Thursday, December 9, 2010

Apologies for Two

I have recently been shown that one of my recent super-heroic drawings posted on Facebook was a bit too 'graphic' or sexual for the general pop, especially for those who have struggled with the false expectations of their sex by such exaggerated human anatomy. There are those who are deeply hurt and offended by a Christian man portraying nude figures of imposing proportions, and I hear their pain.

I reply: But these aren't nudes. They are figures in spandex - but that is very close to a nude proper when done in line drawings, so I apologize for my poor visual interpretation.

So to all the MEN out there who were offended by the six-pack abs, amazing lats and triceps of this square-jawed paragon of manhood I DEEPLY APOLOGIZE.

I know that men who see this may find themselves crying themselves to sleep at night, begin binging and purging to somehow get down to the mythical 5% body fat and will spend countless hours in front of a mirror, applying makeup and false padding to increase their slim jaws to manly levels.

To these poor souls I say:



Well, maybe I shouldn't say THAT, but the way to the exit door of self-hatred is usually a gentle slap in the face.

Now on to my second apology...

I have been informed in three different ways by the same individual that a corporation registers the rights to a trademark to protect the creators from outside theft of their identity.

That sounds noble and good.

Only, when those who are so protected want to use the trademark FREELY without that corporation's control, they are informed they cannot use it.

Well, they CAN use it - if they pay a lot of money. Somewhere between $45,000 - $70,000.

Those figures may be wrong. I am going by hearsay from one of the creators:

Jeff Dee writes:
A decade or so ago, when Jack and I were trying to get Scott to pass the V&V license to other, *active* publishers (R. Talsorian and White Wolf both made offers), Scott put a pricetag of $45,000 on the V&V rights. In an email exchange with me a few weeks before Jack and I re-released V&V ourselves, Scott raised that pricetag to "$50,000 to $75,000". Make of that what you will.

But if they are right - or if the offer was made, it sort of destroys the "I just registered it to keep you safe" argument.

In either case, one of two things are happening - false stewardship or owner's rights.

If they are holding the trademark to PROTECT the Creators and the Creators want it back, as in "Thank you for helping keep us safe - we'd like our trademark back now." and the answer is "No. We keep it FOR you. Safe." then we've got a problem. It is not a real stewardship. It's a false one - akin to the Steward of Gondor in LOTR.

If they offered the trademark for SALE, then they are saying "It's ours and you can buy it for $$$$." But then they are not acting FOR the Creators. Nope. The Creators are merely the most interested buyers [among others, theoretically] who's original concept is now being held hostage until a ransom is paid.

Well, I hope I don't offend anymore protective and corrective people who are writing me 1,000+ words to teach me what is right.

You don't need to explain so much. Keep it simple.

"If your right eye offend thee, puck it out!"

So if you do not like my drawing, DELETE it. Keep your heart safe, please.

"Do not steal!"

Hey - whose property is it anyway? Those who create or those who watchdog it? I'd say give it to the creators - and may God bless you for doing so.

That's it.

Have a very Merry Christmas!


No comments:

Post a Comment