For questions on sales and orders, I suggest emailing Nick our Kings Wild in general. There are some extras that are first offered to subscribers at a discount, after a few weeks, then they go on sale to everyone at a slightly higher price. However, your question may be more specific. If so, best ask Nick it the crew in general. However, you can modify your subscription before the next month, and save on combined shipping with your regular subscription.
The Crazy Squirrel Deck Hunter - Hunt decks to extinction
Bradius wrote:For questions on sales and orders, I suggest emailing Nick our Kings Wild in general. There are some extras that are first offered to subscribers at a discount, after a few weeks, then they go on sale to everyone at a slightly higher price. However, your question may be more specific. If so, best ask Nick it the crew in general. However, you can modify your subscription before the next month, and save on combined shipping with your regular subscription.
I'm not signed up just yet (waiting for payday) but I will take the advice. Thanks Brad.
"Finding it... that's not the hard part. It's letting go."
"One makes a trip by day, but by night one sets out on a journey." -Moominmamma
I dream of a world where wars are fought only by having dance offs. I also dream that a Finnish playing card designer would exist. The former seems more likely to happend.
Money can't buy you happiness, but it can buy you a penguin. Have you ever met a sad person with a penguin?
Are lobsters mermaids to scorpions?
"I did not hit her, it's not true, it's bullsh*t, I did not hit her, I did naaaht! Oh hai Mark!"
EvilDuncan wrote:That tuck makes me want him to make a line of decks based on other such stories, each with book-style tuckboxes.
I love the book-based tucks. Reminds me of one of the 'expert at the card table' decks (btw, if someone knows a good retziler for these decks in europe, I'm in), which also had a book-lookalike tuck. I have to admit, these kind of tucks often look better on picture then in hand. Still, I'd love the idea. You can have a whole lot of fantasy themed books translated in cards. I'm wondering, is something lile robin hood copyright protected? You could print as many decks as there are pages in the book and have each ad card be 1 page. This is such a bad idea... I'm sure with a little more thought there could be some good ideas. I'm already envisioning a small bookshelf with all of these tucks, pictures would look like an actual bookshelf with books. Only it's miniatured in real life. And then you'd have to pull one of the 'books' to open the secret passage to your full cards collection. Make this the next theory11 black friday wheel 'instant collection' prize. I'd empty their warehouse to win this
EvilDuncan wrote:That tuck makes me want him to make a line of decks based on other such stories, each with book-style tuckboxes.
I love the book-based tucks. Reminds me of one of the 'expert at the card table' decks (btw, if someone knows a good retziler for these decks in europe, I'm in), which also had a book-lookalike tuck.
"We look at the present through a rear-view mirror; we walk backwards into the future."
-- Marshall McLuhan (Media Theory Giant) Decknowledgy™ (Ted) Instagram Reviews:https://www.instagram.com/decknowledgy
EvilDuncan wrote:That tuck makes me want him to make a line of decks based on other such stories, each with book-style tuckboxes.
I love the book-based tucks. Reminds me of one of the 'expert at the card table' decks (btw, if someone knows a good retziler for these decks in europe, I'm in), which also had a book-lookalike tuck.
EvilDuncan wrote:That tuck makes me want him to make a line of decks based on other such stories, each with book-style tuckboxes.
I love the book-based tucks. Reminds me of one of the 'expert at the card table' decks (btw, if someone knows a good retziler for these decks in europe, I'm in), which also had a book-lookalike tuck.
I'll explain this as simply as I can. Mythology as a corpus can't be copyrighted. Humanity's been talking about it far too long for any kind of telltale identifications of a "creator" to be made. However, iterations of characters -- through various media -- can be copyrighted.
It's not even that complicated. Robin Hood has been around for centuries, longer than any copyright law expiration, and no clear author can even be attributed his creation. Individual representations of him or works based on him can be copyrighted, such as Disney's portrayal as an anthropomorphic fox, or this deck of cards; those copyrights will eventually expire as well.
Obviously mythologies can be copyrighted. Tolkien's work forms a pretty coherent mythology, still under copyright. Also Scientology, which at least takes itself seriously as a religion, has a mythology that is still copyrighted.
Outsider wrote:It's not even that complicated. Robin Hood has been around for centuries, longer than any copyright law expiration, and no clear author can even be attributed his creation. Individual representations of him or works based on him can be copyrighted, such as Disney's portrayal as an anthropomorphic fox, or this deck of cards; those copyrights will eventually expire as well.
Obviously mythologies can be copyrighted. Tolkien's work forms a pretty coherent mythology, still under copyright. Also Scientology, which at least takes itself seriously as a religion, has a mythology that is still copyrighted.
But both those mythologies you reference are the scholarly pursuit and extension of literary works -- which can be copyrighted -- not the oral history of humankind.
As I said and you reinforced, iterations of characters can be copyrighted and yes there are accepted literary versions of the wider mythological corpus, which invariably fall into the purview of copyright, but nobody can trace these tales through a millennium of more of history to an identifiable creator. Thus no copyright.
portcullis wrote:But both those mythologies you reference are the scholarly pursuit and extension of literary works -- which can be copyrighted -- not the oral history of humankind.
As I said and you reinforced, iterations of characters can be copyrighted and yes there are accepted literary versions of the wider mythological corpus, which invariably fall into the purview of copyright, but nobody can trace these tales through a millennium of more of history to an identifiable creator. Thus no copyright.
It really has nothing to do with being mythology or folk legend. Countless works which are now public domain and widely regarded as mythology or folk tales were in fact created by an identifiable author who did enjoy copyright in his lifetime. What you call literature today becomes folk legend and myth in the future after entering public domain, especially if derivative works become popular.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that it makes no difference that Robin Hood has no identifiable creator or is legend or whatever you want to call it, because the millennium of time is the only relevant part. JR could make a deck based on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales or any of the works of Shakespeare without genericizing it at all and it would be a-ok despite there being an identified author, because the works in question are centuries past copyright expiration.
The best part of this thread is hands down the deck presented but the second best part is the knowledge that Scientology bullocks is protected by copyright law . Makes sense though; both is equally ridiculous.
Harvonsgard wrote:I guess Eric has seen the instagram post as well . Cool idea. I'd love to see it with the whole design on it.
Yes, I did, but it's all white. Let's see what crazy design touches JR puts on that to top the Standard. 2020's so far looking like it's JR's year for DoTY unless of course his decks all split the votes.
Lotrek's Crypt will be hard pressed to win as only the buyers will get a chance to see its beauty and photos can't be posted for fear of the Greek Assassin putting his curse on the foolish one.
. Makes sense though; both is equally ridiculous.
. Cool idea. I'd love to see it with the whole design on it.
