I love the final punchline. I had a problem though, with the "they" in panels 3 and 4. It was never properly introduced who "they" refers to. Panel 2 only mentions the record book, not the editors of the record book.
As good as usual.
@Zach: wouldn't want to get Scott in legal trouble...
I think the glory of copyright would prevent "they" from appearing in their entirety, though I may be mistaken. Does it cost money to reference "them"?
Hilarious. Being lazy myself I naturally admire someone taking it to the extreme.
I loved this strip a lot, but that erroneous apostrophe in the it's on panel three is kinda distracting … <_<
Parody and entertainment are protected as Fair Use provided they don't devalue the use of the entity or work in the marketplace.
All its own Scott, all *its* own. No apostrophe unless it's short for "it is."
Not to be One Of Those People, but in panel 3 that should be "that may be a record all its own!" Remember, "it's" is the same as "it is." If it doesn't make sense like that, then it's not "it's."
Good to know - I thought you weren't allowed to mention things under copyright at all in works like this. I thought this is why for movies, for example, they took all the time to take out trademarks, though that may be different entirely?
After your whole speech about correcting your spelling and grammar errors, I came here to drop a note about "its" vs. "it's." Looks like fluffy beat me to it.
Very funny! KIU!
Another brilliant strip ... you are spoiling us hehehe. (btw I hate this proxy filter ... you are making this lazy guy considering a transparent proxy configuration for the home proxy I use when at work ...)
Yeah, that "it's" ruined the 4th panel for me. It was funny, though.
I was going to suggest "biggest book of records" for your new record before getting to the punchline. You can still put out a new edition, adding their book as new "biggest book of records" :D
I'm pretty sure the taking out of the trademarks isn't because the movie makers were legally required to, but because the trademark owner didn't pay for the priviledge of having their product featured in the movie with a recognisable brand name. This can either result in the movie obscuring the trademarks, or going with a competing product. One of the most infamous examples of this was E.T. the Extra Terrestrial. The original script (and novelization) had E.T. eating M&Ms. Mars (owner of M&Ms) didn't want to pay for the product placement in the film, and Reese's Pieces were substituted.
One of the funniest things to me is that the "long-term goal" was six months. This is very subtle, but for someone who studies laziness (as an art form), it seemed to reinforce, "I didn't want to put a lot of effort into it." It spelled "win" in so many ways.
World record-breaking number of cartoons about conversations about attempting to break world records without, in fact, actually breaking any world records.
Maybe he should have started smaller with trying to break, say, a house record. Then work his way up to block, parish, town, etc.
I think Bob is wrong. Fair Use is an exemption to copyright, which has to do with copying works. The phrase "Guinness Book of World Records" is (presumably) trademarked, which is an entirely different set of laws.
The major protections in trademark are against dilution and confusion. If Scott's discussion of the title could be said to cause confusion or brand dilution, then they would have cause to get mad. In this case, I don't see how mentioning the title would cause dilution or confusion.
It's fine to mention it here in the comments, because Scott still has plausible deniability, if he feels he needs it. :-P
I love how the backwards irony completes the cycle.
First off, I would like to see Scott try to plausibly deny ANYthing...I mean, this IS the person who brought us the concept of rocket hats (which, I have been informed -probably falsely- are being developed by JPL and Virgin Galactic)...who KNOWS what else he might try!?!Secondly, sheesh guys, don't you know anything? Scott isn't referring to the Guinness people...they're probably too drunk to keep good records anyway...he's talking about Mad Daddy McGillicutty's Enooooormous Book of Trivial Records and Other Useless Tripe! (the exclamation point is protected by international peace envoys, grain embargoes, copyright laws, eidetic memories, several mormon circus clowns in midget cars, and the threat of looking stupid if you squint at Mad Daddy the wrong way when he explains that the exclamation point is there so the pig won't bite ya.) It's only THE authoritative work on keeping track of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I have it on good authority that Mad Daddy wouldn't sue Scott or anyone else for infringement, but then Mr. McGillicutty appears to be dead...I'll just steal this Guinness from him, he won't mind.
yeah? well your umlauts are making me think of Motley Crue and now I can't shake the feeling that I need to bleach my hair and put on spandex pants. Thanks a lot! x_X
wait a minute....He took the existing copy and added one more record to it, to make it longer. What was the record? Was the record the record of the longest record book? If he did that, that would mean that he hadn't actually set the record until the printing. Which would make it inaccurate when he wrote it. His book is published in August 2009 he writes it with that added entry in July 2009. His record is set when it comes out and only when it comes out. So when he wrote it, it was a lie. Agh, my head hurts.
ah, so we see that lying is good for some situations after all...if i had known i could make people's heads hurt just by making them lie, i would have been misinforming people for years...wait, i HAVE been misinforming people for years, i just keep forgetting to stick around and see the hilarious results.
the real problem is if it has a lie in it it isnt a record book, its fictional.
so then, if it's in a record book, it's factual? but your response isn't in a record book, so how do I know it isn't a nefarious lying plot to get me to believe that the only source I can trust is record books, thus making me run out and buy a record book in order to put money in the pockets of your lying masters, the record book people?
I set a world record just now, for smallest book of world records. Here it is in its entirety:
The Smallest Book of World Records in the World.Of World Records.by Prattle Assassin
Chapter 1. World Records.
Shortest Book of World Records in the World (of world records): A reference book written by Prattle Assassin is the shortest book of world records in the world -of world records.
AppendixA. The End
And this is why I think most world records are dumb and meaningless. Comics, on the other hand, are hilarious.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.