at least with the general public, if you create fake money they can charge you with counterfeiting, if you give away property of the US they can charge you with theft... This seems wicked retahded
 
2012-09-11 09:20:51 AM  
Z

HailRobonia: [gmsguidetostyle.files.wordpress.com image 339x451]
[www.nationalenquirer.com image 375x525]


b.vimeocdn.com

Double copyright infingement!
 
2012-09-11 09:27:51 AM  

abhorrent1: I was on the fence about canada. I am no longer.

/dicks


Ditto.

/Canadian
 
2012-09-11 09:27:55 AM  

LordOfThePings: What do I owe?


$42,000
 
2012-09-11 09:30:38 AM  

StrangeQ: [upload.wikimedia.org image 220x220]

I wonder how long until the US government takes this as a cue to go retroactively sue the Cobain estate


And leave Courtney Love penniless? Noooo--

Oh, wait, that's okay.
 
2012-09-11 09:31:11 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: This is stupid, I am rather surprised Canada can hold a trademark/patent/copyright.


The old broad on the other side of the coin is fussy aboot how her image is used.
Man, you put a crown on someone's head and they go all monarchy & sh*t!
 
2012-09-11 09:35:02 AM  

Summercat: Patent/Copyright laws will be the death of Western Civillization

 
2012-09-11 09:39:14 AM  

Prince George: So a real penny is worth one cent but a picture of a penny is worth $1.60. That makes cents.
yep. quatchi wins the thread. Remove the picture of the penny and tape a penny to cd jacket.


RIAA Math? Yeah, I do not get that one either.
 
2012-09-11 09:39:23 AM  
Wait a second.

The Ottawa-based mint has waived the fee on the first 2,000 albums, to come out Sept. 18. But it is firm that Gunning must pay up for future releases.


You get the free use of a copyrighted image, and a full branding and awareness package that you didn't pay for, and they let you the first sell 2000 for free? And you don't like that, and can't afford to pay $1,200 for per 2000 units sold? What does each album sell for? $19.95? For $40,000 in sales you can't pay out $1200 for the copyright holder? That's around .33 cents per album. Fark this guy. He's getting a hell of a deal.
 
2012-09-11 09:39:32 AM  

Endive Wombat: Summercat: Patent/Copyright laws will be the death of Western Civillization

You know, I used to think that the terrorist based nations and extreme dictators were going to be the cause of our downfall. With the advancements in technology, weapons development, religious fanaticism, Dictators flexing their Military's abilities on the world stage, the refusal to export oil and other raw goods to the US and the like. Really, I thought that this is what would cause the major damages to us. But now, as I step back and see the protections that Big Business/Wall Street has lobbied so hard for...the patent after patent of total bullshiat and the ever present lawsuit after lawsuit of one company to another...I see what our downfall will be. Corporations and IP law.

Our collapse will not be quick, rather other countries that laugh at the ridiculousness of US IP laws will continue to develop their products without restriction and eventually surpass us in technology, weapons advancements and the like.


I would put more blame on the politicians who are happy to be take money from corporations and then pass laws favoring them. Corporations only have the power to influence law if our elected officials let them have it.
 
2012-09-11 09:39:35 AM  

oldfarthenry: Science_Guy_3.14159: This is stupid, I am rather surprised Canada can hold a trademark/patent/copyright.

The old broad on the other side of the coin is fussy aboot how her image is used.
Man, you put a crown on someone's head and they go all monarchy & sh*t!


LOL, very good point. They could learn from us and put a bunch of dead people on their currency, not around to ask for money to use their picture
 
2012-09-11 09:42:04 AM  

Silverstaff: Thudfark: Nem Wan: StrangeQ: [upload.wikimedia.org image 220x220]

I wonder how long until the US government takes this as a cue to go retroactively sue the Cobain estate

In the United States, works of the U.S. government and other governments are automatically in the public domain.

Canadians might want to look into copying this law. We won't even charge a fee for it.

Yeah, unless you're Boeing, Ford or Chrysler etc and seem to think that aircraft and vehicles designed for the government during WW II are somehow deserving of royalties.

It's not really a work OF the U.S. Government then, is it? It's a work of Boeing, Ford or Chrysler.

The whole thing about government works is meant so that manuals and regulations, forms and official working documents and products of the government (not government contractors) are in the open.

In the U.S.A. you can reproduce images of money all day, as long as you're not trying to counterfiet them by making an image that could be used in place of the real thing.

Those old US government instructional films on Youtube? Not copyrighted because they are a work of the US government.

U.S. government forms, manuals, pamphlets, regulations, and such? Not copyrighted.

The US government can have trademarks and patents though, IIRC the United States Marine Corps has patent and trademark protections on their MARPAT camouflage uniforms, but not copyright.


Yes and no. The vehicles and aircraft wouldn't have existed unless the government hadn't requested them, and the companies weren't given right to sale over any of the designs. They may have been designed by the companies, but they weren't intellectual property as such, and the government was the only purchaser. They did hold patents to specific technology though. I fail to see how Boeing, as an example, can expect to be paid royalties when a model manufacturer makes a scale model of a B-17. Boeing actually went on record as saying this was to offset any costs in liability should someone sue Boeing because little Tommy chocked to death on a model part that was boxed in something with the name Boeing on it. Chrysler is notorious in protecting "Jeep". Recent kit manufacturers have gotten around paying by simply listing the kit as "4 x 4 light utility vehicle". And the irony of the Jeep story is that Chrysler didn't design the thing in the first place.

This isn't actually a first for Canada. With the reappearance of the Winnipeg Jets, the government decided the old RCAF logo was now available for lease at the right price.
 
2012-09-11 09:43:25 AM  
FTFA:
"The Mint has an Intellectual Property Policy in place to protect its IP assets, which includes coin images, and ensure their appropriate use. In instances where an approved use is being made for commercial gain (as would be the case with an ad campaign or selling music CDs), royalty fees are applied,"

What exactly about that is asinine?
 
2012-09-11 09:49:31 AM  

silverjets: FTFA:
"The Mint has an Intellectual Property Policy in place to protect its IP assets, which includes coin images, and ensure their appropriate use. In instances where an approved use is being made for commercial gain (as would be the case with an ad campaign or selling music CDs), royalty fees are applied,"

What exactly about that is asinine?


Currency being used to generate commercial gain, those jerks!
 
2012-09-11 10:01:36 AM  

NutWrench: PunkRockLawyer: "Gunning said he had no idea the mint would charge for images of its coins."

Not to be a dick, but it's the guy's own damn fault he owes money. If you're going to be printing copies of an image, you first check what permissions you need. This is common sense.

He doesn't get my sympathy or my pennies.

Well, since taxpayers paid for the creation of the mint and continue to pay for its ongoing operating expenses, it was reasonable to assume that any products of that mint wouldn't be subjected to trademarks. I know *I* was surprised.


The Royal Canadian Mint is owned by the Canadian government, but it is not funded by taxpayer money. Not only is it expected to cover its own operating costs, but is expected to turn a profit.
 
2012-09-11 10:06:11 AM  
Question: What if you gave your child a line of lyrics as their middle name? If you copyrighted that lyrical line, would any entity using your child's name for commercial purposes be liable for copyright infringement?
 
2012-09-11 10:07:34 AM  
www.amhistoryuscurrency.com
 
2012-09-11 10:14:29 AM  
I'm looking forward to his next album, "Fark the Canadian Mint".
 
2012-09-11 10:20:20 AM  
NASA says "neener:"

i.dailymail.co.uk

/yeah, it's hot
 
2012-09-11 10:25:28 AM  
FTFA: For every 2000 copies of the album he creates he has to fill out an application, wait for approval and be charged $1,200.

He has to send off a form to get permission to pay a fine? That is seriously f-ed up.
 
2012-09-11 10:26:49 AM  

Prince George: So a real penny is worth one cent but a picture of a penny is worth $1.60. That makes cents.


Yeah, he should just pay them with pictures of pennies that are worth $1.60
 
2012-09-11 11:08:33 AM  

capt.hollister: The Royal Canadian Mint is owned by the Canadian government, but it is not funded by taxpayer money. Not only is it expected to cover its own operating costs, but is expected to turn a profit.



Hence awesome shiat like this:

i.thestar.com

What 6-12 year old isn't going to spend $30 of their parents' money on that?

/Kids still like dinosaurs, right?
 
2012-09-11 11:09:03 AM  

Discordulator: abhorrent1: I was on the fence about canada. I am no longer.

/dicks

Ditto.

/Canadian


You must not be of French descent.
 
2012-09-11 11:39:37 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-09-11 11:48:22 AM  

stampylives: [i.imgur.com image 500x175]


Came for this.
 
2012-09-11 11:48:35 AM  
This is the country that puts a picture of the queen on one side of the coin and a beaver on the other (what's that all about). Or the Newfie firing squad on the back of the $50:

www.cointalk.com
 
2012-09-11 11:52:33 AM  
Seriously? they are fazing out its use and yet they get in a huff about a pic of it used on an album cover?
 
2012-09-11 12:10:14 PM  

Loomy: capt.hollister: The Royal Canadian Mint is owned by the Canadian government, but it is not funded by taxpayer money. Not only is it expected to cover its own operating costs, but is expected to turn a profit.


Hence awesome shiat like this:

[i.thestar.com image 615x308]

What 6-12 year old isn't going to spend $30 of their parents' money on that?

/Kids still like dinosaurs, right?


Forget the 6-12 year old kids; my studying-to-become-a-paleontologist girlfriend would totally dig a coin like that!
 
2012-09-11 12:19:11 PM  

grimlock1972: Seriously? they are fazing out its use and yet they get in a huff about a pic of it used on an album cover?


Copyright holders tend to protect their works. You don't see authors giving their books away when they go out of print either.


At any rate, since the Mint is government, one would expect Crown Copyright to apply. If this guy was smart, he would switch future printing runs to show a pre-1962 design penny, as those should be public domain.
 
2012-09-11 12:49:32 PM  

Thudfark: Silverstaff: Thudfark: Nem Wan: StrangeQ: [upload.wikimedia.org image 220x220]

I wonder how long until the US government takes this as a cue to go retroactively sue the Cobain estate

In the United States, works of the U.S. government and other governments are automatically in the public domain.

Canadians might want to look into copying this law. We won't even charge a fee for it.

Yeah, unless you're Boeing, Ford or Chrysler etc and seem to think that aircraft and vehicles designed for the government during WW II are somehow deserving of royalties.

It's not really a work OF the U.S. Government then, is it? It's a work of Boeing, Ford or Chrysler.

The whole thing about government works is meant so that manuals and regulations, forms and official working documents and products of the government (not government contractors) are in the open.

In the U.S.A. you can reproduce images of money all day, as long as you're not trying to counterfiet them by making an image that could be used in place of the real thing.

Those old US government instructional films on Youtube? Not copyrighted because they are a work of the US government.

U.S. government forms, manuals, pamphlets, regulations, and such? Not copyrighted.

The US government can have trademarks and patents though, IIRC the United States Marine Corps has patent and trademark protections on their MARPAT camouflage uniforms, but not copyright.

Yes and no. The vehicles and aircraft wouldn't have existed unless the government hadn't requested them, and the companies weren't given right to sale over any of the designs. They may have been designed by the companies, but they weren't intellectual property as such, and the government was the only purchaser. They did hold patents to specific technology though. I fail to see how Boeing, as an example, can expect to be paid royalties when a model manufacturer makes a scale model of a B-17. Boeing actually went on record as saying this was to offset any costs in liabilit ...



It's complicated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_status_of_work_by_the_U.S._gov e rnment

But for the most part, if a US government employee creates it, it's public domain.

Contrast this with Crown copyright.
 
2012-09-11 12:53:27 PM  

Uncle Tractor: NASA says "neener:"

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x616]

/yeah, it's hot


This has got to be NASA trolling future man and possible alien societies.

"Humans first landed a craft on Mars in 1909..."
 
2012-09-11 12:58:55 PM  

Strix occidentalis: Loomy: capt.hollister: The Royal Canadian Mint is owned by the Canadian government, but it is not funded by taxpayer money. Not only is it expected to cover its own operating costs, but is expected to turn a profit.


Hence awesome shiat like this:

[i.thestar.com image 615x308]

What 6-12 year old isn't going to spend $30 of their parents' money on that?

/Kids still like dinosaurs, right?

Forget the 6-12 year old kids; my studying-to-become-a-paleontologist girlfriend would totally dig a coin like that!


Paleontologist joke ?
 
2012-09-11 01:08:08 PM  

capt.hollister: Strix occidentalis: Loomy: capt.hollister: The Royal Canadian Mint is owned by the Canadian government, but it is not funded by taxpayer money. Not only is it expected to cover its own operating costs, but is expected to turn a profit.


Hence awesome shiat like this:

[i.thestar.com image 615x308]

What 6-12 year old isn't going to spend $30 of their parents' money on that?

/Kids still like dinosaurs, right?

Forget the 6-12 year old kids; my studying-to-become-a-paleontologist girlfriend would totally dig a coin like that!

Paleontologist joke ?


You saw exactly what I did there.
 
2012-09-11 01:35:45 PM  
I can't find it right now, but it reminds me of a ruling in Europe where a photographer was found to have violated the IP of the designer of a chair in a picture he took of the chair.

Totally silly. No reasonable person can be expected to manage that rabbit hole level of recursive copyright/IP law.
 
2012-09-11 01:39:30 PM  
TheDirtyNacho:

I would have thought the government contracting out work would fall under your first link. Especially if the contract is defence related.
 
2012-09-11 02:05:50 PM  
Does anyone else think it would be funny if he paid the $1200 fine all in pennies?
 
2012-09-11 02:52:50 PM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: Does anyone else think it would be funny if he paid the $1200 fine all in pennies?


He should send them a picture of a seven legged spider.
 
2012-09-11 03:15:54 PM  

Saber: No More Pennies is the gayest name for an album ever.


I heard that a lesbian group is already planning to cover the titular song as "No More Penises"
 
2012-09-11 03:20:09 PM  

quatchi: Suggestion: He should just skip the picture and glue a real Penny onto each album.

Instant WIN in the comments section.


Done in one. Edit the image for all future covers to remove the penny, and replace each with an actual penny glued or otherwise secured to the cover. It circumvents the IP argument, gives fans a cute story about their album, and makes the first 2,000 copies instant collector's items. Win/win...
 
2012-09-11 04:31:17 PM  
He should've used THIS penny (NSFW)
 
2012-09-11 04:47:32 PM  

MadAmos: I can't find it right now, but it reminds me of a ruling in Europe where a photographer was found to have violated the IP of the designer of a chair in a picture he took of the chair.

Totally silly. No reasonable person can be expected to manage that rabbit hole level of recursive copyright/IP law.


Not that silly, it depends on the circumstances. Same thing can happen in the US, should said chair picture be used for a commercial purpose. Google "property release". Very important if a commercial image contains a highly identifiable design or landmark.

Europe IP also tends to respect a concept called "moral rights", which allows a creator to exercise some control over how their creation is used or altered, even if the usage is licensed perfectly. In the US this is gray.
 
2012-09-11 04:55:23 PM  
I see the problem. Her Majesty's Mint has the OCD. Mr. Gunning failed to first knock three times.

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-09-12 10:35:11 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: Does anyone else think it would be funny if he paid the $1200 fine all in pennies?


It's been done to death, and most of the time the person accepting them makes the asshole who brought them in spend all day counting them to prove they have as much money as they claim.
 
2012-09-12 03:47:33 PM  

fluffy2097: Science_Guy_3.14159: Does anyone else think it would be funny if he paid the $1200 fine all in pennies?

It's been done to death, and most of the time the person accepting them makes the asshole who brought them in spend all day counting them to prove they have as much money as they claim.


Also, in Canada no one has to accept a payment in pennies for more than $0.25. He could try to pay $1200 in pennies, but they would be under no obligation to accept.
 
Displayed 44 of 94 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report