-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
bluenation
Member
its definitely one of the first things i noticed when i stumbled on TMC. and it seeems like im not alone.
it's like alot of TMC members take themselves too seriously, and there is a a level of ego in that tag that's hard not to laugh at....like, something you'd expect a middle aged, upper class person who first started using forums. (dont forget the monocles!)
then again, i never cared what some silly rags or blogs on the internet said. Meh.
it's like alot of TMC members take themselves too seriously, and there is a a level of ego in that tag that's hard not to laugh at....like, something you'd expect a middle aged, upper class person who first started using forums. (dont forget the monocles!)
then again, i never cared what some silly rags or blogs on the internet said. Meh.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Sheez. Why so negative towards something that really shouldn't matter?
For the record, yes, I am a middle-aged (probably) upper class woman .. who has been on the internet since it was DARPANET and the first "forum" I was on was called readnews. So I probably don't qualify for the 'first started using a forum' part. And I don't have a monocle. But I'll cop to the age and economic classification.
It's like some are using the signature line (that has worked) as a reason to take potshots at others here on the forum.
Live and let live. It's a car forum. That's all. Just a car forum.
For the record, yes, I am a middle-aged (probably) upper class woman .. who has been on the internet since it was DARPANET and the first "forum" I was on was called readnews. So I probably don't qualify for the 'first started using a forum' part. And I don't have a monocle. But I'll cop to the age and economic classification.
It's like some are using the signature line (that has worked) as a reason to take potshots at others here on the forum.
Live and let live. It's a car forum. That's all. Just a car forum.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
No one was under the impression that it was legally binding, but the existence of it did help to pare down on the incidences of "journalists" quoting this forum without attribution or a link. Like all types of disclaimers/warning signs, not matter if it's legally binding or not, as long as it gives people pause or deters them from doing something, it has served its purpose.
Danal
electricmotorglider.com
Copyright is binding with or without the notice.
As I mentioned in my original post, there is "Fair Use". Let's expand on what the law really says: The "Fair Use" framework in copyright law allows for reproduction of for the purpose of "...criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research...". People sometimes see the "news reporting" from that part of the law and think that somehow makes "journalism" special. It doesn't. A given use is either fair use, by ALL of the parts of that law, or not.
For example, that same section also states "The amount...in relation...to the work as a whole", is one of the determinants of infringement vs. fair use. That 'amount' phrase is the killer for quoting most forum posts. Most posts are fairly short. And there are plenty of precedent rulings that quoting a substantial portion of a work is infringing.
I see people all of the time state things exactly like you did. The first time you said "Not how the world or our free society works." The second time time you invoke the word "journalism" with phrasing that infers it somehow overrides infringement. The third time you say the notices are not legally binding. Neither "free society" nor "journalism" have anything to do with how copyright infringement vs. fair use actually work. Instead, it is all there in the code. And the code is binding, with or without any particular signature.
Is the net effect that another site can still quote a post from here, even when a person has a "my copyright" signature? Maybe. Maybe Not. It becomes a question of Fair Use. Which is hideously complex. Without such a signature, people reading or quoting tend to not think about copyright (even though it still applies). Drawing people's attention to that "maybe not" has been extremely effective in a practical sense in stopping the actual underlying behavior.
§ 107 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use[SUP]40[/SUP]
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Last edited:
Yep - quoting a forum post for any journalisted purposes is fair use. Thanks for posting that. Now everyone knows. Assume everything you post is already copyrighted by the forum owner and that anything can be used for journalistic purposes. Because it can. An article can quote a protected work (let's say a book) and it can quote a forum post.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
I think you keep missing the key point: Misuse of posts (out of context) virtually stopped with the signature.
It worked. And that's all people wanted. This isn't about if you're right or wrong. It was about a solution.
What is your issue with this? It's mainly used as a tool against 'journalists' who would sometimes quite members without even saying where it came from and certainly not contacting them. This just served the purpose of either shaming those professionals into at least doing proper attribution and/or putting them in context.
Last edited:
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Who's upset? In the least? I was curious about something and our friendly moderator can't stop from taking the last word for some reason and keeps bumping the thread up.
MassModel3
Member
I'll enjoy the margarita if you agree to switch to decaf.
LMAO!! OMG, I choked on my soda when I read that!
Uh oh, can't get the last word in... Eco, you're up.
Danal
electricmotorglider.com
Fair use is MUCH more complex than you state. I've linked to the code, and copy pasted part of it. Your declarative statements are not factual.
Have fun!
^^This.
I tend to think the copyright notices in the signatures are redundant since the content generated on this site is already copyrighted. But if members find them anecdotally effective, I'm fine with that just as long as they follow the Signature Guidlines listed in the Forum Rules.
Also there is the option to hide signatures in the Thread Display Options of your forum settings.
Link: Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum
Stop drawing me back in to explain things!
Agreed- the entire forum is ostensibly copyrighted by the forum owners. Assume everything is protected under copyright law. However, people forget that it's pretty easy to fall into the Fair Use doctrines of the Copyright Law, especially if it's non-commercial usage. (i.e. not in an advertising campaign or written on the side of a soda can).
By the way, I'm calm and smiling as I type this. I have no ill feelings towards anyone in this thread. We're allowed to disagree. It would be a boring world and a boring forum if one person created a topic and the other 22,000 members simply read it and moved on as they agreed 100% with every post. Stop worrying about convincing everyone of your position, I was merely asking why people had that signature, and it was explained to me that some blogger copied your posts three years ago and your signature scared them off. Gotcha. Turning this into an exercise on copyright law is not going to convince me any further.
Love you all! Go out and drive already instead of goading me into posting :wink:
Agreed- the entire forum is ostensibly copyrighted by the forum owners. Assume everything is protected under copyright law. However, people forget that it's pretty easy to fall into the Fair Use doctrines of the Copyright Law, especially if it's non-commercial usage. (i.e. not in an advertising campaign or written on the side of a soda can).
If that doesn't cover quoting a forum post in a journalistic medium, I don't know what does. A journalist may read posts on a forum and quote them for their journalistic articles however they please - it's absolutely covered under Fair Use. You can't go one day without news organizations reprinting online posts from every possible source. It's legal. I'm not going to argue with you on this.http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html said:
By the way, I'm calm and smiling as I type this. I have no ill feelings towards anyone in this thread. We're allowed to disagree. It would be a boring world and a boring forum if one person created a topic and the other 22,000 members simply read it and moved on as they agreed 100% with every post. Stop worrying about convincing everyone of your position, I was merely asking why people had that signature, and it was explained to me that some blogger copied your posts three years ago and your signature scared them off. Gotcha. Turning this into an exercise on copyright law is not going to convince me any further.
Love you all! Go out and drive already instead of goading me into posting :wink:
Fair use does often apply, though it's mainly an issue of common courtesy. As one of the site owners, it's particularly frustrating to have content lifted without attribution or notification. Even worse when that content gets misconstrued.
During a particularly bad time I contacted many of the offending publications and some members started putting notices in their signatures. Since then things have been much better. I occasionally even get an email asking permission. So even if the notices in the signatures were pointless, they do serve as a reminder and likely encourage more to act in a courteous manner when quoting our content.
But then again, I don't even use a signature.
During a particularly bad time I contacted many of the offending publications and some members started putting notices in their signatures. Since then things have been much better. I occasionally even get an email asking permission. So even if the notices in the signatures were pointless, they do serve as a reminder and likely encourage more to act in a courteous manner when quoting our content.
But then again, I don't even use a signature.
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
Well, you weren't here when reporters started running hit pieces quoting this forum out of context which would actually cause drops in the Tesla stock price. Putting the signature lines in stopped that.
bluenation
Member
...that's what im saying.
to be fair, stock price never reflected the value of a company, except in that overblown importance given to market cap.
there'll be bears, and there'll be bulls. the world will keep running.
and so will tesla. the end.
