General/Off-topic |
|
|
|
|
|
copyright issues
|
| 1. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 12:18 pm |
|
Quoting catwoman: 11 Apr 2008 Fri 02:13 pm
I think this thread is designed as a personal attack that can only lead to more fights, so I'm locking it. |
Granted, this all began with a heated exchange but I began that thread in good faith as I wanted to know more about the practice of acknowledging/not acknowledging someone else’s work. Not my problem if teaschip1 couldn’t see that or control herself.
The rules of this site are clear, i.e.
12. Any message with more than a few sentences copied from another source must give the source with the copied text. Excessive copying from other sources must be avoided. Instead of pasting a whole article please post a link to the article and your thoughts about it in a few sentences.
Btw - Anyone critical of Alameda’s propensity to provide links would do well to note this rule.
The last sentence is particularly noteworthy:
“ . . . post a link to the article and your thoughts about it in a few sentences.â€
Whilst researching another site I came across this:
“In its early years, Free Republic generally allowed its members to post copyrighted news stories in entirety to its forum, regardless of whether permission had been granted by content owners, until the site was sued in 1998 by The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times for copyright infringement. The newspapers obtained a permanent injunction, although stipulated damages of $1 million were reduced to $10,000 during settlement negotiations which allowed the defendants to drop their appeal.[19] The case, often cited when arguing cyberlaw, is called L.A. Times v. Free Republic. “
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Republic
The above relates specifically to news stories although it is still pertinent as many news stories are posted on this site. I might add that the vast majority are acknowledged nowadays. However, lawsuits aren’t only limited to infringements relating to news stories:
“The Copyright Act provides two primary remedies: (1) it allows the owner of the copyrighted material to stop the infringement and (2) obtain damages and attorney fees from the infringer. Both types of relief are available even if the copyrighted material has not been registered with the United States Copyright Office before the infringement occurs.
While registration before infringement allows the copyright holder to recover statutory damages and attorney fees, the owner of an unregistered copyright still has a number of significant rights.â€
Source http://www.injuryboard.com/topic/website-plagiarism-electronic.aspx
With regard to the type of site teaschip obtained her essay from, it may be that she is covered legally. The article :
The Mystery Behind the Written (c)
By Christopher B. Skvarka
Found at http://www.pitt.edu/~skvarka/education/copyright/
States:
“Many works on the Internet are available for public use. However, the author of the work must have explicitly granted it to public domain. If a work is in public domain, granted by saying "I grant this to the public domain," anybody who stumbles upon it can use, take, or copy without giving credit to the owner (Templeton 1). Although, frequently a user can contact the author of the work and be granted permission to use it (Templeton 4).â€
Although later states:
“So how does that apply to Internet users? Internet users cannot scan material from periodicals and post them on the Internet. Users cannot transfer graphics or works, without the knowledge of the owner, and post them somewhere else on the Internet (Templeton 1). . . . To be safe, Internet users should just ask first to insure everyone's safety.â€
So it’s a little confusing.
Copyright law is complicated and that is probably why Admins of this site have included Rule 12, in order to minimise any risk of copyright infringement. I don’t think members should be so blasé about excluding sources of articles, essays etc. because it is not they who carry the risks of litigation or the expense of insurance against possible litigation. Members aren’t charged for using the site, the least we can do is be responsible and endeavour to acknowledge the source of any work which is not our own.
Having said all of this, whether legal or not, I think morally and out of respect for other members included in a debate (who take the trouble to articulate their ideas themselves), we have a responsibility to acknowledge that we are posting the work of a third party. It is so easy to do , simply say “ I have found this article/essay that encapsulates my view . . . “ and quote/acknowledge source. No problem.
Teaschip1 asserts that the practice of not quoting sources is common on this site. I had not realised this and that is one reason why I began the last thread that was locked.
So, is it true? Do people often google essays and post them as their own work? If so, what do members think?
I think this is a perfectly pertinent subject for debate on this forum.
|
|
| 2. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 12:32 pm |
|
I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
|
| 3. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 12:54 pm |
|
Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight 
(Just passing through.....  )
|
|
| 4. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 01:50 pm |
|
Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
passing through . . . pinworms, threadworms, flatulence, poo, AEnigma . . . they all pass through
|
|
| 5. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:20 pm |
|
Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
So - what did I just read then? :-S
|
|
| 6. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:22 pm |
|
Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
That made me laugh! 
|
|
| 7. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:23 pm |
|
I had a copy so I began the thread again.
|
|
| 8. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:24 pm |
|
Quoting karpusqueen: Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
passing through . . . pinworms, threadworms, flatulence, poo, AEnigma . . . they all pass through |
But I actually think this is quite rude - 
|
|
| 9. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:29 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Quoting karpusqueen: Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
passing through . . . pinworms, threadworms, flatulence, poo, AEnigma . . . they all pass through |
But I actually think this is quite rude - |
I wouldn't want to disappoint.
|
|
| 10. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:33 pm |
|
Although it is a long post and somewhat complicated to read, there is the point of copyright that should be considered, especially when the site advertises a lawyer of copyright, which is directly above post 7. I believe that if something is copied from a piece that holds a copyright symbol or clearly states that it is a copyright, then the source should be quoted. If the post is quoted from an article by an author then that author should be quoted. Not difficult - just a case of common decency!
Modified: it would be useful to hear other opinions
|
|
| 11. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:37 pm |
|
Quoting libralady: Although it is a long post and somewhat complicated to read, there is the point of copyright that should be considered, especially when the site advertises a lawyer of copyright, which is directly above post 7. I believe that if something is copied from a piece that holds a copyright symbol or clearly states that it is a copyright, then the source should be quoted. If the post is quoted from an article by an author then that author should be quoted. Not difficult - just a case of common decency!
Modified: it would be useful to hear other opinions
|
It's not that complicated a read. During my research there was evidence to say that work does not actually have to have the copyright symbol on it either.
Anyway, I'm glad you agree with me 
In any event, whatever the ethics or legalities, the site's rule number 12 should be followed .
|
|
| 12. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:48 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Quoting karpusqueen: Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
passing through . . . pinworms, threadworms, flatulence, poo, AEnigma . . . they all pass through |
But I actually think this is quite rude - |
It was a rude answer to a rude interjection. It made me laugh I must admit  Maybe this is why respected members are leaving in droves 
|
|
| 13. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 05:49 pm |
|
Thanks for contributing LL.
I also want to know views on the assertion made by a member : that it is common practice to reproduce work on this site without acknowledging the source, and leading people to believe it is one's own work.
|
|
| 14. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 07:22 pm |
|
Quoting karpusqueen: Thanks for contributing LL.
I also want to know views on the assertion made by a member : that it is common practice to reproduce work on this site without acknowledging the source, and leading people to believe it is one's own work. |
Sorry - I haven't been contributing to this thread before today but could you tell me exactly WHERE teaschip1 claimed that post was her own work or do you mean that by omission she led people to THINK it was her own work? Because - quite frankly - I couldn't give two hoots who wrote it. You all clearly have nothing better to do with your time than gripe at each other all day long.
|
|
| 15. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 07:33 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Quoting karpusqueen: Thanks for contributing LL.
I also want to know views on the assertion made by a member : that it is common practice to reproduce work on this site without acknowledging the source, and leading people to believe it is one's own work. |
Sorry - I haven't been contributing to this thread before today but could you tell me exactly WHERE teaschip1 claimed that post was her own work or do you mean that by omission she led people to THINK it was her own work? Because - quite frankly - I couldn't give two hoots who wrote it. You all clearly have nothing better to do with your time than gripe at each other all day long. |
Is that a gripe?
All the facts of the matter are recorded on this site. Happy reading
|
|
| 16. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 07:40 pm |
|
Copyright is actually a very important issue and should not be taken lightly. What happened here may just be the thin end of the wedge. Whilst it's the site owners who carry the risk and may even be paying insurance premiums to cover themselves, Moderators, SHOULD give a hoot.
I'm sure Admin will come along at some point and clarify everything, then we can put our minds at rest about the legalities, though sadly not the ethics.
Don't forget Rule 12 Moderators
|
|
| 17. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 07:52 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Sorry - I haven't been contributing to this thread before today but could you tell me exactly WHERE teaschip1 claimed that post was her own work or do you mean that by omission she led people to THINK it was her own work? Because - quite frankly - I couldn't give two hoots who wrote it. You all clearly have nothing better to do with your time than gripe at each other all day long. |
yeah! it looks like..:-S
|
|
| 18. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 07:58 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Sorry - I haven't been contributing to this thread before today but could you tell me exactly WHERE teaschip1 claimed that post was her own work or do you mean that by omission she led people to THINK it was her own work? Because - quite frankly - I couldn't give two hoots who wrote it. You all clearly have nothing better to do with your time than gripe at each other all day long. |
+1
|
|
| 20. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 08:32 pm |
|
Quoting catwoman: Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
 |
Karpusqueen you are currently complaining about teaschip1's post in 3 different threads - isn't this just a tiny bit excessive? Are you going for some sort of record? :-S
|
|
| 21. |
12 Apr 2008 Sat 09:51 pm |
|
Quoting lady in red: Quoting catwoman: Quoting Ghost2: Quoting karpusqueen: I began this thread yesterday but it disappeared, without explanation, overnight.
|
I agree it is somewhat irksome. In a perfect world ALL your posts and threads would disappear overnight
(Just passing through..... ) |
|
Karpusqueen you are currently complaining about teaschip1's post in 3 different threads - isn't this just a tiny bit excessive? Are you going for some sort of record? :-S |
Absolutely not and my reasons are more logical than you may think.
It all began during a debate about somethinhg else. In order not to detract from that debate (there had already been a discussion about threads going off topic and spoiling debates) I took it to another thread. That thread was locked, for some reason, so I began another with the same title as this one. That thread appears to have been deleted overnight without explanation. So I have repeated it.
As a Moderator you clearly have the capability to post on a locked thread. Obviously that now looks, to anyone reading your posts, as though one of the threads was current until after your post. Well done .
This thread is not about teaschip1, it's about copyright issues. I gave some background information to put it in context. You can believe that or not. I don't care.
Now we are off topic again.
Care to begin a new thread about my supposed penchant for
repeating myself?
|
|
| 22. |
13 Apr 2008 Sun 02:05 am |
|
Quoting libralady: Although it is a long post and somewhat complicated to read, there is the point of copyright that should be considered, especially when the site advertises a lawyer of copyright, which is directly above post 7. I believe that if something is copied from a piece that holds a copyright symbol or clearly states that it is a copyright, then the source should be quoted. If the post is quoted from an article by an author then that author should be quoted. Not difficult - just a case of common decency!
Modified: it would be useful to hear other opinions
|
Of course, I am very much against any copying of others works with out, at the very least, some type of credit given to the original author/artist.
As an artist with intellectual property,I have been involved in this issue both legally and morally. It is no small matter.
Did you know that Intellectual property is inheritable? In divorce cases it is part of community property?
No mark is needed for legal copyright protection. As soon as a work is fixed, it is copyright. It is a serious matter others here would do well to understand instead of trivializing and making into a joke.
Ever heard the saying, 'Ignorance of the law excuses no one'. How about driving over the speed limit, will you tell the officer, I didn't know? You will still get a ticket, or could even go to jail if the law you broke was serious. Once you get behind the wheel, you are expected to know the law.
It is best first to assume copyright, unless specifically and clearly stated public domain.
|
|
| 23. |
13 Apr 2008 Sun 10:16 pm |
|
Quoting alameda: Quoting libralady: Although it is a long post and somewhat complicated to read, there is the point of copyright that should be considered, especially when the site advertises a lawyer of copyright, which is directly above post 7. I believe that if something is copied from a piece that holds a copyright symbol or clearly states that it is a copyright, then the source should be quoted. If the post is quoted from an article by an author then that author should be quoted. Not difficult - just a case of common decency!
Modified: it would be useful to hear other opinions
|
Of course, I am very much against any copying of others works with out, at the very least, some type of credit given to the original author/artist.
As an artist with intellectual property,I have been involved in this issue both legally and morally. It is no small matter.
Did you know that Intellectual property is inheritable? In divorce cases it is part of community property?
No mark is needed for legal copyright protection. As soon as a work is fixed, it is copyright. It is a serious matter others here would do well to understand instead of trivializing and making into a joke.
Ever heard the saying, 'Ignorance of the law excuses no one'. How about driving over the speed limit, will you tell the officer, I didn't know? You will still get a ticket, or could even go to jail if the law you broke was serious. Once you get behind the wheel, you are expected to know the law.
It is best first to assume copyright, unless specifically and clearly stated public domain. |
I now how fiercely my company protects it's IPR especially when you know how much the product/piece/paper cost to produce!
|
|
| 24. |
14 Apr 2008 Mon 01:06 pm |
|
Ok, so Teas should have added link to the source she had quoted. It might have been a simple oversight. The person who noticed it might have simply added a link and leave it be. (I had a similar situation where I posted a missing link and was reprimanded for not having done so by PM). Teas explained why she hadn't quoted the source but that just added fuel to mission of the righteous to the effect that a new thread was started to lynch the guilty of the crime. Mods decided to delete this thread so the next day the same thread appears demanding justice for the lynching committee. Complaint about breaking the rule 12 breaks the rule about complaining to the mods by PM rather than posting on the forum. How consistent is that?
Everybody noticed that this thread is nothing but an attempt to humiliate Teas. To my great satisfaction, it resulted in humiliation of KarpusQ by her own self.
|
|
| 25. |
14 Apr 2008 Mon 08:09 pm |
|
Quoting Daydreamer: ..........Everybody noticed that this thread is nothing but an attempt to humiliate Teas. To my great satisfaction, it resulted in humiliation of KarpusQ by her own self. |
Daydreamer.....this topic is about copyright and the ethics and legality of it, not about teaschip.
I have been made fun of and belittled many times for including links to my posts. When I stated the reason for that, it was dismissed.
There is a reason. If it isn't too taxing, try reading the material K collected.
The fact of the matter is at the bottom of the page Add Message to the Forum is a link to rules which quite specifically state:
Writing in the Forum
12. Any message with more than a few sentences copied from another source must give the source with the copied text. Excessive copying from other sources must be avoided. Instead of pasting a whole article please post a link to the article and your thoughts about it in a few sentences.
5. Forum messages should have meaningful content. Please refrain from posting meaningless threads, one word (or short) nonsense posts, or such like
Uploading Pictures and Essays
3. Pictures of Turkey uploaded by a user must belong to the user or the source of the picture must be appropriately referenced. If the uploading user does not own the uploaded picture, he/she must get permission from the owner of the picture before uploading.
|
|
| 26. |
14 Apr 2008 Mon 09:31 pm |
|
Quoting alameda:
Daydreamer.....this topic is about copyright and the ethics and legality of it, not about teaschip.
I have been made fun of and belittled many times for including links to my posts. When I stated the reason for that, it was dismissed.
There is a reason. If it isn't too taxing, try reading the material K collected.
The fact of the matter is at the bottom of the page Add Message to the Forum is a link to rules which quite specifically state:
Writing in the Forum
12. Any message with more than a few sentences copied from another source must give the source with the copied text. Excessive copying from other sources must be avoided. Instead of pasting a whole article please post a link to the article and your thoughts about it in a few sentences.
5. Forum messages should have meaningful content. Please refrain from posting meaningless threads, one word (or short) nonsense posts, or such like
Uploading Pictures and Essays
3. Pictures of Turkey uploaded by a user must belong to the user or the source of the picture must be appropriately referenced. If the uploading user does not own the uploaded picture, he/she must get permission from the owner of the picture before uploading.
|
Oh please alameda!!!! None of us are stupid enough to believe that peace train posted this thread to call attention to a copyright issue. We have seen enough of her writing to know what she was doing.
As far as you being made fun of for posting links, you can’t really be that literal can you?? I will repeat myself one more time for your benefit…..it isn’t about the links. It is about the condescending, self-righteous, “I’m smarter than everyone†attitude that you display each and every time you write here. You just don’t get it and unfortunately, I am sure you never will.
|
|
| 28. |
14 Apr 2008 Mon 11:46 pm |
|
Exactly! And if they don't, you may very well be deprived of the extra hits, and don't get your place in the top 10. Thus depriving you of potential income.
|
|
|
