Stating that Anthony is “ripping off” all of these creators is pretty poor form.
11 Likes
I’m just sharing my honest opinion. I’m not attacking.
I’ve seen the KC app source minor youtubers and IG accounts that aren’t typically seen as competition, but with the amount of 1st to market information provided on CHU, it’s weird that you just never really see them credited for anything on the app.
I don’t think there’s a way for an outsider to definitively know if the spoilers here are being used by other apps. If you take note of which books are updated after CHU spoilers go up though, you may see a trend. May not just be the timing that’s suspicious.
I don’t get why some are so offended or surprised by Anthony’s concerns here…
5 Likes
From your perspective, anyone who flips a book is ripping off the publisher, retailer and creators… we’re all guilty as charged profiting off their hard work when we take a book that we bought at $4 and sell it for $20, or $50 or a $1000.
Nuff said, you’re argument is invalid to me! Perhaps you should again, rethink what you’re actually implying because if you ever sold a book for more than cover price, you are now “ripping off” the publisher and creators and even the retailers cause they’re now losing money while you’re “exploiting” them from their “work”… 
1 Like
Because it’s irresponsible to publicly defame an entity without solid proof.
The shop, writer, artist and publisher entered into a voluntary transaction and parted with said property at an agreed amount.
I paid for it. I own it. It is my property to do with as I wish.
It’s a gigantic difference…
Nope, you’re profiting from their work for your own gain. You’re exploiting them… you may own the paper but you do not own the actual work within it as it’s copyrighted material. If you truly owned it, you could make copies of it to sell…
You do realize that Anthony only spoils books he buys right? Under fair use act, he’s doing nothing illegal. He’s not ripping anyone off. From your perspective, if that were the case under rip-off and exploitation, every creator from movies, to books and such when a bad review is written they could now legally go after them for depriving them of potential profits.
Geez man… get the F outta here with your nonsense!
3 Likes
How am I defaming them? I am pointing out that week after week I post spoilers and they change their picks of the week. Lol. Not defaming at all.
1 Like
Imagine paying a monthly fee to be told Agents of Atlas will be on the last season of Agents of Shield or Firestar will be in Shang Chi and introduce mutants. Just to delete the wrong info like it never happened.
4 Likes
This is like watching a car wreck, I can’t look away!
Just to interject, legally this is copyright infringement and not covered by the Fair Use Act, partly based on how much is being copied among other things. Technically anything over a single panel is pushing it. Since previews are released by Marvel that’s not really comparable. That said, who cares. Marvel’s not coming after you anytime soon 
Now please carry on with the entertainment!
1 Like
You’re putting words in my mouth. I didn’t claim I own the “work”. I said I own the “item.”
Are you a lawyer? Because we’ve had lawyers clear what we’re doing stating that we are not doing anything outside of the Fair Use Act.
1 Like
That’s what you implied here. You said nothing about the item.
Do you read the spoilers? If so, you are now exploiting the creators and publishers if the spoilers cause you to not buy the comic. Therefore, you should not read the spoilers. Perhaps you should just stay off the internet…
2 Likes
Well, I meant item. It was a reply to your analogy that it is exploitation to sell a comic book for profit.
Exploiting creators of potential profits going by what you’ve stated and if you say otherwise, you’re living in a double standard in my opinion…
We’re not going to discuss legalities here when members start claiming we are breaking the laws. End of discussion!
3 Likes
Well. I sure picked a good couple of hours to be busy sorting any comcis!
3 Likes
4 Likes