[ SECRET POST #2781 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2781 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.
[Game of Thrones]


__________________________________________________



09. [broken]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Kevin Sorbo/Hercules: The Legendary Journeys]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Transformers: Prime]


__________________________________________________



12.
[Darkchylde]






Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #397.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

1. No, he did not have a right to abuse copyright legislation to attack someone whose actions fell well within the "fair use" exception, which is intended to include uses like criticism and parody. Trying to protect your reputation or career is not a legitimate reason to break the law.

2. The point of Eschergirls is not to make fun of bad individual artists, it's to highlight how the comics industry portrays women. Each of the artists being criticized had editors and other people they answered to, none of whom looked at their art and asked them to leave out the spinal trauma next time or stop tracing from porn. If you think "most of the critics can't make better art" is an effective response to their criticism, you've missed the entire point of the blog.