Posted by: @crocobite

↑

It was probably Nefty’s House of Rants that nuked the Spector Creative YouTube channel. After all it’s Nefty’s fault for the demise of MattyCollector, according to Scott. So don’t put it past that Nefty person to have struck again

I am at a loss. Who is this Nefty person?

Posted by: @caliban

↑

Posted by: @crocobite

↑

It was probably Nefty’s House of Rants that nuked the Spector Creative YouTube channel. After all it’s Nefty’s fault for the demise of MattyCollector, according to Scott. So don’t put it past that Nefty person to have struck again

I am at a loss. Who is this Nefty person?

 

Posted by: @he-dad

↑

Posted by: @asterstar

↑

I know everyone hates him but I can't help but feel bad for him. Imagine all that work it takes building up a channel and then it disappears in an instant.

Yea can't be human and not feel bad a little

 

Posted by: @caliban

↑

Posted by: @crocobite

↑

It was probably Nefty’s House of Rants that nuked the Spector Creative YouTube channel. After all it’s Nefty’s fault for the demise of MattyCollector, according to Scott. So don’t put it past that Nefty person to have struck again

I am at a loss. Who is this Nefty person?

 

he has this little blog called Nefty’s House of Rants that he does which is only seen by a handful of people and apparently he made complaints on his blog about Scott, MattyCollector, and Digital River back in the day. When the decision was made to scuttle MattyCollector, Scott posted on he-man.org that it was the negativity (he specifically mentioned only Nefty’s House of Rants) as the reason why Mattel executives pulled the plug on MattyCollector. 
He complained about Scott a lot, but his blog hardly got many views, so at the time at He-man.org it seemed hilarious that Scott would go out of his way to blame this Nefty person for MattyCollector’s demise.

 I just thought it would be funny if this seemingly all-powerful Nefty person was at it again to throw another wrench in Scott’s plans again, considering how preposterous it sounded back then. A little joke for the .orgers who are here now is all

Nefty is a blogger. Scott once blamed Nefty and his house of rants for being the reason that mattycollector failed. 

I bag on Scott alot and actually do feel sorry for him as a human being but at the same time I would say, "Time to do some soul searching and learn from mistakes of the past."

ETA. Sorry Croc beat me to the explanation. 

Most of the images in his slide shows were in the public domain... (although, he would use images with copyright printing all over them meaning he just used the "preview" image and didn't actually purchase said images...)

However, he used the Filmation He-Man intro, title card designs, and music. I don't know if Mattel actually gave him permission to do so, but I do remember Pixel Dan being asked to stop using MOTU music in his review videos in the early 2000's... so it could be a case of cease-and-desist..?

As others have mentioned, it's hard not to feel bad. I was a huge ToyGuru supporter during the Classics reign, and I wished him nothing but the best when he left Mattel. Unfortunately, that seemed to be the beginning of a downward spiral for Scott.

Here is a clip from someone who seems to know him talking about it:

Is sounds like some generic CR strike over some rather unimpressive looking Star Wars figure picture; not a strike from Mattel or such. Dunno; but even though I do not like SNs content I do not think it warrants the channel to be striked. Its not like he some life threatening extremist or something.

This video sheds some light on the subject of Scott's downfall.

I personally don't feel bad for him. He built a lot on his disdain for the current MOTU lines. He was arrogant and egotistical. He got what was coming to him.

Posted by: @ornclown

↑

Most of the images in his slide shows were in the public domain... (although, he would use images with copyright printing all over them meaning he just used the "preview" image and didn't actually purchase said images...)

 

However, he used the Filmation He-Man intro, title card designs, and music. I don't know if Mattel actually gave him permission to do so, but I do remember Pixel Dan being asked to stop using MOTU music in his review videos in the early 2000's... so it could be a case of cease-and-desist..?

 

As others have mentioned, it's hard not to feel bad. I was a huge ToyGuru supporter during the Classics reign, and I wished him nothing but the best when he left Mattel. Unfortunately, that seemed to be the beginning of a downward spiral for Scott.

Posted by: @catra

↑

Posted by: @ornclown

↑

Most of the images in his slide shows were in the public domain... (although, he would use images with copyright printing all over them meaning he just used the "preview" image and didn't actually purchase said images...)

 

However, he used the Filmation He-Man intro, title card designs, and music. I don't know if Mattel actually gave him permission to do so, but I do remember Pixel Dan being asked to stop using MOTU music in his review videos in the early 2000's... so it could be a case of cease-and-desist..?

 

As others have mentioned, it's hard not to feel bad. I was a huge ToyGuru supporter during the Classics reign, and I wished him nothing but the best when he left Mattel. Unfortunately, that seemed to be the beginning of a downward spiral for Scott.

Would that not be DreamWorks that would strike him for using Filmation property?

 

To my knowledge that is correct.

Posted by: @lurker-man

↑

Here is a clip from someone who seems to know him talking about it:

Is sounds like some generic CR strike over some rather unimpressive looking Star Wars figure picture; not a strike from Mattel or such. Dunno; but even though I do not like SNs content I do not think it warrants the channel to be striked. Its not like he some life threatening extremist or something.

In the video he says over a hundred strikes for photos, not just one lone photo. He uses that Ashoka pic as an example of the type of photos from the website, not as the only photo used by Scott. Because if this Junkman character had shown more than one picture as an example he could potentially get more than one strike against him from the website he’s referring to. After all he did say he would probably get A strike against him from that website for showing that little picture.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I came away from that video with the assumption that the website was claiming Scott was taking lots of pictures from that websites figure reviews, hence the over 100 strikes, not 100 strikes for the same single photo. And that this Junkman character, being a friend of Scott’s, was trying to play it down as no big deal. Which I agree, no big deal, but if it was over 100 times? Maybe not so much.

Considering just how many images Scott throws up on screen during his videos, one might wonder if he had been using that website as a one stop shop for many of those pictures he crams into each video.

If true, many may not feel it’s a big deal, but for the guy taking all those photos of his collection for his reviews, he might start to get annoyed by the 100th time without ever getting a shoutout for his time and effort taking all the photos, if Scott was just swooping in and copying & pasting over a hundred of the guy’s pictures that is.

 I have no idea how much of this is true or not, but one thing that I believe can give this scenario some credibility is that there has been instances of Scott trying to take credit for other people’s efforts before, this could be another example. Who knows for sure?

Posted by: @crocobite

↑

Posted by: @lurker-man

↑

Here is a clip from someone who seems to know him talking about it:

Is sounds like some generic CR strike over some rather unimpressive looking Star Wars figure picture; not a strike from Mattel or such. Dunno; but even though I do not like SNs content I do not think it warrants the channel to be striked. Its not like he some life threatening extremist or something.

In the video he says over a hundred strikes for photos, not just one lone photo. He uses that Ashoka pic as an example of the type of photos from the website, not as the only photo used by Scott. Because if this Junkman character had shown more than one picture as an example he could potentially get more than one strike against him from the website he’s referring to. After all he did say he would probably get A strike against him from that website for showing that little picture.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I came away from that video with the assumption that the website was claiming Scott was taking lots of pictures from that websites figure reviews, hence the over 100 strikes, not 100 strikes for the same single photo. And that this Junkman character, being a friend of Scott’s, was trying to play it down as no big deal. Which I agree, no big deal, but if it was over 100 times? Maybe not so much.

Considering just how many images Scott throws up on screen during his videos, one might wonder if he had been using that website as a one stop shop for many of those pictures he crams into each video.

If true, many may not feel it’s a big deal, but for the guy taking all those photos of his collection for his reviews, he might start to get annoyed by the 100th time without ever getting a shoutout for his time and effort taking all the photos, if Scott was just swooping in and copying & pasting over a hundred of the guy’s pictures that is.

 I have no idea how much of this is true or not, but one thing that I believe can give this scenario some credibility is that there has been instances of Scott trying to take credit for other people’s efforts before, this could be another example. Who knows for sure?

 

 

Posted by: @crocobite

↑

Posted by: @lurker-man

↑

Here is a clip from someone who seems to know him talking about it:

Is sounds like some generic CR strike over some rather unimpressive looking Star Wars figure picture; not a strike from Mattel or such. Dunno; but even though I do not like SNs content I do not think it warrants the channel to be striked. Its not like he some life threatening extremist or something.

In the video he says over a hundred strikes for photos, not just one lone photo. He uses that Ashoka pic as an example of the type of photos from the website, not as the only photo used by Scott. Because if this Junkman character had shown more than one picture as an example he could potentially get more than one strike against him from the website he’s referring to. After all he did say he would probably get A strike against him from that website for showing that little picture.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I came away from that video with the assumption that the website was claiming Scott was taking lots of pictures from that websites figure reviews, hence the over 100 strikes, not 100 strikes for the same single photo. And that this Junkman character, being a friend of Scott’s, was trying to play it down as no big deal. Which I agree, no big deal, but if it was over 100 times? Maybe not so much.

Considering just how many images Scott throws up on screen during his videos, one might wonder if he had been using that website as a one stop shop for many of those pictures he crams into each video.

If true, many may not feel it’s a big deal, but for the guy taking all those photos of his collection for his reviews, he might start to get annoyed by the 100th time without ever getting a shoutout for his time and effort taking all the photos, if Scott was just swooping in and copying & pasting over a hundred of the guy’s pictures that is.

 I have no idea how much of this is true or not, but one thing that I believe can give this scenario some credibility is that there has been instances of Scott trying to take credit for other people’s efforts before, this could be another example. Who knows for sure?

 

 

Scott used a TON of images from my site (probably hundreds) as well, with zero acknowledgement. I usually don't mind people using images from my site but I do ask people to reference the source (whether that's me or the sources I credit). I never reported him to YouTube, but I did find it annoying. I remember in particular his video about Classics Castle Grayskull just had one uncredited image after another from my site, like maybe 10 or 15 in a single video. His practice seems to have been to do a google image search and grab whatever was handy for his slideshows, never worrying about crediting the original source. One artist expressed some annoyance to me that his art was used without acknowledgement too. That example even worse because a single work of art involves many hours of work and creativity. There were a ton of images from the Fwoosh and similar review sites as well. 

I think most people who create content online are pretty good natured, but this was bound to happen eventually. Making a YouTube video requires more care with sources than something like a forum post. His videos reminded me of a forum post, where you just grab whatever handy image to illustrate your point. 

Nothing personal against Scott. Just credit those sources! 

Edit: I want to say that some of his videos seemed to copy graphics and/or music from old Pixel Dan videos as well. 

That adds a whole lot of context. Somehow I missed the hundreds of pics part (likely due to another of my failed attempts in appropriating the female talent of multitasking 😆 ).

Not sure how technical viable it is; but I still don't think nuking the entire channel is the right response as opposed to kinda close it up and tell him to fix it by respecting the sources.

He’s back. I wonder if he’ll learn anything from being put in time out for a couple days, or keep using even more of people’s pics and artwork?

Scott is back.

@kraken Did you watch it? It's kinda messed up what happened to him.

Scott is still pretending he was right and somehow the NE Two Bad wave didn't show in retail and Origins Moss Man didn't show in retail or the fact he said the lines were canceled. And Cluelessfish just kisses his ass.

The guy who made the copyright claims against Scott posted his side of the story.

https://thefigureinquestion.com/2024/03/08/about-this-spector-creative-thing/

And there's this 

https://twitter.com/SpectorCreative/status/1777328499386093808?t=TvXS_vuF4GkrJwiPAWITYw&s=19

What a shitshow

Posted by: @kraken

↑

The guy who made the copyright claims against Scott posted his side of the story.

https://thefigureinquestion.com/2024/03/08/about-this-spector-creative-thing/

 

And there's this 

https://twitter.com/SpectorCreative/status/1777328499386093808?t=TvXS_vuF4GkrJwiPAWITYw&s=19

Scott Neitlich is trash. He coordinated with Junkman to defame the creator he stole from, promised to remove the stolen images if the creator would remove his copyright strikes, then once he got his channel back, refused to remove the stolen images unless the creator provided him copyright registration records demonstrating the images were his. News Flash: If you did not create the image, it is not yours to use.

He swore up and down that he had nothing to do with the Junkman video, and once he gets his channel back, he thanks his viewers—not the creator he stole from—for getting his channel back, and directs them to watch the Junkman video to get the full story. I hope he gets his channel terminated, and that he never shows his face at any convention ever.

Yeah, Neitlich's got a habit of lying and being an arrogant prick.

I used to watch his videos before I learnt about him but even by that point I was getting a bit tired of some of the stuff he was stating in the videos. And I had a lil disagreement with him where I posted a bit of evidence about him being mistaken on one particular thing and instead of just accepting it, he responded with "LOL" and just carried on as before.

@carnivius That's too bad bro. It looks like the dude could have been a MOTU hero if he could only keep his ego in check.

@he-dad I hate to admit it but he kind of is. MOTUC, love it or hate it, got us to where we are now and I would trade my NE Skeletor, ToG Mikey or Origins Thunder Punch He-Man for any toy line.

But saying that, i think, is a kin to saying Hitler is partly responsible for much of the modern technology we have today.

It sucks we have to put up with his BS, but were in a good place now.

I stopped watching his videos because he had me worrying about the Mattel losing MOTU and all that comes with that. 

And his videos are ABSOLUTELY ugly because he uses the b&ll$!# images that he pulls from Google Image Search or whatever. 

But I really don't like the other guy. Being able to hold a copyright on a photo of some other entity's copyrighted and trademarked IP is a murky thing at best. Corporations, like Google, are generally willing to fold because they don't want the headache. 

I lost my Red Bubble account when Hobby Lobby came after me for my fair use/political speech, when I approximated their logo with freely available fonts, to criticize their taking rights away from women in this country. 

But a court of law is something entirely different. The entire balance of internet culture could be upended if these two not-rich people ended up in court over such a thing. Like when the Alabama Supreme Court decided test-tubes full of goo are people. 

But also...

Scott has self-published a comic of AI art. So double screw him. 

Posted by: @rogerblake

↑

I stopped watching his videos because he had me worrying about the Mattel losing MOTU and all that comes with that. 

And his videos are ABSOLUTELY ugly because he uses the b&ll$!# images that he pulls from Google Image Search or whatever. 

But I really don't like the other guy. Being able to hold a copyright on a photo of some other entity's copyrighted and trademarked IP is a murky thing at best. Corporations, like Google, are generally willing to fold because they don't want the headache. 

I lost my Red Bubble account when Hobby Lobby came after me for my fair use/political speech, when I approximated their logo with freely available fonts, to criticize their taking rights away from women in this country. 

But a court of law is something entirely different. The entire balance of internet culture could be upended if these two not-rich people ended up in court over such a thing. Like when the Alabama Supreme Court decided test-tubes full of goo are people. 

But also...

Scott has self-published a comic of AI art. So double screw him. 

Your use of the trade dress of Hobby Lobby to criticize its politics is 100% Fair Use. RedBubble likely has a policy of terminating accounts for any legal threat, because they do not want to be included as a contributory infringer on a lawsuit. If they had to defend every action against the hundreds of pieces of artwork uploaded to the site each day, then they would never be out of court.

This case likely will not go to court. Matters of copyright are tried in federal court, and pro se litigants are not permitted. The average cost of a federal copyright lawsuit is $250K. At most, it will be arbitrated before the Copyright Claims Board. This is not a precedent-setting case; it is a prima facie case of copyright infringement. Despite what he thinks, Scott does not have a Fair Use defense to the claims. The most likely outcome is that Scott will have to remove the images or the videos, or have his channel terminated.