 |
| Posted: Thu Sep 7th, 2017 10:32 am |
|
1st Post |
| Posted: Tue Sep 12th, 2017 01:14 am |
|
2nd Post |
RichardG
Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 17th, 2015 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
I don't own the Tavern Games deck, so I don't speak from first hand experience.
However, my quick YouTube search this morning provided a hand full of reviews.
The consensus is that it's cheap and nasty, out of proportion and printed on flimsy paper.
People are even GIVING their copy away! 
So Kenji need not be too concerned by Tavern Games 2010 rip off, it seems.
But some-one, someday will use his scans to do it 'properly'.
And then there'll be that old moral dilemma...
To buy or not to buy - that will be the question!
I know this is a hot topic, but to my way of thinking, Kenji will own the original.
And everyone else will only ever own a copy.
Will the value of Kenji's original deck go down?
I very much doubt it.
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13th, 2017 10:49 pm |
|
3rd Post |
Abrac
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 123 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
"Meticulously reproduced" but not meticulous enough to Photopshop over the damaged part.  I swear some people's stupidity is beyond belief.
Last edited on Wed Sep 13th, 2017 10:49 pm by Abrac
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 12th, 2017 04:36 pm |
|
4th Post |
truelighth
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1069 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Kenji does own the original. And I don't think the value of a real Pam-A will go down, with whatever reproduction. There is nothing like the real thing. Unless someone manages to even reproduce the way they were printed (with chromolithography and a method not used these days).
The scans of the Roses&Lilies on Kenji's site are from my deck, with my permission.
Reason Kenji is sharing these images without any copyright, is to share them with the whole tarot community. We have the ability to do so, so we do. Unfortunally there is always someone who thinks they can make money from it 
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 12th, 2017 04:42 pm |
|
5th Post |
truelighth
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1069 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Ok, I couldn't help myself. I saw reviews for the article. I added my own.. I don't think the seller will appreciate it.. hahaha.
But well, if you write that the original is on very bad thin paper and that you got the images directly from a museum copy, then you are just lying.
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15th, 2017 07:38 pm |
|
6th Post |
DeToX
Member
|
Does Kenji actually state that those scans/photos of the vintage decks without copyright or creative commons licence? Even the lowest form of IP licence would state how the photos were to be used, and some reference to commercial use would be included as to whether it was permitted or not. If it is ambiguous then copyright applies and the deck bootlegger could be threatened with legal action or requested to share profits etc. as whilst the deck cannot be copyrighted, his particular digital rendering of them can. Last edited on Sun Oct 15th, 2017 07:38 pm by DeToX
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17th, 2017 11:23 pm |
|
7th Post |
Abrac
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 123 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
There's a strange notice on kenji's blog."[Illustrations from the Rider-Waite Tarot Deck® reproduced by permission of U.S. Games Systems, Inc., Stamford, CT 06902 USA. Copyright (c)1910 by U.S. Games Systems, Inc. Further reproduction prohibited. The Rider-Waite Tarot Deck® is a registered trademark of U.S. Games Systems, Inc.]"
That's the first time I've ever heard of ©1910 US Games.
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 24th, 2017 12:49 am |
|
8th Post |
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
LOL!!!
|
|
|
Current time is 05:46 pm | |
|
|
|
