Seen Yooper Avatar on the News tonight

I seen Yooper Avatar on the news tonight. Fox 13 Tampa Bay was doing a story on Kit Lab, and guess who avatar was featured. Yooper you is moving up to the big time now from the World Wide Web to the big screen at 10:00 PM :rockin::rockin::rockin:.

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/28903134/homebrewers-partner-with-website-to-make-cash

 

This seems to have started about 3 months ago...

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=525376





Yooper's avatar is waaaaaaaay too sexy, and sex sells! Not as sexy as her Matthews one, but damn sexy. Lol!

 

Yeah, but it was still cool seeing your avatar on the news!

 

This news video was last updated May 1st. I haven't seen much of anything going on since the unsuccessful kickstarter.

 

Sorry Yooper Didn't mean anything about it just thought it was cool to see your avatar on the news.

 

No one's mad at you mate. Don't shoot the messenger

Pretty lousy using a screen shot of someone's recipe after they specifically told them, they weren't willing to play any role.

This doesn't say much for the business owner's integrity if he/she had any say in disseminating the screen shot in the news piece/advert.

 

I prefer the Dominatrix Yooper to the Packer's flex as far as Avatars go. Same woman with sage advice, though. And that is the most important thing.

 

reminds me a lot of why Dave Mustane was so pissed off...:rockin:

 

None of that seems like a big deal to me. At least I wouldn't have cared. Maybe it would be a small thrill to see my HBT post on TV.

They guy who wrote the Imponderables books (anyone remember those?) quoted me in one of them. That was sorta cool. He pulled a conversation we had on a Usenet physics forum and put it in one of his books. It was my 15 minutes of muted fame I guess.

 

Was that him, or the station that chose that particular screenshot?

 

Well Yoop, you could always convince him what a bad boy he was being; your avatar does imply you don't take sh!t from anyone.

 

I guess the difference is @passedpawn , that you would have been only too happy to have your name and work mentioned in the book. Can't say I've read it BTW. (*hangs head in shame*)

I seems to be presented as if @Yooper is fully onboard with the project and is collecting royalties from people using her recipes. Her name and Avatar are well known on HBT and throughout the small homebrewing community so it is not surprising they wanted to use it. To do so without her OK is pretty lousy in my book.

In reality @Yooper has altruistically placed her creations in the public domain without any thought of financial or other rewards, as is true for all that have added to the great trove of recipes here. Her creations are widely disseminated, hugely popular and justifiably so. I've brewed a few of them with, IMHO, delicious results.

Therein lies the disconnect between reality and what is presented in the piece.

It just seems really cynical to ask for someone to get on board with a project, be declined and then use their name, albeit a handle, regardless. No bueno.

 

I agree, it's bogus that he asked permission, was denied, then went ahead and did it anyway. I'd have much less of an issue if he had just used it without mentioning where he got it - that happens all the time

 

hell, I'm just happy when someone mentions me in a post!ipe:

 

Wait, who are you again?

 

Yeah, but then you punch them in the berries

D'oh.... What have I done?.....

 

@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,@billy-klubb ,

That should make your day.

*covers berries with both hands and sits quietly*

 

It's only recognizable if you're looking for it or familiar with it, so...

 

Yea I saw it too and thought wow that's Yooper's avitar on tv, pretty cool. So I watched the story and it did leave the viewer with the impression that you were involved with the site. That's terrible that they would do that to you when you specifically told them that you did not want to be affiliated. Still pretty cool though to see you on tv...... it was like wow Yooper made the big time with her beer recipes, good for her, felt like I kinda knew ya from all your posts here on HBT. Don't worry about it, we are all with you Yoop!

John

 

So if I'm reading this correctly; His business model is to pay royalties to the authors of the kits he sells?

He approached you, you declined and he went ahead and used your likeness and recipe anyhow?

So; have you recieved any royalties? If not, where'd they go?

Its getting to be a crazy world when a home brewer has to trademark her avatar, screen name and beer recipes; just so some vulture can't make money off her back.

 

well luckily he hasn't made any money off of her name yet. his kickstarter campaign failed.

also, i don't believe you can copyright a recipe. i wouldn't be surprised if she found the avatar on the internet somewhere, and it's likely copyrighted. for sure the football season avatar is copyright by someone else. i would love to know if someone could copyright a screen name though.

also if someone wanted to make money off of her recipe, all they would need to do is not ask for her permission and call the beer a yooper house pale ale clone. or give it a name that very closely resembles her name and recipe so that people know where the inspiration comes from and will want to buy it. like Hooper Pale Ale. Then change the percentage of some of the malts by a half of a percent, and boom, completely different recipe which she has no rights to.

not to say that i wouldn't be pissed if i were in her shoes as well. in fact, if the company does get started, i would personally find a lawyer who could show that he owed me royalties, and also sue him for distress or something. and then i would go to some other kit distributor and give them the rights to use my recipe and my name just to spite the guy.

 

Public domain is free to all. Recipe, avatar, username, is not in question.

It's just the bare faced douchebageddyness of their behavior that stands out.

 

I think it would be funny to get a lawyer to go after royalties for something that you were already giving away for free. What this guy did was certainly rude, but that's probably the extent of it. He flashed a picture of a screenshot that is only recognizable to the users of HBT. Everyone already has access to that recipe. This kit will allow them to buy the ingredients with instructions.

If that's all his product is, then of course he's struggling.

I don't think you could copyright a screen name, but you could register it as a trademark. Yes, a registered trademark for a screen name on a HOBBY site. And that name happens to be a word that refers to a group of people (not invented by that person), and someone adopted that word for their screen name. Good luck copyrighting or trademarking that.

Suing for distress? This thread gets better and better.

HBT might have a shot at complaining about using THEIR content in his promo video. That's who actually owns the content, right? Including this post I'm writing at the moment.

 

I think that's the nice thing about the beer brewing community, and something I feel is dwindling a bit with commercial breweries, which is kinda sad. The spirit of beer making has always been about just trying to make a quality product that people enjoy, not about some undisclosed secret ingredient. It's another item on the list of why I really got into this thing, people just sharing info for free.

 

Just two years ago, home brewers brewed 2 million barrels of beer. That's the same amount as Samuel Adams. The largest craft brewer in the country!

LOL!! largest "craft" brewery. I guess BMC isn't craft....just large. Haha!

 

ha

The way they display the computer screen reminds me of the "To Catch A Criminal" when they are trapping pedophiles...

The interview would go:
"This is the transcript from our criminal,
Yooper said: Yes, it's 40L Crystal.
Victim: But do you all grain??
Yooper: Yes, you should see my sparge arm...
Victim: I'm kinda intimidated by all grain...
Yooper: Don't worry, you're not my first first-timer!"

 

Personally I would be pissed that someone is making money by using recipes from someone who declined to participate, especially a prominent contributor like Yooper. Sure, the guy could change one ingredient and then sell it as different, but then he should do that and put in the effort. What is preventing someone from submitting a recipe that was pulled from someone online? It just seems morally wrong to me, but that is just my personal opinion.

 

I'm responding to the thread, not to you in particular. I'm responding to the posts suggesting copyright and getting a lawyer.

I'm also pointing out that if you (or anyone else) posts something here, the content probably legally belongs to HBT, since you contributed it to their site.

There's a spectrum from "I wish he hadn't done that" to "mad" to "pissed" to "get a lawyer" to "make your own kit and sell it just to spite him."

Again, I'm addressing the overblown tone of the thread, not what you said except for where your comments fall on that spectrum.

I wonder if the White House or Obama get their shorts in a bunch when they see the White House ale kits. The recipe is free to all, but the kits use the (recognizable) White House logo and name.

 

Nothing. In fact, aren't most recipes derived from another recipe, sometimes very, very closely. For example, you should compare the recipe in the video (Yooper's Oatmeal Stout) to Jamil's Oatmeal Stout.

Recipes are open source the minute they are made public.

And I agree, cut out the legal BS (not you, Yeastmode ). Her avatar is not her "likeness", it's a piece of clipart off the internet, just like mine. I have no idea if I'm using mine legally, so I certainly wouldn't claim any ownership of it.

She rightfully, though, should be unhappy with the guy who used her online personage after being asked not to. Gawd, how did this turn into another rant thread

 

Wait, that's not you? Disillusioned

 

It is very damn difficult to pass one's tone all the way through the wires and satellites into the text you see displayed. It was all written in jest from my side. I thought it sounded ridiculous enough to be able to infer the joking nature of it, but apparently not.

 

This is why I don't understand getting too pissed about it. It's public, you do it on a public forum, you don't make money from it... ("You" in general).

 

I thought that was how all Floridians dressed. Sure it's not you? I was working under the assumption that below the tweed and twill are a pair of board shorts not in view, and a copy of cheesemaker's weekly and some low-tar Dunhill lights just out of shot.

 

Ya I left the legal arguments out of it because they are not really appropriate for this forum conversation. I was more speaking from a moral argument, as in "how can the operator of the business/site ensure that the royalties are paid to the proper person." And what happens if two people submit the same recipe? Is the operator going to investigate who is the "creator" of the recipe? And in Yooper's case, she said "I don't want to participate" so wouldn't it be morally wrong to use her information? Is he going to sell her recipe at a discount because there is no cost of royalty?