Crazy Climber Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Is anyone else thinking a Bible box would be cool? like the God Cartridge? Exactly! Except cardboard and the same specs as an original atari box Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennybingo Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I vote for the RSC crucifix limited edition!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HatefulGravey Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Maybe he doesn't want to make Moises a joke. Or, on the contrary, he lost faith and don't want to spread the word. He could just as easily do nothing on this. I can't see 100 of these selling and even that is a very small number of people in the grand scheme of things. I over looked the religion in all this to be honest so I guess that could play a role I didn't account for. Good call. You could very easily be right or very close to the truth of the matter. I'm pretty sure all the legal talk was started just to scare other bidders away to possibly get it cheaper, good plan actually but at 10k it didn't work, lol. Now the auctions over so we can move on and wait for reproductions. Is anyone else thinking a Bible box would be cool? A Bible box would be pretty cool actually. Maybe a custom shaped box that is the two tablet the 10 commandments were on. As you unfold the 2 tablets the game is suspending in the middle gate fold style. Either way, I'm truly sorry I started this legal mess back up. Lets all hug and move along. Deal? I have to learn to program for the 2600. I think Satan might be a bit under represented in the gaming library. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Necron99 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 maybe some macaroni pictures inside the box? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raskar42 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 needs a box shaped like the ark of the covenant. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulBlazer Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 To bring this back on topic: The bid has been holding at $8,777 for a while now and there's about 21 hours left to go. I do expect to see some last minute bids and it probaly will sell higher then ngan2's copy, cause it's in better condition, and it will probaly will sell for about $11-12k and it will exceed the reserve which was $10k. Of course, those are just educated guesses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buyatari Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) double post Edited September 11, 2012 by Buyatari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buyatari Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 If a painter paints something, and no longer owns that painting they have no rights to it. So, they create the painting, the store the painting and forget about it, someone else buys the place it is being stored 20 years later and find the painting, and sells it for a huge profit. Ownership was transfered, the painter no longer owns the painting and has no right to get paid for it because it sold. Reproduction paintings are not illegal, counterfeit painting are. There is a legal difference. Artists have been fighting for more legal protection for years now and much has changed. These days unless they sign it away the illustrator owns the rights to the image. They do not need to own the physical artwork to retain this. Also in some places (Europe and California for example) the artist is entitled to a percentage of any sale of any original artwork no many how many times it is sold. Here is California http://www.legal-new...california.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegamatrix Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Wow... there sure are a lot of long posts in this thread to scroll through and not read. My scroll wheel finger is all tired now. I need a nap. Also, people who don't bother to trim out the 7 or 8 embedded layers of quotations have no idea what is like to browse a topic on a phone or tablet. Oh, the humanity! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss 2600 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, people who don't bother to trim out the 7 or 8 embedded layers of quotations have no idea what is like to browse a topic on a phone or tablet. That's one of my pet peeves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Also, people who don't bother to trim out the 7 or 8 embedded layers of quotations have no idea what is like to browse a topic on a phone or tablet. Oh, the humanity! I can disable nested quoting.. ..Al 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icemanxp300 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I can disable nested quoting.. ..Al I would like that if what you are saying is only qoute what the last person had said, and not what he/she qouted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I would like that if what you are saying is only qoute what the last person had said, and not what he/she qouted. Yes, that's how it works. I just turned it on. ..Al 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+5-11under Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Yes, that's how it works. I just turned it on. ..Al Yes, that's how it works. I just turned it on. ..Al Bummer, I liked the nesting. It was fun. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Bummer, I liked the nesting. It was fun. LOL. You can always get back to the original post by clicking the little icon next to the user's name in the quote box, if you need more context. ..Al Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+thegoldenband Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Will nested quoting still work if you do it manually? A lot of websites include only the most recent post while reply-with-quoting, which works well. EDIT: I guess I could just try it: I'm a quote.I'm a quote in a quote.And I'm more of the first. So I guess the answer is yes! Sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buyatari Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 More on the artwork. I just caught this part at the end of that page. I didn't know this part of the California law. If you buy a piece of artwork and damage or alter it (even though you own it) the artist can come after you for this. Side Bar – Destruction of Artwork: In addition, an artist whose work is intentionally or is, through gross negligence, altered or destroyed without his or her permission has the right to injunctive relief, compensation for the loss, payment of attorney's fees and expert witness costs, and potentially punitive damages -- even though the artist no longer owns the work. (California Civil Code §§ 987 and 989) This part I knew. Federal Law: The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, is a Federal law that protects artist “moral rights” regardless of any subsequent physical ownership of the work itself, or regardless of who holds the copyright to the work. It covers more types of visual art than the California counterpart but it does not have an automatic royalty component. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegamatrix Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Cool! Thanks Al, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy Climber Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 More on the artwork. I just caught this part at the end of that page. I didn't know this part of the California law. If you buy a piece of artwork and damage or alter it (even though you own it) the artist can come after you for this. Side Bar – Destruction of Artwork: In addition, an artist whose work is intentionally or is, through gross negligence, altered or destroyed without his or her permission has the right to injunctive relief, compensation for the loss, payment of attorney's fees and expert witness costs, and potentially punitive damages -- even though the artist no longer owns the work. (California Civil Code §§ 987 and 989) This part I knew. Federal Law: The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, is a Federal law that protects artist “moral rights” regardless of any subsequent physical ownership of the work itself, or regardless of who holds the copyright to the work. It covers more types of visual art than the California counterpart but it does not have an automatic royalty component. Well, I'm not saying in any way that artists shouldn't have some rights/etc to there work but you have to remember California Law is kind of like Willy Wonka's chocalate factory compared to the rest of the world, hell, kids can't even get a toy with there happy meal over there...if it's even a happy meal anymore....it's probably a soy patty with hummus and a glass of almond milk...sounds more like a saddy meal 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cebus Capucinis Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 kids can't even get a toy with there happy meal over there...if it's even a happy meal anymore....it's probably a soy patty with hummus and a glass of almond milk...sounds more like a saddy meal With free Zoloft in every package to offset the depression! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raskar42 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) Well, I'm not saying in any way that artists shouldn't have some rights/etc to there work but you have to remember California Law is kind of like Willy Wonka's chocalate factory compared to the rest of the world, hell, kids can't even get a toy with there happy meal over there...if it's even a happy meal anymore....it's probably a soy patty with hummus and a glass of almond milk...sounds more like a saddy meal With free Zoloft in every package to offset the depression! what a crazy place, i'll have to visit it sometime. Edited September 11, 2012 by raskar42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeusExMachina Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 what a crazy place, i'll have to visit it sometime. You better visit it soon before it files bankruptcy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss 2600 Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 You better visit it soon before it files bankruptcy. That's why I left Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Random Terrain Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 That's why I left We all know that you really left for Albert. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zwackery Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I'm pretty sure all the legal talk was started just to scare other bidders away to possibly get it cheaper, good plan actually but at 10k it didn't work, lol. Well, I know I had a part in the legal talk by asking if Mr. Stack had sanctioned such an action. I raised that particular question because many people were just automatically assuming that a reproduction would be made, and to me that assumption had some problematic thinking behind it. I had no intention of trying to scare away bidders (nor do I believe that such a tactic would even work). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.