'>>10973251
Are you sure about that?
Personally the whole situation was blown way out of proportions and I don’t think either side was right in their way of handling the matter and I don’t think Scott should lose his channel. Ethan seems like kind of a crybaby about the whole thing when his pictures are just a figure on a white background that looks like it’s from eBay.';

'>>10973255
Interesting. On The Figure In Question, an email from Spector said that he was shutting down his channel. It's in the previous thread.

Let's keep the drama and names and such out of it please. How would you have handled it in the photographers situation? What would've been the right move?

I'm genuinely curious about this as it's an interesting topic amongst our community.';

'>>10973260
Scott did delist all his videos when he had sent that email, but they’re all back up now.
I would’ve personally reached out to Scott first, which he even admitted he should have done. Instead he hits him with the strikes randomly, doesn’t try to work with Scott in any way, and then goes onto other channels to try to spread drama about the whole situation. Yes, Junkman did the same thing about Scott’s side, but Scott didn’t reach out to Junkman. Ethan then releases all the emails which he know make Scott look bad, even though Scott’s whole job IS BASED AROUND THE CHANNEL. Scott can’t do his work while his channel is down and when he got hit with those strikes his channel was essentially dead as he couldn’t reach the dashboard to even potentially try to remove the striked videos.
TLDR: Ethan tries to act all holier than thou about the whole situation when in fact he was the one who caused all of this.';

'>>10973260
And what does it matter if we use their names? Anyone who knows anything about the situation knows them by now. Also, you said it was 30 strikes in the OP, but from what I remember it was over a 100 strikes.';

'>>10973251
Dont know either guys but If he went out of his way to remove the watermark, hes a thieving piece of shit and the photographer has every right to file claims.';

'>>10973277
That’s the thing, THERE WAS NO WATERMARK
ToysRUs used his photos in the past and yet he still never added a watermark
He’s made up these lies to try to ruin Scott’s good name';

'>>10973267
>doesn’t try to work with Scott in any way
This seems to contradict the emails back and forth with Spector and even the timeline that Spector himself presented. The photographer said he was willing to let Spector use his work, just as long as his website was linked. Hardly a ridiculous request. I do agree that filing the copyright strikes first was too much. If Spector ignored him it refused to work with him I could understand striking his channel.';

'>>10973251
I personally dont see photography as "your" art. It's no different from tracing a drawing. There's no energy sensed that insists that this photo of your toy standing in a snowy field suggest that this is yours and yours alone,
>ESPECIALLY<
after you posted it publicly. Now if you saved it enough to post it to something like a news source, magazine or National Geographic, then your art has more credentials that protect it';

'>>10973270
I'm trying to avoid the drama side of it. Like what you're doing by trying to claim it was more than 30 strikes when Spector has gone on record saying as such before changing his story. He tweeted it. The Figure In Question website has pretty clear receipts of the whole interaction between the two.

>>10973283
There were multiple watermarks that were removed. Now it seems like you're actively trying to muddy the facts here. Stop. Leave the drama out of this. This is something that should be discussed without your petty nonsense attached to it.';

'I don't give a shit about gay YouTube drama.';

'>>10973292
So myopic, anything done well can be art. I hired an electrician once to install a new breaker panel and the careful arrangment of the wires that all fit together perfectly was nothing short of a work of art. My dentist is another great example. After I shattered most of my front teeth in an accident, he made them look better than they ever had. Who is to say that he is not a sculptor just as talented as any other?';

'>>10973251
Really? A third thread about this off topic nonsense? Cmon OP, stop doing this already.';

'>>10973298
> I'm trying to avoid the drama side of it
POSTING THIS IS SPREADING DRAMA
Are you really that slow, OP? You didn’t get enough of an answer on this topic the past two threads?';

'>>10973292
Tracing a drawing is stealing though. Plagiarism isn't acceptable in most professional settings. You don't see photographer's work as theirs because you're a drooling retard that's never created anything. Getty pictures are watermarked and you can only use them freely after paying. You can't just take someone else's work and say lol it's mine now and not expect any shit.';

'>>10973251
If I were watermarking my photos, yeah I'd be pretty irritated at the fact someone else used them without crediting me. I don't know if striking his channel was the right move but at the same time, knowing how Scott is, just outright contacting him wouldn't have done anything either. So I don't really know how it should be handled, but it's pretty clear Scott is in the wrong with this.';

'Why does not Scott, a toy collector, simply photograph is own toys?';

'>>10973328
He doesn't buy toys just shitposts.';

'>>10973328
I imagine he's too lazy/untalented to do them himself. I mean, this is the guy who put out a graphic novel using AI art.';

'>>10973251
Can someone post an example of one of the guys photos with the watermark? I wanna see';

'>>10973336
His pictures suck.';

'>>10973350';

'>>10973350
You can barely even see the watermark, I honestly don’t fault scott for not seeing them.';

'>>10973350
>>10973352
Ethan didn’t watermark the image with who made the figure! Copyright strike him!';

'>>10973322
>>10973305
I stand corrected, but I still dont see how your art is protected if you posted it publicly from a less secure source like deviantart or even your own blog's hosting. But now I'm thinking about my stuff. People can just take my blog photos, so now im assuming i wont feel anything if it pops up on youtube or something. But now im thinking about "are there protections that will work against me somehow?"';

'>>10973322
Scott wasn’t claiming that those photos were his though, obviously they weren’t. I just think Scott didn’t think it was a big deal which most people don’t. It wasn’t like he was profiting off the photos really, the point of the video was his thoughts on the toys not the photos of the toys';

'>>10973251
Why not link the last thread? >>10962359';

'>>10973409
Because OP want to play dumb like he didn’t make that last thread, these are off topic as fuck and there’s a reason why that last one was autosaged.';

'>>10973411
And that the one before that was deleted.';

'>>10973411
I made the last thread, I didn't make this one. Also every thread gets autosaged after 2 weeks.';

'>>10973417
That thread got autosaged by a mod in the first day or two, go look at it, it’s only been up for 7 days.';

'>>10973418
Interesting, maybe Ethan got to the mods here too. Shame, there was a lot of good discussion in that last thread.
>Verification not required.';

'>>10973428
The last threads were clearly trying to get more drama going. This one seems more interested in the copyright side of it.';

'>>10973255
>>10973267
I only see 29 videos on the channel currently. There used to be a ton more. So I wouldn't say that its fully up and running yet';

'>>10973433
Nah, it’s still drama related. And it’s not even really toy related, but rather toy influencer drama which is not welcome here.';

'>>10973450
I'm just genuinely curious as to how people who regularly take photos of their toys would feel about the whole thing. I probably should've left it more vague, but I felt that it needed some context. I didn't even bring up the drama other YouTubers caused about this or other such nonsense.';

'>>10973450
This. Report and get theses idiots banned.';

'>>10973476
Why does anyone do anything?
Humanity is retarded.
I am sure people do weird stuff in your (prob 3rd world) country.
When's the last time you've pooped in the street?';

'>>10973470
Then why not ask it in the toy photography thread where photographers actually are? Making this whole thread is just asking for drama. If you’re actually genuine, I would delete this and go about asking a different way.';

'>>10973528
Present it then anon.';

'>>10973251
Mentioned it in the photo thread, but if I went out of the way to watermark my stuff, yeah, I wouldn't pretty pissed and probably do something to get them removed.';

'>>10973309
it's just the retrospammer trying to victory lap.';

'>>10973795
Has Michael officially commented on the matter yet? Im honestly very surprised he never put out a video about it.';

'>>10973251
You know for a marketing guy, you'd think his logo would look better than something made with Microsoft Word clip art.';

'>>10973434
Something weird is going on with his channel.';

'>>10973817
is it similar to something? how would you improve it?';

'>>10973260
Ethan Wilson uses his name publicly on his blog, it’s not like it’s doxing or anything when he literally waves it around on the site.';

'>>10973350
They were made with the clear intention of showing the figs as they are and nothing more.

That's why they're so useful that so many people over the years have stolen his work for reference.';

'>>10973292
>>10973255

You may not "see" photography as "your" art, but it is legally recognized as such.

Any photo you take is automatically "your" art, at least partially...

When you take a picture of someone else or someone else's art, then, unless there's a signed contract in the way, it's also partially "theirs" and would normally require the other part's permission to be used.

However, if you use that photo for journalistic purposes, like reviewing, then you don't need "permission" from the person or the person's art as long as it was legally obtained.

Ethan took those pictures for toy reviews. Had he published them only for the sake of publishing them with no reviews, then he probably couldn't have claimed copyright ownership.

Scott went and stole his work for his reviews/commentary. When Ethan took action Scott was sure that either he wasn't going to go through the trouble of copyrighting the photos or that they wouldn't let him copyright them.

Scott was wrong.

I hope Scott could just go and properly credit the past videos with Ethan's photos and keep his channel, which I loved even after Scott dissapointed me with this situation and the AI crap.';

'>>10974175
That's what's so wild to me. All Scott has to do to make this go away is drop a link to the dude's website on the videos in question. But he had to quadruple down and be a retard. Can't say he doesn't deserve it. This is just par the course for Scott.';

'>>10974242
It's actually impossible for Scott to admit he's wrong.';

'So tired of Scott's doomposting.';

'Isn't this like the fourth time he would delete his channel? I mean I can access it just fine right now, he just uploaded something yesterday.';

'>>10975531
He's a drama queen. It's the only way he can get anyone to pay attention to him.';

'>>10973251
I'd be pretty pissed if I went out of the way to watermark my shit and someone removed it.';

'Any updates on this?';

'>>10980105
Scott won. His Youtube channel is back and he's uploading new videos.';

'>>10980158
His viewers lost though as much of the back catalog is gone';

'>>10980158
I don't think we've reached the end yet.';

'>>10980158
>barely getting any views
>confused all his followers
>made a huge ass of himself
>quietly apologized to Ethan
Ok';

'>>10980412
This. If Scott considers this a win, I don't wanna know what losing is for him.';

'>>10980412
>>10980459
>normal viewcounts for his videos
>none of his followers give a shit about the drama
>most people are unaware anything even happened
Scott won. Ethan lost. Retroblasting eternally coping and seething.';

'>>10980794
>Brings RB up out of nowhere
That dude sure does own your anus lmao.';

'>>10980794
>normal viewcounts for his videos
I love how he consistently got 50k views a year ago and he struggles to break 1k now.
I hope Ethan continues to teabag the corpse of The Mighty Spector.';

'>>10980794
>"normal views"
If his 32k subs and 800 views average are normal, sure. Scott turbo fucked his channel with all the strikes and unlisted hundreds of videos. That translates to two red flags for YouTube and subtracts from his channel's total view count which means less promotion in the algorithm.
Plus you can't honestly say most people are unaware. His drama videos about this got way more views than anything else recently uploaded.
Michael meanwhile still stands by his hit piece and is sitting at 125k subs and reaching around 10k per video. But by all means, tell me how he's coping and seething when he doesn't even talk about Scotty.';

'>>10981454
>If his 32k subs and 800 views average are normal, sure
It is lmao';

'>>10980158

He didn't win.

He thought he won and he even disrespectfully celebrated in a video. But then YouTube told him Ethan had gone through the trouble of copyrighting his material so the legal vacuum he was exploting went away,

He told Ethan he was sorry and removed his channel for a couple days.

Now his channel is back but every past video with Ethan's photos is removed (and apparently that was like 90% of his videos lol) And every upcoming pre-recorded video has Ethan's photos "censored".';

'>>10980158

If you think Scott "won" by keeping his channel then who did he win over? LOL

Ethan only wanted proper credit. Had Scott done the right thing he'd still have his channel up with a 100% of his videos. He wouldn't have needed to pay a legal team nor lost 90% of his YT work.';

'>>10981520
>>10981534
You are homosexual';

'>>10981520
>And every upcoming pre-recorded video has Ethan's photos "censored
Holy shit are you kidding, he's really so lazy he can't just use a different picture? Holy fuck this guy.';

'>>10981539
So just politely agreeing to disagree with these other anons huh? Guess you lost too!';

'>>10981539
Scott still lost. Junkman lost. Ethan won.';

'>>10981454
>Scott turbo fucked his channel with all the strikes and unlisted hundreds of videos. That translates to two red flags for YouTube and subtracts from his channel's total view count which means less promotion in the algorithm.
I wouldn't be surprised if he's going through and trying to edit out Ethan's pics before making them public again. Remember, The Mighty Spector always has an ace.
>Plus you can't honestly say most people are unaware. His drama videos about this got way more views than anything else recently uploaded.
Of course they did you retard lmao, it's drama. Now go and read the comments, 99% are normies just confused why some of his videos are gone.
>Michael meanwhile still stands by his hit piece and is sitting at 125k subs and reaching around 10k per video
Comparatively his channel isn't doing any better than Scott's. The clickbait Lego video fucked him, his channel is flatlining. At least he's not as bad as Toy Polloi who bought like 70k subs but hasn't had any increase in views.
>But by all means, tell me how he's coping and seething when he doesn't even talk about Scotty.
Michael has been buckbroken ever since he lost the debate. Scott destroyed his mind.
>>10981520
>But then YouTube told him Ethan had gone through the trouble of copyrighting his material
Ethan desperately trying to retroactively copyright his content so he can submit more false claims lol
>>10981534
>He wouldn't have needed to pay a legal team
Are you the faggot on the He-Man World forum that thinks Scott had to pay 60k or some bullshit lmao. Always makes me laugh reading that thread and seeing you absolutely obsessed over Scott that you're making up all these conspiracy theories';

'At least Scott isn't a pedophiles like Lioconvoy';

'>>10982395
>I wouldn't be surprised if he's going through and trying to edit out Ethan's pics before making them public again. Remember, The Mighty Spector always has an ace.
Lmao I wouldn't exactly consider that a win, on fact isn't that exactly what Ethan wanted?

>Comparatively his channel isn't doing any better than Scott's.
Really? RB gets anywhere from 7K to 20K views a video. Scott struggles to pass 1K unless it's e-drama. Keep coping though lmao.

>Michael has been buckbroken ever since he lost the debate. Scott destroyed his mind.
More cope lmao. RB has been rightfully ignoring this. I'd like to see his take though lol.

>Ethan desperately trying to retroactively copyright his content so he can submit more false claims lol
Just admit you don't know how copyright works.

>Are you the faggot on the He-Man World forum that thinks Scott had to pay 60k or some bullshit lmao. Always makes me laugh reading that thread and seeing you absolutely obsessed over Scott that you're making up all these conspiracy theories
Ah I see. You have schizophrenia.';

'>>10973292
>I personally dont see photography as "your" art. It's no different from tracing a drawing. There's no energy sensed that insists that this photo of your toy standing in a snowy field suggest that this is yours and yours alone,
the kind of faggot who's afraid of AI kek
>MUH REAL ART!
tick tock bitch nobody will give a shit about your true art featuring furries in diapers in a year';

'Weird how people get anal over Scott's use of dumb photographs yet collect third party transformers of characters or 1/12 action figures that do not have express permission from the copyright holder.';

'>>10982649
It's not so much that he used the photos, it's that he was a scummy ass hole about it.';

'I wouldn't be upset about it but I also reject all forms of intellectual property as it's a violation of freedom of speech and expression so it might just be me. I've even let people take my photos and drawings and claim that they actually made it. Both parties in this situation sound like retards though.';

'>>10982581
>Lmao I wouldn't exactly consider that a win, on fact isn't that exactly what Ethan wanted?
No, he wanted credit. Now he gets NOTHING
>Really? RB gets anywhere from 7K to 20K views a video. Scott struggles to pass 1K unless it's e-drama. Keep coping though lmao.
So now it's 20k, not 10? His last 2 videos barely got 5k lol. With 125k subs he should be getting much more, that's why I said comparatively you retard.
>More cope lmao. RB has been rightfully ignoring this. I'd like to see his take though lol.
After he lost the debate he resolved never to say Scott's name publicly again. He broke his same promise about Junkman last month though
>Just admit you don't know how copyright works.
I didn't say he was trying to do that, you did lol
>Ah I see. You have schizophrenia.
No, I'm Lioconvoy.';

'>>10983450
>No, he wanted credit. Now he gets NOTHING
No, he gets the videos removed. Sounds like a win and you're still coping.

>So now it's 20k, not 10? His last 2 videos barely got 5k lol. With 125k subs he should be getting much more, that's why I said comparatively you retard.
His 5th most recent video is at 18k. Scott barely exceeds 1k.

>After he lost the debate he resolved never to say Scott's name publicly again. He broke his same promise about Junkman last month though
Who cares?

>No, I'm Lioconvoy.
Oh, it's this sped. How am I not surprised. You might genuinely have brain damage lol.

Scott gutted 90% of his channel. He lost. Junkman is a retard and loser and always loses. Ethan won. Retroblasting is a homo.';

'>>10983472
Reminder, Lioconvoy is a smelly fat retard that is childless and got clapped by two women on stream.
https://youtu.be/kOknZKbxL-o
https://youtu.be/x1DOZr03YDU';

'>>10983739
I'm not watching your gay discord drama.';

'>>10983450
When did Michael reference Junkman last month?';

'>>10983861
Did you not click on the pic in the post you tried to?';

'>>10983875
>tried to
*replied to';

'>>10983450
Is Michael admitting he beats Melinda?';

'>>10983472
>No, he gets the videos removed. Sounds like a win and you're still coping.
Actually the videos are still up, just unlisted right now. Scott's editing them to remove the photos so no trace of Ethan will remain.
>His 5th most recent video is at 18k. Scott barely exceeds 1k.
Lmao you want to keep going back further? Keep moving those goalposts champ.
>Who cares?
You, clearly lol.
>Scott gutted 90% of his channel. He lost. Junkman is a retard and loser and always loses.
Junkman just celebrated hitting 40k subs, his star is still rising. Scott's channel will recover from the false copyright claims. Meanwhile Michael is still seething about the Danoby barge shit from 5 years ago
>Retroblasting is a homo.
Hey you got one thing right at least';

'>>10984034
>Junkman just celebrated hitting 40k subs
Interesting. I wonder why he only averages 700 views per video.';

'>>10984226
Because most people realise he's a child of incest and just stop watching and then forget they are subbed to him.';

'>>10984269
What's wild to me is that he uploads like three videos a day. That means he's literally doing nothing else with his time. He apparently doesn't have a day job since he uploads so much, so I question how he managed to feed himself. You're not making substantial money with 40K subs and barely 1K views per video.';

'>>10984305
Dude, no one cares about your discord drama. Bringing up this random nobody YouTuber I've never even heard of before this place is the shittiest deflection I've ever seen.

Stop being mentally ill.';

'>>10984318
>Dude just shitpost like a seamonkey jungle gook and jam Ultra Magnus up my asshole

Kek, you third worlders are mentally ill.';

'>>10984330
I have to assume it's a bot at this point. Stop replying to it.';

'>>10973251
who da fuck literally';

'>>10984280
Pretty sure he has a job too but I don't remember what it is. Whatever he's doing on Youtube seems to be working for him though.';

'>>10985056
Hi Junkman. Looking for content for your next video?';

'>>10985056
How’d that ad work out for you? Get any subs or did you have to buy more?';

'>>10984034
I think people mostly just watch him for the toy e-drama, not the videos about actual toys or toy news. That is, given that it's mostly about 5poa Star Wars stuff with a bit of He-man potentially sprinkled in and some nostalgia catalog viewings or Kenner retrospectives. Most of the subjects to talk about those old lines are kind of already done. He has had an occasional video covering some new info but not that often as new info is hard to come by.';

'>>10981897
Junkman is having Mark Hamill guest on his Saturday live stream to talk about the brain worms he has that made him call Briben"joe bi wan"at a press conference.He Won!Ethan will NEVER get Mark Hamill to do his fagcast.';

'>>10984226
You're just jealous he has Mark Hamill slated to be on his stream to talk about his brain worms he contracted filming ESB.cope harder.';

'>>10985538
>>10985584
You're an idiot Junkman. Get a job.';

'>>10985538
If Mark Hamil isn't on his stream tonight I'm going to be so fucking upset.';

'>>10985538
So was Mark Hamil on his stream?';

'>>10989045
He didn’t even stream.';

'>>10989051
Watta fuckin loser';

'>>10989051
Keep on junkin'';

'>>10973251
All Scott has to do is re-up the vids without the photos and/or without altered/cropped watermarks. That's it. Personally I'd avoid anything that has to do with Ethan because he's stalking and looking for more excuses to issue a ton of copyright strikes.

"Yeah I know it only takes three strikes to take down a channel but I didn't mean for his to get taken down when I filed 30 of them." Yeah bullshit. Both sides are assholes.

>>10973260
>Let's keep the drama and names and such out of it please.
Oh fuck off, Ethan. The names are already out there.

>>10985538
Mark Hamill is a hyper-leftist asshole now. He deserves for his one legacy character to get shit on by Disney.';

'>>10990653
Looks like Scott re-public-d his videos. I wonder what he was doing by marking almost all of them as private.';

'>>10991753
He was re-editing them, and he did that thing Tyler Durden did in Fight Club, so now all of his videos have a single frame of Scott's erect, circumcised penis.';

'>>10991795
It's too small, I can't see it.';

'>>10991795
>He was re-editing them
That's what he needs to do. Just cut out anything that's Ethan's so Ethan can go bother someone else for attention to his web site no one knew existed until this soap opera bullshit occurred.';

'>>10992320
Sounds like Ethan won';

'>>10992353
I am sure he did because people who never knew his site exists now do.';