Ukraine Can Win

[JayH]

Jay, why do you insist of posting whole articles that can be read by just clicking on a link?


It is beyond annoying.

The short answer-- many stories in the  links are not able to be seen by some -for a variety of reasons.

I am also of the view that being able to see the substance of the article as written is far preferable to a rework to say the same things without attribution ( eg-- as a major poster on another forum repeatedly does )=(fi fi)
Often the article will cover numerous points and angles- and a short excerpt does not paint the whole picture.
You have made the point repeatedly-- so why not comment on the hugely positive bravery of this young woman?I know you do care about Ukraine and it's people-- but--I want as many people as possible to feel like that- and given the promoted negativity good news positive stories are needed to counterbalance.

One last point--my overwhelming personal preference is to see a story like I posted above appearing on the forum rather than 16 pages of FT's self indulgent drivel & nonsense.

[JayH]

I'd rather read the whole article rather than clicking on the links. 

I agree-- my guess is that is so for most people.

[alex330]

From what I understand the copy right is nullified IF the link to the original article is shown.

You should really ask permission from the author to be above board. Linking back to the article and naming the source is generally acceptable to most as you drive traffic back to the original site. Limiting the amount of copied content helps to uphold you to the fair use rule.

[AkMike]

After reading the Cal State doc attached it appears to me to say unless the source is from a pay per site or subscription news source it's open to use under the US copyright laws. This use of articles is for education.

http://www.calstate.edu/gc/Docs/Fair_Use.doc

[fathertime]

One last point--my overwhelming personal preference is to see a story like I posted above appearing on the forum rather than 16 pages of FT's self indulgent drivel & nonsense.

I'm sure on your mind a lot!   So now it is my fault that you are break forum rules and post full articles...typical warped 'thinking' by you. 


Fathertime!   

[Boethius]

After reading the Cal State doc attached it appears to me to say unless the source is from a pay per site or subscription news source it's open to use under the US copyright laws. This use of articles is for education.

http://www.calstate.edu/gc/Docs/Fair_Use.doc

But links on this forum are not made solely by US situs posters.  Furthermore, factor 3 in your link tends to support the restriction imposed.

[AkMike]

What other copyrights is this US based forum concerned with? Uganda?

[Boethius]

Canada, Australia, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Germany, France, New Zealand, Belgium, the Netherlands . . . Any country from which posters either post, or access from this forum, copyrighted material.

Not all posters here are American, and unless you are an expert in the law of conflict in addition to copyright law, you don't know which laws may be applied.

[AkMike]

I read factor 3 as showing the use of news sources is legit for this application.

Factor 3:   The amount of the work used in relation to the whole copyrighted work.


Here, the items on the left weigh in favor of fair use and those on the right weigh in favor of not a fair use, in which case permission from the copyright holder is required. 

      Small amount   Large amount
      Not the “heart” of the work   “Heart” of the work

Like all of the factors, this factor, in particular, must be considered in relation to the other factors.  For example, if the use is educational and for commentary purposes (factor 1, strongly in favor of fair use) then more of the work could be used and still be within fair use.  Similarly, if the use is commercial, even a small amount of use would weigh in favor of it not being a fair use, therefore, requiring permission.

[Boethius]

The key is "could".  In legalese, that also means "could not".

American case law in terms of what can, and cannot be used as "fair use" is based on interpretations of the Copyright Act 17 U.S.C.  107. 

The rule here has been established for a reason, and Mod3 has some real life experience in this area, which is why he established the rule.

[Boethius]

Even American courts haven't come up with a definitive answer on fair use -


http://www.jstor.org/stable/40041357?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

[calmissile]

The key is "could".  In legalese, that also means "could not".

American case law in terms of what can, and cannot be used as "fair use" is based on interpretations of the Copyright Act 17 U.S.C.  107. 

The rule here has been established for a reason, and Mod3 has some real life experience in this area, which is why he established the rule.

Am I getting senile or is there some reason I cannot find the post from Mod3?

Never mind, I am afraid of the answer.   

[Boethius]

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=18830.0

[mendeleyev]

It is indeed dangerous to post an entire article. Many syndication agreements exist whereby the original author extends the right to republish to a limited group or publishing organization. A good example of this is any syndicated newspaper or magazine article. Unless RWD pays the syndication fees, we are in violation of copyright because we have broadcast or published for free what another source must pay for the same privilege.

To qualify for fair use or educational use in such circumstances we can introduce an article to readers, but should direct them where to legally find the complete article. Here is an example by using an article from the Moscow Times:

A founding stone for the controversial Prince Vladimir statue was installed on Borovitskaya Ploshchad near the Moscow Kremlin on Tuesday, Interfax news agency reported. The installment ceremony was attended by Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kirill, Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, Russian news agencies reported.

Technically I've just violated not one, but two copyrights: The Moscow Times, and the Interfax news agency of which the MT pays for news services.

I can mitigate those violations by doing this:

The Moscow Times (link added), quoting sources from Russia's Interfax news agency, says that "A founding stone for the controversial Prince Vladimir statue was installed on Borovitskaya Ploshchad near the Moscow Kremlin on Tuesday." According to Moscow Times sources, the newspaper also reported that the ceremony to install the monument "was attended by Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kirill, Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin."

Read the full story here.

I have whetted the appetite to read, and have provided links for those who wish to read to the article. Links to newspapers are proper, but links to a private and paid service like Interfax is not, unless Interfax published the story somewhere themselves.


Educational use and fair use is more appropriate to quotes and short segments. In the United States, the laws regarding fair use are guided by the word "limited." Copying an entire article is not "limited" at all-it is a full republication and opens the forum to potential legal issues. In all cases a link to the source is necessary.

[Muzh]

Mendy, do you think your explanation will penetrate the thick skull of certain copious "copy and paste" poster?


I think not. 

[JayH]

For the supposedly well educated who only want to read links--please read the whole article and report back!

For the rest is a summary!

Also note-the author has specifically given permission for reproduction! While this is dated 2008-it espouses the principles involved.It certainly illustrates that some of the over precious statement made here(on forum) are marginal at best.\\
 All the while recognising that this is a different issue to Mods request here on posting.

Note that this is an essay about copyright myths. It assumes you know at least what copyright is -- basically the legal exclusive right of the author of a creative work to control the copying of that work. If you didn't know that, check out my own brief introduction to copyright for more information. Feel free to link to this document, no need to ask me. Really, NO need to ask.

10 Big Myths about copyright explained

In Summary

These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.
Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.
Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except perhaps the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.
Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.
Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.
Fan fiction and other work derived from copyrighted works is a copyright violation.
Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.
Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.
Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.

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

[mendeleyev]

For the supposedly well educated who only want to read links--please read the whole article and report back!

I did, although it was fairly generalized. Nothing there to dispute what I posted earlier. You don't like links, Jay, and I love ya man, but not only are full posts a copyright violation, but I skip thru the bulk of it.

[Muzh]

Mendy, do you think your explanation will penetrate the thick skull of certain copious "copy and paste" poster?


I think not. 

What'd I say? 

[JayH]

Back to the real world-- and the thread title.

US to provide aid to Ukrainian Armed Forces to ensure NATO interoperability


United States will assist the Armed Forces of Ukraine in becoming interoperable with NATO forces by 2020, Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Elissa Slotkin said.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/us-to-provide-aid-to-ukrainian-armed-forces-to-ensure-nato-interoperability-401502.html

[Muzh]

Thank you

[AkMike]

Ukraine reduces gas consumption by 19% in 10 months
In January-October 2015, Ukraine reduced consumption of natural gas by 19.4% compared to the same period last year, to 25.788 billion cubic meters (bcm), according to the Ministry of Energy and Coal Industry of Ukraine.
Read Full Article On www.unian.info

[alex330]

Congress Passes Bill Giving Lethal Aid To Ukraine

Congress has passed a defense policy bill that authorizes up to $50 million in lethal military aid for Ukraine and mandates a White House response if Russia is deemed to be violating a key arms control treaty.

http://www.rferl.org/content/us-ukraine-russia-lethal-aid-bill/27356526.html

[JayH]

 The idea that Ukraine can win  is becoming closer to reality every day.However--it is not stopping Putin making ridiculous statements!!
The Minsk agreements have served Ukraine's purpose-- to buy time and restrict the depth of the Russian invasion. I look forward to the next stages--ie--to remove Russia from all of Ukraine.

The author offers his own analysis of the fulfillment of each of the provisions of the Minsk Protocol.

As for the complete ceasefire, UKolov notes that the Russian mercenaries and militants have systematically violated it, even trying to go on an offensive during 2015, although they were refuted.

Speaking about the withdrawal of heavy weapons, the political scientist stressed that, according to the OSCE, the militants violate this provision regularly, by moving toward the contact line their BM-21s, as well as other mortars and tanks.

On the Article 3, the journalist noted that the militants do not allow OSCE SMM to the certain areas of the occupied territories.




Expert highlights Putin’s manipulations over Minsk deal


As for the amnesty and pardon by giving effect to the relevant law, Putin pretends he does not know that the law was adopted on September 16, 2014, according to the expert.

Also, the militants refused to exchange prisoners according to the all-for-all principle.

The political analyst also reminded of the issue of securing the deliveries and distribution of international humanitarian aid: "It was reported that that militants let only part of the humanitarian aid to the occupied areas from the territory of Ukraine," he stressed.

"Therefore, Putin's statements about the need to amend the Ukrainian Constitution before Russia implements Article 9 [of the Protocol] is a deliberate manipulation. Russia must first implement articles 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7," the expert said.

Earlier today, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the control over the state border between Ukraine and Russia in the occupied Donbas will not be returned to Kyiv until the Constitution of Ukraine is amended.



Read more on UNIAN: http://www.unian.info/politics/1233054-expert-highlights-putins-manipulations-over-minsk-deal.html

The sheer temirity of Putins ignorance is amazing-- one wonders when he will get it- get that it is no longer Russia controlling the destiny of Ukraine
Putin names condition for Ukraine's retaking its eastern borders

Russian President Vladimir Putin says that Ukraine will be able to retake its eastern border with Russia only after constitutional reform has been introduced, according to Putin's official website kremlin.ru.


Read more on UNIAN: http://www.unian.info/politics/1232361-putin-names-condition-for-ukraines-retaking-its-eastern-borders.html


On December 26, Russian President Vladimir Putin appointed one of his close, trusted aides, Boris Gryzlov, Russia's representative in the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine, which concluded the two Minsk agreements on Ukraine's Donbass region in September 2014 and February 2015.

This appointment suggests an important change in Russia's policy toward Ukraine. Gryzlov is a heavyweight in Putin's inner circle, a permanent member of its security council, a former minister of the interior, a speaker of the State Duma and a colleague of the president's from his St. Petersburg KGB days.
PUTIN MOVES TO DIRECT RULE IN THE DONBASS
Gryzlov replaces lightweight ambassador Azamat Kul'mukhametov, who has held that post since April. His appointment was seen as an attempt to downplay Russia's role and to force Ukraine to negotiate with the leaders of the Russian-controlled Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) and Luhansk People's Republic (LNR). Now the Kremlin has taken direct control.

This year, three strong-minded rebel commanders (Pavel Dremov, Aleksei Mozgovoy and Aleksei Bednov) were killed in a professional manner, making observers presume that the killers belonged to the Russian military intelligence. In the summer, it became evident that the troops of the DNR and LNR were directly subordinated to the Russian Ministry of Defense, and the Russian commanders were identified by the Ukrainian Defense and Security Council.

The political leaders of the DNR and LNR have been the same since August 2014, when Aleksandr Zakharchenko replaced Alexander Borodai as prime minister of the DNR and Igor Plotnitskiy became head of the LNR. Their appointments marked the end of Russia's attempted Novorossiya project, the incorporation of eight Ukrainian regions into Russia. Both leaders are considered of limited capability with no political appeal but obedient to Moscow.

In the second half of 2014, the occupied Donbass went through terrible destruction. Russian engineering troops blew up bridges, and factories were subject to extensive artillery fire. All banks and ATM machines were looted, and banking ceased. Most shops closed, leaving little but grocery stores.

Rebels plundered or seized small, medium-sized and state enterprises, while big private enterprises, largely owned by Rinat Akhmetov's DTEK and Metinvest, were protected by the Kremlin. They continue to operate according to Ukrainian law, using Ukrainian currency, and pay Ukrainian taxes. Their workers have to go to ATM machines in free Ukraine to collect their salaries.

http://www.newsweek.com/putin-moves-direct-rule-donbas-412411?rx=us

[JayH]

An interesting perspective from Russians-please excuse translation.
Quote
"The agenda is almost no Russian - she became the periphery Ukrainian agenda, it is no longer even the main topic when discussing war. Ukrainian society is more concerned with how to integrate the inhabitants of the occupied territories than any actions of the Russian Federation. This is not neglect, a general consensus finally ceased to associate Russia with the possibilities of development of Ukraine. In addition to emotional alienation, this is due to the fact that Ukrainians are deploying their economies and policies towards a multipolar world, not just Europe. In Odessa, has developed investment projects for China, for example. For the year are expected to invest $ 3 billion"


# Ukraine with their own eyes. Impressions Russians

What we saw in Ukraine shakes. It's surprisingly healthy, it does not harden and can not be militarization society
Thanks to the project # Ukraine with my own eyes I had the opportunity this week to go in Kiev, Dnepropetrovsk and Odessa, as well as talk to dozens of people, ranging from ordinary citizens and ending with the volunteers and officials. The result of this very interesting, but very strenuous trip can be regarded as the text. It is specifically the most relieved of emotions, which, of course, there is. But I considered it important to report findings because emotions too much, and they are quite clear without words.

I think that Ukraine is going through two important processes: the formation of a political nation and meritocratic revival. Anyway, Independence, his victory and the subsequent war was isolated from active society a very special group. People hone certain their skills in a competitive environment of private business, suddenly put aside their immediate business and engaged in volunteer projects. They did it because they have become professionals and know how to do what they felt at this moment the best for their homeland.



http://nv.ua/opinion/grekov/ukraina-svoimi-glazami-vpechatlenija-rossijanina-70025.html

[JayH]

Another summary of the situation and issues outstanding.

Washington, Brussels, and the other European capitals must continue to press the government of Ukraine to move forward with reforms, they should not throw up their hands in frustration that it hasn't happened overnight. Winning in Ukraine matters—for both Ukrainians and the West.

Ukraine is no longer simply about Ukraine. As a matter of power politics, Putin wants the country to fail, which means one thing: Ukraine cannot be allowed to become part of the West in any real sense of the word. No EU membership, no NATO membership, no evolution to the rule of law and well-functioning democratic institutions. For one thing, Ukraine has remained an important piece of the Kremlin's chessboard.


Why Winning In Ukraine Matters -- Don't Give Up Now

We've never been clear whether we have merely a Putin problem or a Russia problem. We do know, however, that this Kremlin boss plays it safe, muzzling the media, reining in (or worse) dissidents, and snuffing out where he can all liberal aspirations that crop up in Russia. Success in Ukraine can't help but be a problem for Putin.

More broadly, failure in Ukraine puts a stake in the heart of the idea of Europe "whole and free." It's bad enough that the West has for all practical purposes conceded Putin's military conquest of Crimea and the de facto annexation of the Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. What accommodationists fail to see, though, is that something larger and civilizational is now at stake.

Abandon Ukraine and other euro-Atlantic aspirants and we're not just acquiescing to spheres of influence, we're also giving legitimacy, providing the aura of success, to a form of nationalism and autocratic rule that America and its allies have fought two wars to stamp out. In short, not only must Putin not win in Ukraine, he has to be seen domestically and internationally as losing.

Ukrainians themselves, of course, must ultimately bear the lion's share of responsibility for their own success or failure. But the United States, together with the EU, can do our part: through economic aid (tied to progress on corruption); intelligence and military support (including lethal assistance); and diplomatic solidarity (foremost, continued sanctions against Russia).

http://www.usubc.org/site/recent-news/why-winning-in-ukraine-matters----don--039-t-give-up-now