Copyright Discussion for Jim McLeod...

[Roadtogundagai]

We lost an ODI to the Kiwis... You want to make something of it?

More of a "thrashing" than a loss. :laugh:

 

[SlyFrog]

The copy of the rulebook the scrote has wasn't copied by him. Someone esle gave him a copy of the intellectual property. It violates copyright.

Even if he sat and typed the thing in himself, he'd have violated copyright. Why else do some pages in the rulebook carry explicit permssion to copy while most do not?

Are you arguing U.S. or U.K. law of copyrights? If in the U.S., are you aware of the concept of fair use?

Do you have any case law or other law on comparable factual situations that back your statement that this is a violation of law and not permissible fair use in accordance with the United States Copyright Act?

Please note, this has nothing to do with TaterTot, I'm more curious about your ironclad certainty regarding your legal analysis of this particular situation. So as to not hide the ball, I believe you have stated with certainty something of which practicing attorneys would not even come close to being so certain, so I'm curious where you are getting this from.

 

[trevpr1]

Are you arguing U.S. or U.K. law of copyrights? If in the U.S., are you aware of the concept of fair use?

Do you have any case law or other law on comparable factual situations that back your statement that this is a violation of law and not permissible fair use in accordance with the United States Copyright Act?

Please note, this has nothing to do with TaterTot, I'm more curious about your ironclad certainty regarding your legal analysis of this particular situation. So as to not hide the ball, I believe you have stated with certainty something of which that practicing attorneys would not even come close to being so certain.

He has a copy of someone else's rulebook... He didn't even copy the book he bought himself. He has a copy of cpyrighted material. What's to work out here?

 

[Sparafucil3]

That said, the biggish looking Bulgarian of the three did bear more than a passing resemblance to Tater. The moustache looks suspect and Bulgarians are usually more swarthy looking.

Bulgarians?!?! They have no feel for the sport. The best tub divers come from Moosejaw. Those people dive with a passion and a flair like no one else. It is a sheer joy to watch, IMO. -- jim

 

[trevpr1]

More of a "thrashing" than a loss. :laugh:

Oh thanks for the chip-in from the cheap seats!

Oh and BTW that's a nice avatar... what a guy.

 

[SlyFrog]

He has a copy of someone else's rulebook... He didn't even copy the book he bought himself. He has a copy of cpyrighted material. What's to work out here?

I discussed it in another thread. There is nothing stating that a right to "copy" for fair use is dependent on whether or not you used your own labor to do so, or at least there is no legal doctrine I am aware of that states it.

I believe that you are really being (inadvertently I believe, I'm not trying to suggest you're being disingenuous or anything) glib on this issue. From a legal standpoint it certainly is not as simple as you make it seem, and I do not believe it is from a moral standpoint either (which I also discussed in that other thread).

 

[Gunner Scott]

Hi-

For are resident Copyright Nazis, here is MMP's folder at consimworld:

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?13@344.7yY3djehKEP.28@.ee6d502/58089

Please complain about the eASLRB, my waffen SS pack over there to your hearts content.


Scott

 

[Roadtogundagai]

Oh thanks for the chip-in from the cheap seats!

Oh and BTW that's a nice avatar... what a guy.

I got sick of the slutty pics. Upham was a remarkable soldier. If you would like more info, the website below has an overview:

http://www.nzedge.com/heroes/upham.html

P.S> Please ignore my pinching the image for my avatar - I don't want to fire up the copyright wars again. :OHNO:

 

[trevpr1]

I got sick of the slutty pics. Upham was a remarkable soldier. If you would like more info, the website below has an overview:

http://www.nzedge.com/heroes/upham.html

P.S> Please ignore my pinching the image for my avatar - I don't want to fire up the copyright wars again. :OHNO:

Since posting to you I just went and re read the wikipedia entry. Glad you were on our side!

 

[Whizbang1963]

sheesh go shopping with the wife for a few hours and the whole freaking place explodes..where are we Basra? Baghdad? or some other equally unpleasant place?

 

[Tater]

There seems to be a bit of a myth out there that copyright law is attached to commercial profitability and financial gain. It's not. It's based around principles of the creator's granted permission of fair use and inter-person distribution, regardless of financial opportunity.

Where did you get your law degree anyway?

 

[Whizbang1963]

there is an attorney in Virginia who plays ASL (or at least used to) wish I could remember his name off the top of his head. We had some really good discussions surrounding reasonable and fair use on the ASML years back and he and I discussed it further privately.

His consenus as I recall is that it is an incredibly muddy issue and every court has so far ruled just a little differently than every other so there is no clear precedent as to what is really and truly fair use and what is violation of copyright.

so unless we have some lawyers in our midst who can definitively speak on the issue, we should call this horse well and truly beaten to death. Time to bury the beast and move on.

 

[Tater]

so unless we have some lawyers in our midst who can definitively speak on the issue, we should call this horse well and truly beaten to death. Time to bury the beast and move on.

Hey, this thread and the discussion in the SS thread has absolutely NOTHING to do with copyright. Portal and Trev think they have found a pointy little stick to jab at me with. IOW, it is personal.

 

[SlyFrog]

there is an attorney in Virginia who plays ASL (or at least used to) wish I could remember his name off the top of his head. We had some really good discussions surrounding reasonable and fair use on the ASML years back and he and I discussed it further privately.

His consenus as I recall is that it is an incredibly muddy issue and every court has so far ruled just a little differently than every other so there is no clear precedent as to what is really and truly fair use and what is violation of copyright.

so unless we have some lawyers in our midst who can definitively speak on the issue, we should call this horse well and truly beaten to death. Time to bury the beast and move on.

I am a lawyer. My belief is that no lawyer worth his salt will definitively speak on this issue, because it is not an area where any intelligent lawyer would state that there is a definitive answer.

Now I do know which way I think a court would come out on some of these issues if a given claim for copyright infringement were pressed, which is different than saying I'm certain.

 

[Whizbang1963]

I am a lawyer. My belief is that no lawyer worth his salt will definitively speak on this issue, because it is not an area where any intelligent lawyer would state that there is a definitive answer.

Now I do know which way I think a court would come out on some of these issues if a given claim for copyright infringement were pressed, which is different than saying I'm certain.

would you be willing to enlighten us? Any answer from a professional at this point would be better than all of the amatuer speculation taking place about what is and what is not legal. Of course with the understanding that it is your opinion, based on your experience and not an "official" answer from the courts.

 

[Portal]

Guys, I was hoping for an honest copyright discussion. Tater has already been exposed as a copyright hypocrite with no credibility in giving the Gunner a hard time about his SS pack. We don't need to keep going there.

I have a Master of Library and Information Studies degree and work in the business records and information management field. While I'm not a lawyer, I've had decent exposure to IP law in Canada and the U.S. through my career. It is a myth that copyright protection is all about commercial opportunity. It is about creator control over how their work is available and used.

 

[Jim McLeod]

Bulgarians?!?! They have no feel for the sport. The best tub divers come from Moosejaw. Those people dive with a passion and a flair like no one else. It is a sheer joy to watch, IMO. -- jim

I concurr WRT the skill and artistry of the Moosejaw tub diver set.

Mark's use of Bulgarians, in this case, was due to financial concerns. As members of the International Tub Divers Union, the MJ crew demand top $$$.

The Bulgarians on the other hand can be had for a pitance. They have no real medical plan, their dental benefits are a joke and they get paid straight time for any OT they put in. Whats more, you can sleep them six to a room (think ASLOK levels of BO but with more paprika) and they will all fit easily into the trunk of your average vehicle for travel purposes.

I also hear that Mark can write off the money spent on the Bulgarians. He can claim them as dependants and list them as foreign research students.

Anyway, I still believe that that is Tater over in the back behind the furry bald guy.

:nuts:

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I discussed it in another thread. There is nothing stating that a right to "copy" for fair use is dependent on whether or not you used your own labor to do so, or at least there is no legal doctrine I am aware of that states it.

I believe that you are really being (inadvertently I believe, I'm not trying to suggest you're being disingenuous or anything) glib on this issue. From a legal standpoint it certainly is not as simple as you make it seem, and I do not believe it is from a moral standpoint either (which I also discussed in that other thread).

You and Bruce have both covered it quite well, thanks for your input. It's an important issue; it's also why the other thread was locked and why I hope any future threads on stolen artwork will continue to be locked.

 

[SlyFrog]

would you be willing to enlighten us? Any answer from a professional at this point would be better than all of the amatuer speculation taking place about what is and what is not legal. Of course with the understanding that it is your opinion, based on your experience and not an "official" answer from the courts.

Nahhh. First, as mentioned, I do not think there is a clear answer - the guy you mentioned talking to through PMs had a good angle on it in my opinion. Second, I did not want to come in and try to hold court and give the definitive answer anyway, I was just hoping that people might ease up a bit on the certainty and vitriol and recognize that this is a complex area of the law that has some grey areas. I'm also a bit paranoid about giving my opinion on things like this as certainty - while I have them, I don't need to dismiss other people and then suggest that I have a whizbang answer myself. I save that for talking out of my ass on other things.

I'd be much more interested in discussing Rodney King, and asking why we can't all just get along.

 

[Portal]

Spoken like a true lawyer. Lots said but nothing at all. :laugh: