Controversy over BDSM symbol (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

mistoferin -> Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 2:08:46 PM)

I found these two articles while doing a search for something else. I am sure it will be old news to many of you but I had not seen this before. I found it interesting and thought others might too.

http://emblemproject.sagcs.net/history1.htm

http://www.atruerose.com/rose/bdsmsymbol/myth.htm




xxblushesxx -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 2:22:16 PM)

Very interesting.
Seems to me that if he had a copyright, he could easily prove it.
And if not, he may be spending quite a bit of time in court.



camille65 -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 2:23:26 PM)

Quagmyr is a nice guy to deal with and I've worn stuff made by him for years.



CalifChick -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 3:01:50 PM)

It seems the whole unfortunate mess could have been avoided had he only understood that a void (a hole) is not significantly different from a dot in design.  For example, a happy face with eyeholes is considered the same design as a happy face with black dots for the eyes.

Cali





EvilKitty -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 3:05:46 PM)

I was "leather" before I was "BDSM", so I've been wearing (& painting) the Leather Pride flag for many years. One of the reasons I've never bothered to learn Quagmyr's trikele is because it had already had many meanings for me. As a pagan, I know druidics who use a similar emblem. As an SCAer, the Kingdom I live in uses a blue & white triskelian emblem. As an artist, I was doodling celtic spirals with 3 arms, ie. a "triskele" since my teens, and, as a SciFi fan, I'd seen something similar on Star Trek somewhere.
So, the "new" meaning of a triskele, as long as it's metal & black with holes in it, seemed shortsighted to me. All the more so when, early on, we knew that Tony had given the flag emblem freely to the pansexual community & that the artist of the triskele was being VERY proprietary about his piece of art. It seemed from the beginning like a way for him to make money & nothing else. It didn't seem very pretty or distinctive or very much like I had imagined after reading "O".
I've always loved the Black & Blue & Black & Blue & always with a Heart aspect of the Leather Pride flag. I've had stickers on my car for over a dozen years; sometimes long strips of the colors, sometimes a flag shape, sometimes cut into the shape of the state of Florida. No one but BDSMers have EVER approached me about them & it's always nice to be waved & smiled at on the highway!
Whew, long-winded this afternoon! There's my 2 pfennig's worth!
hugs from Lady Cat



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 3:46:34 PM)

To me it was a different symbol before I ever knew anything about bdsm, so it didn't transfer well to me.  I prefer the leather pride flag.

http://www.collarchat.com/m_1461716/mpage_1/key_triskellion/tm.htm#1461726
BDSM symbol

http://www.collarchat.com/m_580675/mpage_1/key_triskellion/tm.htm#580677
How well known is this emblem?

http://www.collarchat.com/m_258395/mpage_1/key_triskellion/tm.htm#258396
federal highway admin symbol

http://www.collarchat.com/m_1299988/mpage_1/key_symbol/tm.htm#1300485
The bdsm Triskele



darchChylde -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 3:59:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: EvilKitty

as a SciFi fan, I'd seen something similar on Star Trek somewhere.



"The Gamesters of Triskelion"

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Gamesters_of_Triskelion

An episode of Star Trek with numerous heavy BDSM and Ds themes (albeit nonconsentually).



Alumbrado -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 5:11:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

I found these two articles while doing a search for something else. I am sure it will be old news to many of you but I had not seen this before. I found it interesting and thought others might too.

http://emblemproject.sagcs.net/history1.htm

http://www.atruerose.com/rose/bdsmsymbol/myth.htm




Very much a non-issue...... no one gets to say what is and isn't copyrighted but the copyright office, and the people who have a problem with Quagmyr are barking up the wrong tree.  If they don't like it, use something different.



CruelDesires -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 5:23:07 PM)

It seems to me that the person who wrote that article was looking for more sensationalism and drama then actual fact. Especially with her "supposed" sources and "unmentionable" people who all claimed he ripped them off or took advantage of them. Even after Quagmyr disputed her information via email with names and dates and items received, she still did not come forward with enough information to back up her story. That alone discredited her in my eyes and made it mostly fictional speculation and fluffy sensationalism.

CD



housesub4you -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 5:45:28 PM)

Years ago I ran into Quagmyr at a fetish show.  I saw the emblem in question and asked him if I could use it in some BDSM eq. I hoped to sell.  He agreed and you know what he wanted as a fee????  A single recipe for a veggie dish, no cash, nothing but a recipe that he said I could email him whenver I had the time.   He signed a release on the spot and that was that.  No lawyers no nothing. 

I find the claims he demanded money from unnamed sources very hard to believe    



VioletAshes -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 7:58:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: camille65

Quagmyr is a nice guy to deal with and I've worn stuff made by him for years.


As have I - very happy - good bloke.



MasterFireMaam -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 8:36:05 PM)

You cannot copyright something that has existed for millenia. Three-spiralled symbols have. If he owned all of BDSM, he could register it as a trademark, however.

Master Fire



Alumbrado -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 9:05:34 PM)

That blatanty ignores the facts. 

Trees have existed as symbols for millenia, are you saying that no one can copyright their personal artistic visual depiction of one?
3 chord songs have existed for centuries...no one can copyright a new 3 chord song?

Nonsense/



MasterFireMaam -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 10:28:20 PM)

Good point. So, I did some research.

From http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp
What Is Not Protected by Copyright?
Several categories of material are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection. These include among others:
  • Works that have not been fixed in a tangible form of expression (for example, choreographic works that have not been notated or recorded, or improvisational speeches or performances that have not been written or recorded)
  • Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring; mere listings of ingredients or contents
  • Ideas, procedures, methods, systems, processes, concepts, principles, discoveries, or devices, as distinguished from a description, explanation, or illustration
  • Works consisting entirely of information that is common property and containing no original authorship (for example: standard calendars, height and weight charts, tape measures and rulers, and lists or tables taken from public documents or other common sources)
-----
I think it's the last point that's being argued; the bdsm triskele has no identifying marks on it. Yes, it has an attached explanation, but the emblem itself isn't different enough from a generic triskele to count a copyrightable material, apparently...or surely he'd have the copyright by now. Here's an example of a copyrighted triskele:
http://www.universoul-llc.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=1196

Which can be seen listed here, as copyrighted, along with all the other triskeles versions copyrighted in the US. The list does not include the BDSM triskele, so my guess is if he has really applied, he has apparently been denied or it is still in arbitration...or he has decided to copyright it under another name. If you can find it, let us know.

Master Fire



Alumbrado -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 10:40:23 PM)

Reading the whole thing, any work of art is copyrighted as soon as it is created. Because it isn't registered does not mean that it must not be copyrighted or must not be original.

And taking an existing object and creating a new version of it, be it tree, triangle, triad. or triskelion, can be such a work of art.

After that, if somone wants to employ that as their own symbol, they can... they own the copyright.

Once Quagmyr changed the various facets of the old triskelions around enough, just like Warhol's soup cans, or the next art student to paint the Eiffel Tower,  it was his work, his copyright, whether he ever registers it or not.

So that aspect is not in question, until such time as someone backs up a claim that they created that exact version before he did, which quite frankly, I doubt will happen.

And as pointed out above, those who have an issue with his version being accepted as some sort of universal symbol are free to create or adopt their own.



rook42 -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 11:26:58 PM)

On the subject of the symbol itself: As others have stated, hang around enough spiritual people, and you'll see the symbol is NOT new or unique. On the subject of its depiction: try to copyright your own unique derivative of the cross, to use for a brand(Church, product, company, individual identifier, etc.); imagine a suit succeeding against any later churches or organizations that attempt to use a similar cross. How likely do you see this scenario?

Now... if you convince an organization that the cross they are using is in fact similar enough to your own copyrighted cross that they are inviting legal damages for using it... How justified do you think they would be in accusing you of fraudulent behavior, when they find you without copyright?

If he claimed the triskelion to be his work, and claimed copyright or demanded damages/payment for it, it would seem to be fraudulent. If he didn't, then it wasn't. If his depiction of a triskelion is in question, then it's a question of whether said depiction really differs in any serious way from existing depictions- not really a question that has answers until it shows up in court.

These articles claim that the copyright office told the author that they could not copyright the depiction for their own use, on account of the closeness of its relationship to similar ancient symbols. Either way, kharma will kind of work itself out. If there is any evidence of ANY goods with any monetary value trading hands based on the implication of copyright, and he does not possess said copyright, the amount of risk he would have opened himself to would far outweigh the gains. If any alleged victims of his alleged fraud is like me, and stores correspondence for a decade(meticulous and/or lazy), just let them mingle for a while and share information. I have enough faith in boredom, a human sense of justice, or just plain viciousness that something would come of it.

*shrug* There really isn't enough info to doubt either Quagmyr or the authors of the articles. Someone's in a risky situation, regardless. The stories look mutually exclusive. If this is the case, it would seem there is something criminal being done here, whether it be libel or fraud. I'm annoyed enough by drama that I'd enjoy seeing one of these parties feel a kharmic foot in their rectum about now.

Quick edit in response to post above: This is entirely true. However, your version MUST be different enough from previous versions to qualify as a version in and of itself. If the articles are true, then the accepted BDSM symbol is NOT.



CalifChick -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 11:27:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

And taking an existing object and creating a new version of it, be it tree, triangle, triad. or triskelion, can be such a work of art.

After that, if somone wants to employ that as their own symbol, they can... they own the copyright.

Once Quagmyr changed the various facets of the old triskelions around enough, just like Warhol's soup cans, or the next art student to paint the Eiffel Tower,  it was his work, his copyright, whether he ever registers it or not.



That's just it... he didn't change it enough.  Adding 3 dots (or in this case, "holes") to an existing design does not render it sufficiently different from the existing design to be considered a new design.  So whether he makes it official or not, it is not his exclusively (no matter how nice of a guy he is, or whether his demand for payment is a copy of a recipe).

Cali



rook42 -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/24/2008 11:47:05 PM)

<humor>
Ok... Just in case Alumbrado's argument is solid: I have officially created symbols consisting of a multitude of crosses, stars, animals of various species, trees, rocks, and genitalia... with yes... count them... 1-7 holes in them. More to follow, once I have documented the possible permutations, or devise a recursive program to make them for me to come up with.

In retrospect: Piercing fetishists have probably already gotten all of the permissible holes on genitalia covered.

<tangent>
*grin* By the way, a company (err... allegedly- Whilst I doubt highly they troll these forums, I wouldn't put it past their scary beast of a legal team) actually tried this same trick to copyright a HUGE variety of potential software code to sue would-be programmers with. Whether the suits go through or not(Not, if the defendants have the cash to stand up in court), it still gives justification lawsuits to threaten people with, without countersuits for frivolous legal action. Funny trick, but I'd rather it not become the norm, and I'd like to see it even less in the BDSM community.



Alumbrado -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/25/2008 4:30:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalifChick

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

And taking an existing object and creating a new version of it, be it tree, triangle, triad. or triskelion, can be such a work of art.

After that, if somone wants to employ that as their own symbol, they can... they own the copyright.

Once Quagmyr changed the various facets of the old triskelions around enough, just like Warhol's soup cans, or the next art student to paint the Eiffel Tower,  it was his work, his copyright, whether he ever registers it or not.



That's just it... he didn't change it enough.  Adding 3 dots (or in this case, "holes") to an existing design does not render it sufficiently different from the existing design to be considered a new design.  So whether he makes it official or not, it is not his exclusively (no matter how nice of a guy he is, or whether his demand for payment is a copy of a recipe).

Cali



And  how much did Warhol change the soup cans?  You don't get to say how much is 'enough'. Unless someone else shows they made the same changes earlier, it is his design.



CalifChick -> RE: Controversy over BDSM symbol (6/25/2008 6:30:37 AM)

I wasn't going with my personal, thought-up opinion Alumbrado.  I was going with the standards of the trademark office and how they have operated for many, many years.

Do you really think you could take a well known symbol (of a tv network, of a cereal manufacturer, whatever), stick three holes in it and try to claim it as your own?? 

Cali




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875