[MakoMike]

Guys,
I've just had to delete two entire threads because the threads were started by someone quoting, in its entirety, a copyrighted article. There is no way the rest of the thread would have made sense without the originating, offensive, post.
Let me give you a brief, oversimplified and simplistic overview of the copyright rules. Any copyrighted material cannot be reproduced, for profit, without the express permission of the copyright holder. Since this website collects fees for advertising it falls into the definition of "for profit" regardless of whether it actually generates a profit or not. So please DO NOT post complete articles or copyrighted images without first obtaining permission. If you do get permission, please note at the bottom of the post "posted with the permission of the author or publisher."
If you find an article that peaks your interest you can quote from the article, sparingly, and paraphrase the significant facts brought out by the author using you own words. The object of this policy is not consorship or the stifiling of discussion, the object is prevent Noreast from being sued! In which case we all loose.

(This post edited by MakoMike on 02/19/2003)

 

[620427]

why delete the entire thread and all the responses that were not copyright issues ?

can you explain that please.

also you better check the archieves on noreast because there are thousands of copyright infrigements contained in these posts.

are you aware that it is a copyright infringement to xerox a page from a book if you dont have permission as well.
how often is that enforced ?

 

[noreast]

Megs,

We have had to delete a number of posts on this site due to the threat of copyright infringement. A link to the article is preferred.

By thw way; when was the last time you went to Kinko?s or Staples to get a copy of a page from a book? They won?t do it because of ?copyright infringement? concerns.

Welcome back.

 

[MakoMike]

Megs,
Why delete the thread? Because none of the reposes made any sense without the original message.
Re:"check the archieves on noreast because there are thousands of copyright infrigements contained in these posts."
I know, George and I have talked about this several times and we agreed that it had to stop. I'll tell you, if I ever found any of my pictures on a discussion board like this (I'm a semi-pro photographer)I would sue both the Board and the guy who posted it. I don't want to see that happen to this board or any of its members.
FYI- It is NOT a copyright infringement, per se, to copy a page from a book, either via a Xerox Machine or by hand. There are multiple exceptions for "fair use" of copyrighted materials. My post attempted to simplify those fair ues rules for this environment.

 

[Hunt n' Fish]

Learn something new

I was not aware of that. I thought that as long as the source and auther were cited it was OK. If I put the time into writing an article, study, etc. I would be happy to have as many people see it as possible as long as I was credited for it. Especially a news article. Interesting...

Megalodon, don't take it personally. They have a valid reason, it was just unknown prior to this.

(This post edited by doughboy on 02/19/2003)

 

[186logic]

Makomike, what do you mean none of the other responses made sense when the article was deleted!! THEY MADE SENSE TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED and others may just have caught on. So thoughtless of you to carelessly delete our feelings about a matter which is quite important.
You have just WASTED my time and I am not a happy boy.

 

[LkyLindy]

Wazzup

What was the topic of the deleted thread???-
Inquiring minds want to know!!!

This post edited by LkyLindy 02:58 PM 12/22/2009

 

[Gamakatsu]

Yeah, what did I miss???

Anyway, in Mike's defense, there was a phony picture posted on here last year of a great white leaping out of the water at a rescue chopper. The guy who orginally took the pic of the shark threatened George with legal action if the pic was not removed. While the practice of cutting and pasting is common online, you never know when you're going to run into some jerk like that.

Gamakatsu

 

[Brown Trout]

How about the "link to the article" that was spoken about so we can get on w/ it? Inquiring minds DO want to know

 

[MakoMike]

Guys,
FYI, it was and arrticle from the Financial Times, pointing out how the U.S. oil companies have been doing business with Iraq, through their European subsidiaries. If someone, including Megs, wants to post the link and restart the discussion that would be fine. In fact that's the way it should have been done in the forst place.

 

[Polodog]

Copyrights......what me Worry

Mako is right about the issue of copyright infringements. Yes one could Xerox a page for personal use from a book. As long as this page, will not be used for public dissemination of information. Yes one could also use published material in there own reports, as long as the source and authors are duly acknowledged. This practice being restricted to the academic world. Even though on college campuses students will Xerox complete books to save a buck, but any copier is within their rights to refuse, as they too become an accessory to that act of copyright infringement. Now on the question of this board being profit driven, is a moot point. As any previously published information, which is posted here, is public dissemination of that material. In the same way our original posts here enjoy copyright protection of noreast.com. Thus if we copy articles etc. and post them here the board or we are open to litigation by the owners of that intellectual property. By the way many a times when I have used information I have sent an email to the publishers explaining to them my intended use of their materials, and I have never been disappointed. I always save their email in case of problems later. So guys you might be surprised that a simple email will get you the permission.

 

[620427]

"I would sue "

quote:
"I'll tell you,
if I ever found any of my pictures on a discussion board like this (I'm a semi-pro photographer)I would sue both the Board and the guy who posted it." MAKO MIKE **

makomike can you explain why you take such a hardline attitude about something like this ?

if a member innocently copied one of your photographs from the web and posted it on noreast.com, you would SUE THEM AND NOREAST.COM ?

most likely that member greatly admired your photograph and wanted to share it with his friends as well, they had no intention of making a profit with it, only to share its beauty with others.
your response is to start a LAWSUIT why ?

i can understand your desire to sue if noreast would use your picture on the cover of the magazine without your permission,
but to sue an innocent member of a discussion group because the admired your picture is a bit extreme wouldnt you think ?

what if it was one of the 10 year old readers who we strive so hard to protect on these boards,
what if the 10 year old posted one of your copyright photos,
DO THEY GET SUED AS WELL ???

"you never know when you're going to run into some jerk like that. " gamakatsu

as gamakatsu pointed out,
we might have run into one of those people right on our own board !

** - makomike's quotes were used with his permission, copy of his email to me is available to all publishers, members and attorneys

(This post edited by Megalodon on 02/20/2003)

 

[Billy40]

Mega - it probably wouldn't bother me either, but if I was making money off of photograpphs, then I deserve some sort of Royayties from Noreast, since they are making money based on how many people view teh site, and if my photo drew people here, I should get some.

There are MANY people who share MM's copyrighting photo's: "I'll sue you" mentality, so there must something more to it. Take a look at some of teh photos you see posted, a lot have copyright information right on the photo itself.

 

[MakoMike]

Megs,
Just like the authors who specialize in words, I take pictures to earn money. If someone uses one of my pictures I am entitled to compensation for it. When a magazine, like Noreast, likes my pictures they BUY the right to use them. If I feel charitable, I might GIVE the right to use them to a worthwhile cause. But. like the author's articles, they are mine, and I use them to earn money. If you (figuratively not personally) use one of my pictures without my permission you are STEALING! If I like a product you sell in your (figurative) store, does that entitle me to pick it up and walk out with it? Of course not! So why should someone be able to pick up and walk away with my picture or article? Just because you can't touch it (its called intangible property) doesn't mean that it belongs to everybody, or nobody. I pay to produce my pictures, both in time and expenses, why should I be forced to give them away to any Tom, Dick or Harry that has a computer?

 

[613458]

I've held back from responding on the copyright issues, but I think it's finally time to chime in.

I happen to live copyright as part of my job (I'm an entertainment attorney with a major record company), and it troubles me that there seems to be a growing misconception that the use of another's copyrighted work without license should not be actionable. While there are established "fair use(s)" under copyright (for educational purposes, newsworthiness, etc.), the cutting and pasting of copyrighted material is a rampant problem that needs to be aggressively policed.

If you disagree with the foregoing statement, then you should take a close look at the music industry and what P2P sites, Napster and burning have done (I acknowledge that some of the erosion of music sales are in fact the industry's fault (ie., the music stinks, pricing, failure to embrace new technologies, and the arrogance of the major record companies)). Napster and its progeny has given rise to a public sentiment that as long as content is on the net, it is part of the "public domain" and subject to free use (for those familiar with the term "public domain", please recognize that this is a legal term, not a lay term, and doesn't refer to the public availability of a copyrighted work).

While not all cases of unlicensed use are actionable, and all cases of infringement monetarily worth pursuing legally, I stand by MM in his hard-nose stance against the unauthorized use of his work.

 

[LkyLindy]

Brass Tacks

Mahi-
Lets say you go to a site that says-Images for free-tons of photos-none of which gives any copyright indication-You download to this site and then the "author " finds it and says NO GO-How are you supposed to know what's copyrighted or not??

 

[MakoMatt]

I would just like to say that if I see any of my original MakoMatt artwork creations on any other sites without my expressed permission, I will sue the pants off everyone!!!

My latest creation, the .....MakoLisa!!!!

 

[LkyLindy]

WHOOOAHHHH

Mako-
LMAO

 

[B.Attitude]

My thoughts are still the same....
EDIT,DON'T DELETE!!!!
This is supposed to be a friendly fishing site,not a freakin courtroom with all kinds of LEGAL BS about what we're posting.(No offense Mahi ,LOL)I thought George just wanted the attacks of members,foul language and the nudity to stop!!
Boys and Girls,can you say FRIENDLY fishing site?
paulie

 

[MakoMatt]

LkyLindy, you have used a very popular computer lingo phrase, LMAO. This may be copyrighted material so I would kindly request that MakoMike do a search to see if it is. Furthermore, the letter A, in LMAO, I think we all know what that stands for, so I would further request that MakoMike give some thought as to weather or not this is suitable for family viewing, and, should he decide it is not, would suggest that rather then delete the entire thread, perhaps he could delete the letter A, leaving us with LMO.

MakoMatt