Bukowski duds for the toddler (1 Viewer)


Founding member
What the fuck.

Isn't dressing your little kid up in some ironic, post-modern tshirt kind of a "LOOK AT ME!" move on the parent's part?


Plus, it is a violation of the artists copyright. Some day the owners of the copyright may come after you. The fines and penalties can be crippling. This is an area that I would not venture into unless you love pain....


hank solo

Just practicin' steps and keepin' outta the fights
Reaper Crew
Founding member
I've previously wondered about copyright, and how long it lasts etc.

I suggest anyone thinking about going into the bootlegging business has a read of the copyright laws for wherever they are, but generally, for Bukowski related itmes, I image that US laws apply. Anyway, you could read up on it here:



It is probably a copyright violation. Either way, a copyright holder could sue you and ruin you just trying to defend yourself. Even if you won, there is a good possibility that you would be out tens of thousands in unrecovered legal fees. If you lost, then it would be far worse. It just does not seem worth the risk...

You Buy One Of These Shirts And I Will Hunt You Down Like A Dog

Who gives a fuck if it is a copyright violation! It is a violation of good taste-sort of like the bumper sticker that says" My son is an honor student at Butkowski Central." Or those fucking smiley faces that robots wear.Or the Shirt that sells here, "My Parents are Big Gay Liberals", or, how about ,"He Thinks he's My Dad" .Pure class. If I was the kid I would be relieved I was a bastard and not the son of the Creitan who bought the shirt.You want your kid to get beat up because you are an asshole.Hey make a statement of how cool you are-buy a "Viva Che" shirt here. I was born on the lower West Side in Buffalo. Shit- we thought Boy Scout uniforms were too much of a symbol of a police prescence and if you joined-you got the shit beat out of you. I have been an asshole buying things for my kids sure. I bought my son a condom when he was four but all he did was put it over his head and almost suffocate. OK-I also bought a Russian Hammer and Sickle for his hockey uniform before detente when he was 6. I took it off between periods when I noticed the kids whose Dads were red necks with mullets were taking extra shots. There is a prima facie case that you are an unfit parent if you buy one of these shirts. I reported a neighbor whose kid wore a shirt she purchased here, "My mama drinks because I cry." The kid was sent to a foster home until the foster parents bought a shirt here,"Question Authority" and now the kid is a ward of the state-all because of buying one of these fucking shirts. Leave your kids the fuck alone. Let them watch re-runs of "Mr. Rogers" so they learn to talk slowly and softly . Turn off that shit rote teaching like they will have soon enough in school-where the little bastards yell "ONE_ONE TWO TWO-GREEN GREEN when all you did is ask are they hungry. But if any of you are interested in a Mr. Rogers T-Shirt email me and I will give all Buk fans a discount-you miserable mother-fuckers. Hey I can get you those too. ,I'm a miserable mother-fucker" shirt.
Ah hell, everyone settle down, its not a big deal, who care if they want to advertise themselves? By responding to that you are invoking more of the same crap. Besides its kind of funny, I would probably give it to my kid just because it is funny, no other reason. I bet Buk would too. (Its hypothetical don't get all "He wouldn't have kids" on me.)
In not so many words, I have to agree with derma on this. I think putting a Bukowski shirt on a kid differs little from putting a Playboy bunny shirt on him.


Usually wrong.
How long does copyright last? A long time. I did some reading on it and there are four or five laws that may apply -- depending on when the material was created and/or published (but increasingly restrictive in favor of the copyright owner, if I remember correctly) -- and with different lengths of time that the material is protected. The bottom line, as far as I was concerned, is that anything published before 1923 is in public domain and may be reproduced without permission. If 1923 or later, it may be protected, depending; probably is. Unpublished material can be protected even further back, like to the 1880s. It's complex lawyer stuff, but you can bet that any image you're going to run into of Buk (photo, art work), is probably protected and can't be used without the permission of the rights owner.

Users who are viewing this thread