SCANS DAILY

UPDATED 3/1, 9:43 PM–A request to the hit and runners.  By that I mean the people who swing by for the express purpose of hurling blame, invoking Gail Simone, calling me names and departing.  You might want to consider taking the time to read the thread.  Read it in its entirety, read the most recent posts, whatever.  The chances are you will already see your comments responded to (since the H&Rs are pretty much all saying the same thing) by myself, various fans, and Gail.  Honestly, I don’t expect this message to have much impact on the H&Rs, but I figure it’s worth a shot.

Did you ever hear of Scans Daily?

I had not.

Kathleen informs me that it began as a site on Live Journal where individual scenes from comic books were put up and commented upon. Apparently, this included certain panels from “Young Justice” to which homoerotic subtext was ascribed. It’s a shame I never had a chance to see those. That would have been funny.

But somewhere along the way, it morphed into posters giving page by page summaries of new comics, complete with the entire pages. Writing a critical review and posting up a panel or a page to illustrate a point falls under fair use. Posting over half the book while saying, “This happened, then this happened, then this happened,” is not remotely fair use and a blatant copyright violation.

On an “X-Factor #40” thread on CBR, someone put a link to it. This put it on my radar, and–I suspect–on other people’s radar as well.

Conscientious people have reported to me when they see flagrant copyright violations of my work (typically entire Star Trek novels being posted online). So I did the same thing, informing Marvel of the scans.

Did Marvel then shut them down? No. Because before Marvel legal had an opportunity to do anything, the scans had already been removed for being a violation of terms of service of Photobucket, the site that enabled the posters to put up pictures on line. Perhaps the CBR links put the site on PB’s radar as well as mine.

I did, however, use my wife’s Live Journal account to make my presence known. A fan asked if I had informed Marvel about the scans. An honest question. I replied honestly. I said yes, I had, but that the scans were pulled before Marvel took any action.

Two days later, Scans Daily was shut down completely. Purely a guess: Photobucket complained to Live Journal and LJ said, “Enough’s enough.”

The reaction on the blogosphere? Peter David got Scans Daily shut down.

Well…no. Again: My intervention wound up having no impact. And besides, if anyone got Scans Daily shut down, it was the fans themselves. Some will own up to that reality. Many, I suspect, won’t.

PAD

601 comments on “SCANS DAILY

  1. Which part of “PAD is not the copyright holder, Marvel is” do you not understand?

    I never believed that he was. I was under the impression that he contacted Marvel so they could have their legal department remove the images. I’m just wondering if it would have been easier to just simply ask the scan_daily mod team to do it without involving lawyers.

  2. Before contacting Marvel to have their legal department take action, did you ask any of the moderators at scans_daily to remove the images from X-Factor #40?

    PAD never said he contacted Marvel to “have” them do anything. He informed Marvel about a violation of its copyright, that’s all.

    I’m just wondering if it would have been easier to just simply ask the scan_daily mod team to do it without involving lawyers.

    It would have been presumptuous of PAD to make that decision for Marvel. Since Marvel’s intellectual property was being abused, it made sense to tell them and leave the ball in their court. Their property, their choice about how to proceed.

    Besides, Marvel’s lawyers never had a chance to “get involved.” Before they could contact anyone involved w/SD, Photobucket removed the images. This has all been covered in this thread many times over.

  3. Rick,

    He didn’t because he did not own the images and did not have the legal ability to have them removed. Beyond the obvious issue that’s been discussed is the tiny issue of Peter not being able to make that decision at all.

    It was Marvel’s property. Peter could have told SD to pull the images because of violations of fair use and copyright, SD could have done it and then word could have gotten back to a Marvel Comics that was all fine and dandy with SD putting that much of any given book on the site. I think he could have found himself in even more trouble than SD fans are trying to make for him now had he represented himself to SD as (basically) a spokesman for their legal arm and, as an employee with no connection to legal, made SD do something that might or might not have been something that Marvel would have wanted SD to do.

    As it was, Peter, sent word to the legal owner of the images in question and said basically that he didn’t know if this was good with them or not and that they might want to take a look at it. That’s all he did because that’s all he could do. As he said way above, he would have contacted them directly over half of a Fallen Angel issue being published on SD since he legally owns that, but he had no true legal standing to say anything to SD about Marvel’s property.

  4. No, Rick. I didn’t contact the legal department to have the images removed. I contacted the legal department to inform them of a copyright violation. Whatever action Marvel chose to take or not take was entirely up to Marvel.

    I’m going to draw a connection, Rick, between what you’re saying and what I’m repeatedly hearing from other S-D denizens. It goes like this:

    “Scans has been around for five years. Marvel must have already had some knowledge of its existence.”

    Let’s say that they were right. Let’s say Marvel DID know. If they did know, and they weren’t taking any action, then implicit in that argument is that they were okay with it.

    Now along comes Peter David who says to the mods, “Take down this material immediately.”

    What does that get me? An angry call from the legal department or, better still, Joe Quesada, saying, “What the hëll do you think you’re doing? We knew about this and chose not to take any action. You’re not a Marvel rep. You’re not a lawyer. You’re not the copyright holder. Where do you get off sticking your nose into this? Who do you think you are?”

    I’m not afraid to go toe-to-toe with Marvel. God knows I’ve done it in the past. But if I’m going to do it, then I’d better be dámņëd sure I’m right. And I can tell you right now, if I had taken it upon myself to act as Marvel’s representative in a copyright matter, I would be dead wrong in doing so.

    So basically what you’re asking me is: Peter, why didn’t you risk taking the brunt of Marvel’s anger instead of turning that anger upon a bunch of people who were illegally enjoying copyright violation?

    Do I really need to answer? Does any reasonable person?

    PAD

  5. PAD,

    First off thanks for coming by the site.

    Second, as much as we interwebs folks deny it we tend to have a massive sense of entitlement. We feel that our “right” to get information free no matter what should outweigh any cost. The problem with this, naturally, is when that “right” impedes against the right of someone else. Then, we become selfish me-monkeys who don’t give a crap about our common man. Case in point, Peter’s right to get paid for his hard work versus SD Fan’s “right” to violate copyright law and get something for free.

    I’m curious- would SD readers still be onboard with the site if there was a small monthly fee required to see these previews, a fee cheaper than a comic book but more than free? or would they complain that SD was screwing them and that they wouldn’t go there anymore?

    Plain and simple, this is about people not getting something for free that shouldn’t have been given in the first place. SD decided to pack up and go home after Marvel came by asking for their ball back.

  6. I only mention this because it may be important later, but I did not misuse quotes in my posts to you. If you look again you’ll see that the section inside the quotation mark was cut-and-pasted directly from your text, and the paraphrase was absolutely not quoted and not inside quotation marks. I would never misquote in a contentious internet conversation; the use of paraphrase is in questionable taste, but there was no misquoting or misuse of quotation marks on my part.

    That said, I wrote a more reasoned response to you here:

    http://megatexas.livejournal.com/169445.html

    I hope you can find time to read it when things are calmer.

  7. Geoff Sebesta Says:

    I hope you can find time to read it when things are calmer.

    “…when things are calmer”? On the Internet?

  8. I skimmed through his response, Mike. Here’s a summary for you:

    Geoff knows waaaaay more about internet culture than PAD, so PAD should really listen to him.

    Lots of people want to get stuff on the internet for free, so they should be able to.

  9. I am a former S_D member and poster. I am a fan of obscure comic book characters. And I am a fan of yours, as well. Your revamp of Jamie Madrox taking him from being a “pile on the numbers” one-man-mob character to a character with depth and a much more interesting take on his powers made me pick up your titles.

    Your writing made me pick up the books.

    S_D introduced me to the changes.

    So, what did I post on Scans_Daily? I’m comfortable saying. I was a back issue person. Gone are the days when your local comic book store had tables and tables of longboxes full of back issues. For back issues, now, you’re forced to try and find them in trade, or to search for individual issues on eBay. And comics, bless them, are very self-referential.

    If you don’t know what they’re talking about, you’re up a creek. There’s only 22 pages, and they’re not going to recap for you.

    Take one of the new titles in Marvel. New Avengers: The Reunion. What you have here is the return of a character and character relationship that has been gone for fifteen years. I was a fan of Mockingbird. MY comic collection includes every issue of the West Coast Avengers. This probably says something sad about me, but I’ll accept it. I loved that character.

    Scans_Daily was not as excited about this prospect as I was. So I posted scans from back issues. I introduced Mockingbird to them as a character–samples of her relationship with Clint, showing how she’d had a very dark character arc encompassing abduction, molestation, murder, divorce, espionage, heroism, and then her untimely death just to sell the comic.

    Scans_Daily began to rally for the New Avengers: Reunion title. It was no longer an unknown character with no powers, it was Mockingbird and Hawkeye, and interesting. And I did it without ever posting more than the legal limit out of any comic. You’d have seen MORE in a preview.

    Someone did the same thing for me, with Madrox. “You remember him as this loveable doofus, but look at him now–interesting enough to have his own title!”

    Scans_Daily has had its moments of blurring the legal line. Rabican and its other moderators were good about jumping in and smacking people who did, too. They were responsible, and responsible enough that THEY had the post taken down.

    We welcomed creators. We welcomed debate. And yes, we welcomed hyperbole–it’s the internet, you’re going to get it anyway. Because we were passionate about comics, about our favorites, about the treatment of the familiar faces and titles we loved.

    I’m sorry about the impression you took away from our community. I am sorrier, however, that my community is gone. “Rebuild,” you say. It took us five years to get the thousands of comic enthusiasts we had. Each voice in that community was important to it (from the thoughtful discussions to people screaming obscenities to the perpetual “Motto”ing). This was never four or five friends BSing about comics that can do it anywhere, or any time. It was something built, nurtured, moderated, and as self-policing as any online community can be.

    S_D will be missed.

  10. From Geoff’s Livejournal entry:

    “Let’s put it another way; consider this statement:

    ‘They have invented a machine that allows any human being alive to hear any song, watch any movie, or read any book, for free, instantly.’

    What reason can you think of that is good enough to destroy this machine?”

    Well put. Even twenty years ago, this would’ve been the stuff of the wildest sci-fi fantasies. Now it’s at all of our fingertips. The internet is the future and the future is a beautiful place.

  11. “They have invented a machine that allows any human being alive to hear any song, watch any movie, or read any book, for free, instantly.”

    Except for the “instantly” part, we already had that. It’s called shoplifting. The security in most stores isn’t that great, it can be beaten without too much difficulty.

    Nobody is disputing that the internet *can* be used to upload everything and give it away for free. And Emily, nobody is disputing that people will enjoy the results of taking something for free. People always get a benefit from the things they do, otherwise they wouldn’t do them.

    But just because you *can* do something, that doesn’t mean you have the right to and it doesn’t mean other people aren’t right to object.

    Do you really think you’re paying for ink and paper when you buy a comic? You can buy ink and paper much cheaper from a stationary store. When you hand over money for a comic book, you’re paying for the service of creating that story. You pay a barber for a haircut, not the scissors. You pay for a comic book so that the people who made it can afford to make some more.

    Playing the information-wants-to-be-free song doesn’t change the fact that the work to make this stuff isn’t free. Yeah, you’re not taking a physical object, but the comic makers performed a service and they did it for the purpose of getting paid. The people on Scans Daily knew they were skirting that process for their own benefit.

    This isn’t new. People like to say that the internet changed all the rules, but it didn’t. This is the same problem that came about when the printing press was invented. Suddenly it was possible to make tons of copies of books with very little work, then sell them. It didn’t even matter if you were the author, the printing press was what mattered. But the authors couldn’t exist with that system, so copyright was invented. They deserve something for their work, so we established that right. That’s the same issue we have today, the internet didn’t change a thing, it just gave everyone a new ball for the same old game.

    This isn’t about whether or not you *can* do something. It’s about the right. What PAD did was right. He did not overreact, he alerted Marvel, which was a completely responsible thing to do. If you think shutting down the site was an overreaction, blame the people who made the decision to shut down the site, but know that PAD wasn’t that person. He doesn’t owe anyone an apology and nobody will ever feel better from trying to make him the villain.

  12. Jason M. Bryant Says:
    March 6th, 2009 at 11:35 pm

    This isn’t about whether or not you *can* do something. It’s about the right. What PAD did was right. He did not overreact, he alerted Marvel, which was a completely responsible thing to do. If you think shutting down the site was an overreaction, blame the people who made the decision to shut down the site, but know that PAD wasn’t that person. He doesn’t owe anyone an apology and nobody will ever feel better from trying to make him the villain.

    Sure they will. If they make PAD the villain, it means that what they were doing must have been legitimate, and possibly even good and noble.

    “…the sophistries of villains…”

  13. We welcomed creators.

    Well, I was welcomed with imprecations, anger, and informed that the space was not intended for me. Granted, it wasn’t uniform, but it was sufficient that had Live Journal chosen not to shut the place down (again, an outcome I did not intend or desire) I would gladly have put it to my rearview mirror.

    My favorite assertion that the fact that I write strong women characters was no proof that I respected women. Of course, you just know that if I wrote stories in which women were consistently servile, beaten down and shoved into refrigerators, you just know that would be held up as proof that I hated women.

    PAD

  14. Peter David Says:

    My favorite assertion that the fact that I write strong women characters was no proof that I respected women.

    Early in my brother’s career, one (female) reviewer was all indignant that Baen Books had forced the author to use the male pen name “David Weber”, saying that Path of the Fury‘s strong central female characters could never have been written by a man.

    (That’s my second-favourite story from Dave’s early days with Baen – my favourite was the time he called them up to talk to Jim Baen, and whoever answered the phone asked him who was calling, and, when he gave his name, said “Oh, yeah – mike’s brother.” I don’t know for sure, but i’m willing to bet that that was someone who worked there who, at the time, i’d known for twenty-three years.)

  15. Peter, I’m not saying this to start a šhìŧ storm, but two pieces of recent information arrives in the past three days:

    First, Rich Johnston over at LiTG this week (http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=20361):

    “SCANTASTIC

    The Scans_Daily story gets curiouser and curiouser.

    People who had posted excerpts of Marvel titles on the now-cancelled Livejournal comics scan site have received letters from Livejournal’s abuse team not only reprimanding them for posting copyright material, but also telling them they are forbidden from showing the contents of the letters to other people or reposting the letters anywhere.

    Which is, apparently, a new one for LiveJournal.”

    And here is the link to the “forbidden” letter in question. Mind you, this was NOT posted on livejournal, as livejournal stated that if it were to be posted there, the user in question would lose their account. I assume they wish to avoid a šhìŧ storm themselves.

    Peter, I like your stories, and I’ve followed your work for years. I even had the pleasure of interviewing you at SDCC two years back, and you were a gentlemen. Same can be said for when I saw you at Comic Book Club. I don’t blame you for scans_daily going down, because it could have been anyone. What I will say, however, is that the community residing inside scans_daily was not an evil, copyright infringing place. Usually, we discussed comics with civility, and went out and bought books BECAUSE they were posted, as opposed to simply reading scans and laughing at those who spent money on books. I cannot speak for the minority of users who abused the service, but the majority did not. I’m sorry to see you were mistreated by the minority when posting over there.

    Anyway, here is the post in question, with Livejounal and Marvel legal letters included. http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/4436 While we may never know if it was Marvel who took down scans_daily itself, I am sad to see Marvel’s legal department going after individual posters like this. Can’t stop the legal machine though. Ce la vie.

    1. Ian, why would you say, “Marvel’s legal department going after individual posters like this”?

      They aren’t. Those letters are from Livejournal. LiveJournal is going after individual people. Perhaps this is at Marvel’s encouragement, but we don’t know that and either way it’s still Livejournal’s action.

      Plus, why would you be sad about that? You said it yourself, it wasn’t the whole community causing problems, it was a minority of users. Going after the minority that was abusing the service sounds like the exact right thing to do.

  16. Well, Jason, I’m just not certain as to whether or not these guys are being singles out because they were abusers, or whether they were just the latest to post a few Marvel scans and therefore are at the top of the list. That’s the only reason I’m sad about it at the moment. The legal depts. usually have trouble differentiating between repeat offenders and major abusers and the innocent parties, is all. RIAA is the obvious example, but that’s almost too obvious.

  17. What I will say, however, is that the community residing inside scans_daily was not an evil, copyright infringing place.

    The latter assertion is proven wrong because, were they not a copyright infringing place, Live Journal would not have declared they were in violation of TOS regarding copyrights and shut them down.

    As for “evil,” well, the actions of people in the community resulted in Live Journal shutting them down. Rather than take personal responsibility, the response of a number of them was to demonize me, vandalize my wiki entry, shout for boycotts. and endeavor to wreck my reputation. What definition of “evil” would you like? Morally reprehensible? Causing harm? I don’t know for sure that the term applies, but a case could be made for it. You tell me.

    PAD

  18. PAD, I don’t agree with everything Ian says, but I think his point about “evil” goes back to him saying that the troublemakers were a small minority of the people from Scans Daily. It seems like a lot when all the bad people come here, but I’m thinking they’re still the minority.

    Not everyone who posts on PeterDavid.net is the best example of the rest of us, either.

  19. PAD, I don’t agree with everything Ian says, but I think his point about “evil” goes back to him saying that the troublemakers were a small minority of the people from Scans Daily.

    Well, that’s why I said “a number of them.”

    Even so: Let me put it to you this way. Let’s say that people urge you to move to a community. Good schools, almost non-existent crime rate, etc. And you move in and you’re there exactly one week, and within that week, your house is broken into; your kid comes home bloody because someone beat him up; and then an arsonist sets fire to your house.

    It’s easy to say, “You shouldn’t judge the entire community by the actions of only three people.” And it really is only three people, and you know the majority of the people are law abiding and decent hearted. Doesn’t mean you won’t put that place to your rear view mirror at the first opportunity.

    I heard a very vocal “minority” declaring that they were never going to read anything of mine again. I don’t recall seeing a very vocal majority declaring that this condemnation was wrong and that they were going to mount a campaign to buy more copies of my work in order to counter it. By and large all I see is, “People really shouldn’t be yelling at you, but it’s too bad you ruined their fun.” Basically I’m told I should give them the benefit of the doubt. Let’s just say I have plenty of reason for doubt and no benefit.

    PAD

  20. All fair points, PAD.

    The one counterpoint I would make is that I wouldn’t expect the good people from Scans Daily to come here nearly as much as the bad apples. People who don’t think you’re responsible have no particular reason to seek you out.

  21. The latter assertion is proven wrong because, were they not a copyright infringing place, Live Journal would not have declared they were in violation of TOS regarding copyrights and shut them down.

    Peter, as a regular user of LiveJournal who has seen communities get shut down for spectacularly dumb reasons, I have to say you’re giving the people at LJ a little too much credit, here.

    You are correct in that they should be directing their rage at LiveJournal and not at you. But don’t assume that LiveJournal is thinking as rationally as you are. They could have given the mods a chance to set things right instead of nuking the community entirely. They chose the nuclear option.

    Is it right? Is it fair? At any rate, it’s done, and new communities have already sprung up in the place of Scans Daily, so it’s as moot a point as a point can be mooted.

  22. Sheila, PAD didn’t say that Livejournal took the right action. He said that they took the actions that they took because Scans Daily was in violation of TOS regarding copyrights.

    I don’t believe PAD has ever said that shutting down the entire community was the right thing to do. In fact, I believe he said he’d still like to read the Young Justice remix stuff.

  23. Jason, the problem is that LJ shutting them down isn’t necessarily adequate proof that they were, indeed, violating copyright, given LJ’s documented history of fail. (And this from a gal with a permanent account. Go figure.)

    That’s not to say that they weren’t violating copyright, just that Peter reached for a dodgy bit of evidence to back up his claim when he asserted that particular point. The fact that some people from Scans Daily themselves admitted that they were posting perhaps more than they should have is more dámņìņg evidence than LJ shutting them down is.

  24. Okay. If the argument is that there is even more solid proof than what PAD mentioned, I can’t argue with that. I read a recent interview with the Scans Daily mods that made it pretty clear to me that they knew what they were doing wasn’t in the clear and just hoped not to get noticed.

  25. PAD-

    Glad to see you noticed that.

    Goota be honest, this whole multi-platform conversation has been a list of cliche’s. One side yelling “EVILPIRATES!/COPYRIGHT!/lostsales!” and the other yelling “FAIR USE!/freepublicity!/notthewholething!”

    The site was pushing it (severely), but saying they were cutting into sales is, unless you are suggesting people seeing a work they won’t like and not buying it is the reason, at best misguided. At the same time, they did at best strain the definition of fair use to the breaking point.

    As to fault, at this point it’s pretty clear what happened, so that is not an issue. Marvel had the sight taken down

    At the same time, I believe you (PAD) when you say marvel told you they were already down, and am betting they were.

    Do I blame you? No. Do I think you were the direct cause? No. Did your actions lead to the sites closure? Eh, not really the big issue for the most part as far as I’m concerned.

    I will say, however, that I find it hard to believe you are actually suggesting the discovery of copyright infringement requires going strait to the copyright owner, and that immediate action is required if they weren’t asked before hand, given that you have spent a deal of time in Fan Fiction circles yourself, centers of blatant severe copyright violation, though i suppose your views on such things could have changed.

    I suppose it could have more to do with it being posting of actual existing work as opposed to derivative, but that would lead me into a tangent for another day.

  26. The one counterpoint I would make is that I wouldn’t expect the good people from Scans Daily to come here nearly as much as the bad apples. People who don’t think you’re responsible have no particular reason to seek you out

    Okay. But unless there are various “good people” putting up “Support PAD’s comics!” threads in the reconstituted sites, what I said still stands. Not feeling that I would be particularly welcome over there, I haven’t checked.

    PAD

  27. As to fault, at this point it’s pretty clear what happened, so that is not an issue. Marvel had the sight taken down

    No, they didn’t. They didn’t give a rip about whether the site remained up or down; they just wanted their IP protected, something that they are legally required to care about.

    I will say, however, that I find it hard to believe you are actually suggesting the discovery of copyright infringement requires going strait to the copyright owner, and that immediate action is required if they weren’t asked before hand, given that you have spent a deal of time in Fan Fiction circles yourself, centers of blatant severe copyright violation, though i suppose your views on such things could have changed.

    Let me put it this way: In my fan days, I published Star Trek fanzines. They contained plenty of fanfic. I dutifully included the Paramount copyright notices (which is, I believe, more than Scans ever did) but was fully aware that at any time I might receive a C&D from Paramount. Had that happened, I would have shrugged, shut it down, and said, “It was nice while it lasted.” I wouldn’t have bìŧçhëd about it, I wouldn’t have moaned about it, and I sure as hëll wouldn’t have said that copyright holders had no business spoiling my fun.

    PAD

  28. You were within your rights to do as you did, but I’m disappointed that you chose to exercise those rights.

    I’m going to be getting rid of my old Hulk and Aquaman issues and Trek books in the near future. They’re still as good as they ever were, but I’m not going to be able to read them anymore without thinking about Scans Daily and getting depressed, so I may as well pick up some pocket money and clear some more shelf space. Maybe someone else will enjoy having them. For the same reason, I doubt I’ll ever buy anything of yours again. Even if it was good (as it probably would be) I wouldn’t be able to really enjoy it.

    I’m not even sure why I’m bothering to post this. It’s not personal, and it’s not like you could really do anything to fix the situation at this point. I guess I just felt like you should know.

  29. As of today, Peter David books are banned from the new scans_daily, so that you don’t get offended by someone posting your stuff. Just so you know. From the post:

    “Just a heads up guys, PAD has made it pretty clear that he’s not comfortable with our community, and that he’s willing to involve the legal department of his employer, to prevent our posting snippets of his work. So no PAD scans, even under flock. While he’s been more accepting of our posting older works, he’s also made noises about wanting people to ask for his permission before scanning and sharing even small portions of his work.

    Let’s respect his wishes on this.”

  30. So, basically, Ian, instead of getting permission, the new SD is going to same old crap that got the old site shut down… but ‘respect the wishes’ of a single author. Rather than, you know, actual seek out permission from Marvel.

    I wonder who will draw their ire next?

  31. I’m not even sure why I’m bothering to post this. It’s not personal, and it’s not like you could really do anything to fix the situation at this point. I guess I just felt like you should know.

    Let me help: you want to punish the guy for exercising his legal rights not to have people steal his stuff and it’s not enough to punish him, he has to KNOW he’s being punished. Also, it may serve as a warning to anyone else who might try to protect their rights. Is that helpful? Jeeze, at least the others who did this had the guts to admit they were doing it.

  32. “Just a heads up guys, PAD has made it pretty clear that he’s not comfortable with our community, and that he’s willing to involve the legal department of his employer, to prevent our posting snippets of his work. So no PAD scans, even under flock. While he’s been more accepting of our posting older works, he’s also made noises about wanting people to ask for his permission before scanning and sharing even small portions of his work. Let’s respect his wishes on this.”

    Well, the last time I was over there it was made abundantly clear that I wasn’t welcome, so I’m not going to make the mistake of going over there and saying this. But feel free to post the following in response:

    The position espoused is not remotely correct. I have EXPLICITLY said that I have no problem with “snippets.” A few panels here, a page there. Anything that remotely falls under the realm of fair use is of no concern. And the comment about wanting people to consult with me over reproducing “even small portions” of my work is, again, 180 degrees away from what I said. What I had said was that–giving a for-instance–if people wanted to produce LARGE amounts (such as the 50% that was reproduced of X-Factor) of work to which I own the copyright (such as Fallen Angel) that they but had to approach me and we could likely work something out. Here I was trying to put forward an example of how I’d be willing to work with Scans regarding work where I have the legal option to make that call (unlike that Marvel work) and it’s being twisted and distorted to make me come across as uncooperative. I really can’t fathom it.

    PAD

  33. I’m not even sure why I’m bothering to post this. It’s not personal,

    Yes. It is. Admit to it, don’t admit to it, it’s up to you. At this point I’m so tired of people showing up to tell me that they’re going to stop supporting my work because I told a copyright holder that their rights were being violated, thus spoiling the poster’s fun in breaking the law, that I really don’t care anymore.

    PAD

  34. Vlad,
    This is way beyond RIDICULOUS! For the umpteenth time, PAD was not responsible for SD being shut down and it is incredible that you are upset at PAD because a site you enjoyed which was engaging in ILLEGAL activities, was shut down because the “community” couldn’t control themselves and felt they were entitled to do whatever they wanted. Now that you found out you weren’t you want to act like a spoiled child and get rid of PAD’s stuff because you hold him responsible for robbing you of a guilty pleasure, yet you feel it was perfectly okay to rob the copyright holders by letting people read stuff for free.
    You want to get rid of PAD’s stuff, including “Hulk” and “Trek”. Fine. Give me them for cover price and I’ll buy them and I’ll give them to my fiance’s son and the stuff I would have doubles of, I’ll donate to my local library. Heck, that stuff played a huge role in getting me addicted to comics and I’m sure it would have the same effect on others. What is depressing to look at for you would be greatly appreciated by those I would give them to. So make me an offer.
    But, of course, it’s not personal. I would say “Bulldip!”, but in a way I think it has nothing to do with PAD at all and everything to do with the incredibly overblown sense of entitlement you and many other members of the SD community have and have displayed on this thread.
    I mean, really, most of you guys have been so unreasonable, selfish and illogical you actually have me, PAD, Bill Mulligan and Craig Ries – and vitually every other regular on this board who disagrees with each other – all agreeing on something, which is a sure sign of the apocalypse I think.
    Because most of you guys are just being petty. I would have more respect for you if you chose to no longer read PAD’s stuff because of his political views. I still wouldn’t necessarily agree with it, but at least you could possibly and plausibly argue you were making your decision based on your personal convictions.
    This, however, just comes across as petty and spiteful and a lot of misguided anger because you’re not getting your way, and that I have no respect for.
    All kidding aside, I would hope all the new faithful readers PAD has picked up with the Stephen King books, his Spike comic being mentioned in “TV Guide” , his “New Frontier” and “Sir Appropos” comics and the various X-crossovers will VASTLY outnumber the readers he will lose because they are spoiled brats and think they are going to teach him a lesson.
    Why don’t you treat this as a life lesson instead: You keep doing the wrong thing and eventually you will pay for it, one way or another.
    Let me know how much you want for those comics.

  35. you actually have me, PAD, Bill Mulligan and Craig Ries … all agreeing on something, which is a sure sign of the apocalypse I think.

    Do I get to pick which Horsemen I get to be? 😀

  36. Well, hey, if we’re picking Horsemen, just make sure that War gets to be a hot redhead. (Can you tell that I recently reread GOOD OMENS?)

  37. Which 4? The traditional Conquest, War, Famine, and Death of the Bible or the newer Pestilence, War, Famine and Death of rock and roll album covers?

    And I call dibs on anything not Pestilence or Famine. How uncool are they?

  38. The hilarious thing is that the moderators on Scans declared they wanted to have the community decide whether to keep the ban in place. I could have saved them some time by predicting they’d go thusly: “We hate his guts. Screw him. Never speak of him again. He’s waiting in the high weeds to try and destroy the community.” Endless variations and wash, rinse, repeat.

    Meanwhile, the best thing of all will be what happens a few months down the line when some poor bášŧárd who is new to the site decides to post a couple of pages of “Fallen Angel”and suddenly fifty people are going to start screaming at him, shouting, “Don’t you know there’s a ban on Peter David’s work!”

    And the artwork will be taken down immediately by the mods.

    Why?

    Because they will be taking aggressive action for the purpose of protecting their property, i.e., the community.

    It’s so perfect; the glorious irony. The residents of Scans support a total ban on showing any of my work because they understand the concept of taking aggressive actions to protect their property. But they condemn me because Marvel and/or Live Journal took aggressive actions to protect their property.

    And so the ultimate hypocrisy is finally brought to the surface.

    Feel free to post that, too, if anyone cares to.

    PAD

  39. Your last post says it all, Peter. It really does. The hypocrsy in the SD community is vast and deep.

  40. As disappointed as I am at seeing scans_daily disappear, I respect Peter David’s position on this.

    Scans_daily at its best gave us a look at obscure or obsolete work that had either fallen out of copyright or was simply not available for love or money. Had everyone in the group stuck to presenting this kind of material, along with ‘teasers’ of work currently available for sale on the racks, there would have been no problem.

    The fact that there was a problem has nothing to do with the whistleblower and everything to do with the actual copyright breaches – otherwise, regardless of who complained, it would still be around, as fair use is allowed. That’s easy enough to understand.

  41. For the record, Scans_Daily really tried to crack down on excess scans from one comic.

    And to Peter, if he’s reading this we they found homoerotic subtext in everything. It was half for a laugh.

  42. I’m not sure if this is getting through because this website is being odd. But I just noticed the bit about the S_D ‘ban’ on peter david’s stuff. Good lord. What an abysmal idiotic move. That probably helped kill it.

  43. scans_daily tuned me into the world of comics in a way I hadn’t interacted since crawling through my dad’s old comic book pile as a kid.

    Through the site I learned that there were people like me, willing to take sarcastic or sexually explicit or serious discussions about things we find in comics.

    Through scans_daily I learned about the classics and the new that I was too young for and later too old to get into without significant prodding.

    After my father went past the phase to buy comics, I didn’t have anything beyond the 1990s published comics at best.

    After my father, not even my brother bought new comics.

    After discovering whole entire series and storylines on scans_daily, previously unknown comicbook verses that I had no idea even existed, I continued my father’s old passion.

    Now my shelves are fitted with pretty much as much of The Authority I could find. I love it that they’re a pastiche of the common superhero tropes, that the team’s philosophy was so refreshing, and of course, that the spirit of the 20th century was supposedly born in my country. I was so glad my country, Singapore, was actually mentioned in a comic book.

    Comic book stores in the heartlands for Singapore are more or less gone. The ones in the malls are pretty big. It’s intimidating for a young girl to venture into a boys’ realm without really an understanding on the culture and names in the comic book industry. The last big story arc I ever knew was really just the Phoenix Saga (no joke).

    Scans_daily not only opened the door to The Authority to me, it opened the whole store to me. I have no fear when I enter the stores now. I know what I want, I can give the names, I can spare a few minutes discussing the storylines with the shop clerk and hearing suggestions from him on any new series that he felt might catch my eye. Scans_daily made me part of a sub-culture I never knew I’d fit in before.

    Things are said and done, but the whole idea of copyright infringement…

    I wonder if a fan uses the wallpaper you have on your own site right now, or someone decides to create an eomticon, using materials off the internet or otherwise, I wonder how far you’d like to take the slippery slope.

    And a great irony is how, since I buy graphic novels with much more confidence, I decided to pick up 1602 by Gaiman, and on the way, grabbed 1602 Fantastick Four on a whim.

    That’s right PAD, you owe scans_daily a purchase of one of your own books.

Comments are closed.