EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 10:28 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:24 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:41 pm
Posts: 6190
Fos, I want to be sure I understand this situation so the same mistake is not made again. Are you saying we need to search the net before we post a joke to insure it is not copywrited?

Also, I understood why you took the joke down the first time. You didn't understand it was a joke, and said it was over 2 sentences long.

But what I don't understand is, after digging through the internet to find it was copywrited, why not just tell me it was and it needed to be removed. Rather then give me a warning for posting copywrited material I didn't know was copywrited, and you didn't know was copywrited until you went digging.

I know I could have sent you a PM to talk about this. But on this occassion I thought it might better be handled here were everyone could see what we're talking about. After all it is election time and people can get sensitive to what they feel is political censorship, and we don't want anyone thinking that is what was going on here. At least I didn't think it was.

_________________
I don't know what your problem is but I bet its hard to pronounce.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:15 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
hunter88 wrote:
Fos, I want to be sure I understand this situation so the same mistake is not made again. Are you saying we need to search the net before we post a joke to insure it is not copywrited?


I'm not saying one has to do anything other than abide by the rules, whatever that takes.

Quote:
Also, I understood why you took the joke down the first time. You didn't understand it was a joke, and said it was over 2 sentences long.

But what I don't understand is, after digging through the internet to find it was copywrited, why not just tell me it was and it needed to be removed. Rather then give me a warning for posting copywrited material I didn't know was copywrited, and you didn't know was copywrited until you went digging.


You WERE sent a private message to the effect of the original posting being in violation of the rules. Further, that this was the second time you were UNofficially warned by me for an excerpting violation. Finally, you were advised that any following violation would result in an official warning. You reposted the same material, which in this moderator's opinion was a violation in the first place, and as a result an official warning was issued.

Quote:
I know I could have sent you a PM to talk about this. But on this occassion I thought it might better be handled here were everyone could see what we're talking about.


I agree and am glad you took this to the feedback forum. It's a perfect example of something difficult for both posters and moderators to interpret. Personally, I'll be fine with however it turns out.

Quote:
After all it is election time and people can get sensitive to what they feel is political censorship, and we don't want anyone thinking that is what was going on here. At least I didn't think it was.


Can't be. I'm a red-stater. :razz:

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:46 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:41 pm
Posts: 6190
Quote:
You WERE sent a private message to the effect of the original posting being in violation of the rules.


That is true, but you did not say anything about the cpoywrite rule in the PM, only that my post was over 2 sentences long. Of course I didn't think this had anything to do with copywrite since it was a joke, which I assumed you didn't realize because it had the appearance of a real article, so I saw no need to worry about re-posting it again.

By the way you wouldn't have a link to the location where it falls under copywrite would you.

Quote:
After all it is election time and people can get sensitive to what they feel is political censorship, and we don't want anyone thinking that is what was going on here. At least I didn't think it was.

Can't be. I'm a red-stater. :razz:
[/quote]

But then this is the first time a joke was ever removed for copywrite infringement. Or maybe no one has bothered to go through all the jokes on the forum to make sure they do not violate the copywrite rules. Well there sure are a lot of jokes to go through, looks like someone might be busy for a while. Sure glad that's not my job. :wink:

_________________
I don't know what your problem is but I bet its hard to pronounce.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:12 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
hunter88 wrote:
Quote:
You WERE sent a private message to the effect of the original posting being in violation of the rules.


That is true, but you did not say anything about the cpoywrite rule in the PM, only that my post was over 2 sentences long. Of course I didn't think this had anything to do with copywrite since it was a joke, which I assumed you didn't realize because it had the appearance of a real article, so I saw no need to worry about re-posting it again.

By the way you wouldn't have a link to the location where it falls under copywrite would you.

Quote:
After all it is election time and people can get sensitive to what they feel is political censorship, and we don't want anyone thinking that is what was going on here. At least I didn't think it was.

Can't be. I'm a red-stater. :razz:


But then this is the first time a joke was ever removed for copywrite infringement. Or maybe no one has bothered to go through all the jokes on the forum to make sure they do not violate the copywrite rules. Well there sure are a lot of jokes to go through, looks like someone might be busy for a while. Sure glad that's not my job. :wink:[/quote]

*********************
That is a very good point.

:-k :-k :-k


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:56 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
Hardly. The rule is not retroactive, therefore it's not anyone's job.

Here's the link indicating that the content in question is copyrighted: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007855.php

Finally, this is not a debate. Until there is a higher ruling, the one made stands.

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:02 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
Fosgate wrote:
Hardly. The rule is not retroactive, therefore it's not anyone's job.

Here's the link indicating that the content in question is copyrighted: http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/007855.php

Finally, this is not a debate. Until there is a higher ruling, the one made stands.



******************************
I think Hunter's use is 'Fair Use ' Fos
Especially as the article is datet 2006.

Quote from article......." Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.
FAIR USE NOTICE
This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes..."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 9:49 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5776
Location: USA
Hunter88 wrote:
That is true, but you did not say anything about the cpoywrite rule in the PM, only that my post was over 2 sentences long.


Actually (from the PM in question)...

Fosgate wrote:
This quite obviously exceeds the two-sentence limit on quoted, copyrighted content.


jhawk wrote:
I think Hunter's use is 'Fair Use ' Fos


Allow me to make this perfectly clear for those that still fail to understand:

2 sentences of quoted content is the limit on copyrighted material, fair use or not.[/quote]

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:13 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 7:43 am
Posts: 2102
Location: Port Arthur, TX
Fosgate, what you are best demonstrating is that members of these forums must now fear expressing themselves, entertaining themselves, and otherwise participating in the forums out of fear they may utter or use something that is or has been copyrighted at some point in time.

Notwithstanding, perhaps you and a few other people should study copyright law to determine what is permitted and what is not under those laws. You may be surprised that copyrighted material can be quoted extensively insofar thereas it is not used for personal or monetary gain. And thereto, perhaps what these forums need most is someone within the legal profession and a background in copyright law to make a formal determination as to what is or is not legal. If for no other reason than to clarify this situation.

To deny someone the pleasure of sharing with others a humorous or pleasant story, regardless whether copyrighted or not, is not an exercise in the Freedom of Speech. What it is may just be labeled something you don't want to hear.

_________________
Demand American-Made; Buy ONLY American-Made


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:14 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
Roadside... if you could recommend an attorney that would be willing to donate their services to EnviroLink, I'd be thrilled to chat with them about this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:19 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 7:43 am
Posts: 2102
Location: Port Arthur, TX
Let me see what I can do, Josh. I've authored a number of articles for professional trade publications, and will see if any of my old friends are still running around. I'll be in touch .....

_________________
Demand American-Made; Buy ONLY American-Made


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:19 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
josh knauer wrote:
Roadside... if you could recommend an attorney that would be willing to donate their services to EnviroLink, I'd be thrilled to chat with them about this.


*********************
I can see where Roadside is coming from though Josh. Earlier it was suggested that jokes are protected by copyright. If this is so, then the 2 sentence rule takes away the punchline and most of the joke. Do you see what I mean ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:25 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 1:41 pm
Posts: 6190
Quote:
Hardly. The rule is not retroactive, therefore it's not anyone's job.


That's not totally accurate. Yes we have only been working with the 2 sentence rule a short while. But I think it is clear we have never been able to post an entire article. We were always told only a small portion, and if someone posted the entire article, it was removed or reduced in size.

So my question remains. Why with all the jokes that have been posted in the past, was my one joke singled out and deleted? No one has ever gone to the effort to see if any jokes were in fact copywrited in the past. Even by the old rules one would not have been able to post an entire joke. And it seems to me if I went back and brought to the top the last joke thread, someone would need to go through all those jokes and make sure they comply, under either the old or the new rule.

_________________
I don't know what your problem is but I bet its hard to pronounce.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:29 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2003 11:53 am
Posts: 2281
Location: Pittsburgh, PA USA
jhawk wrote:
josh knauer wrote:
Roadside... if you could recommend an attorney that would be willing to donate their services to EnviroLink, I'd be thrilled to chat with them about this.


*********************
I can see where Roadside is coming from though Josh. Earlier it was suggested that jokes are protected by copyright. If this is so, then the 2 sentence rule takes away the punchline and most of the joke. Do you see what I mean ?


Sorry, "it was suggested" is not a legal opinion. All I know is that I have been advised many times in the past that we have to deal with the US Copyright law that we are under the jurisdiction of. I am very serious that if someone can find me an intellectual property lawyer to give me an opinion on this, pro bono, then I am happy to listen and follow their advice. Until then, complain to the US Congress, as they are the numbskulls that wrote the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

-josh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:51 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:49 pm
Posts: 7554
Location: England
Copyright laws are a minefield here in the UK too Josh.
It isn't an army of lawyers we need, it's a fleet ot two of minesweepers.

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Some clarity please
PostPosted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 10:35 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!

Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 7:43 am
Posts: 2102
Location: Port Arthur, TX
I haven't yet had time to contact anyone who could be able to help clarify the potential for copyright infringement issues here in the EnviroLink forums. However, while searching the matter on the Internet, I came across the following resource and I learned a few things of which I wasn't aware:

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

Please note the feature clearly states permission granted by the author with regard to posting this link.

We should also be aware that the transfer and/or posting of pictures can be in and of itself a violation of copyright law regardless whether the production actually carries a formal copyright. In this respect, all photos I have posted are in violation of copyright laws, and should be removed.

Darn it! I hate being wrong.

_________________
Demand American-Made; Buy ONLY American-Made


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group