Copyright Violations

[SANDRO43]

Wrong, BC, clue bats apply to newbies only, guiillotines to everybody, as Robespierre may have said .

[Son of Clyde]

Can you please clarify these two acronyms?

ToS (Terms of Service?)
T&C (Terms & Copyrights?)

I did read the terms in the beginning and I don't think I have violated them except when I lost my temper a few times. Some members were posting to the board PM's I had sent them which I find a bit tacky. If there is a problem send the PM to Dan not to the whole board. I think this is not good policy to post another's PM. I am glad it ceased.

[Admin]

Can you please clarify these two acronyms?

ToS (Terms of Service?)
T&C (Terms & Copyrights?)

I did read the terms in the beginning and I don't think I have violated them except when I lost my temper a few times. Some members were posting to the board PM's I had sent them which I find a bit tacky. If there is a problem send the PM to Dan not to the whole board. I think this is not good policy to post another's PM. I am glad it ceased.

The RWD policy is expressed in the Terms of Service (ToS), found in the RWD Announcements forum.

T&C is a common contractual term and means, Terms and Conditions. They are often used synonymously.

- Dan

[Jack]

Dan I hardly ever disagree with Andrew but in this case I do.   

I think you made the right choice.

Now I am a johnny come lately on this, I'm not sure of what all that happened.
Now did Manchester take a photo of KenC and his lovely wife from this board and post it without KenC's permission on another board and in the process some stupid and nasty comments were made?  How could this action be excused if true?

I had PM'ed  jb last evening to get a little info. I was going to write him back by PM but can do it here.

jb I can see your point, as well I can see Dan's point. For one minute put yourself in Dan's shoes. You have worked hard and at great expense to build a pretty damn good Russian discussion board. Their is not another one like it dealing with the pursuit for a Russian bride in the world today. So you have built this fantastic discussion board, quite proud of it and somewhat protective of it. End of story.

[BC]

I think cross board posts can be ok as long as the original author agrees beforehand and proper credit is given (which was not the case in this incident).. after all there are no 'trade secrets' involved.

I have to say, seeing the round of applause 'over there' for jb's eloquently presented info  does confirm my appreciation for his presence here.

[Ste]

Does this site get indexed by Google? I mean the content? How does the Copyright come into force there?

Wasn't going to try but I just did and it doesn't seem to.....

Ste

[Jooky]

I just read these terms of service and I don't see how RWD can claim ownership of either JB's post, KenC's photo or any contributions made here by the members.

Read the terms.

The following Ownership and copyright information applies only to materials we own.

Reproduction, copying, or redistribution for commercial purposes of any materials or design elements on this site is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of International Relations. As such, you are authorized to view, copy, download, and print on a single computer for personal, non-commercial use, provided that (1) you do keep all copyright and proprietary notices intact; (2) the documents may be used solely for personal, noncommercial, and informational purposes, they may not be posted or distributed, (3) the documents may not be modified, and (4) all copyright and other proprietary notices must be retained in the document.

How do you define ownership?

Read the following from your own terms of service:

Limited License

By posting or submitting content to this site, you grant International Relations and its affiliates and licensees the right to use, reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, distribute, have distributed, and promote the content in any form, anywhere and for any purpose; and warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content and that public posting and use of your content by International Relations will not infringe or violate the rights of any third party.

We grant RWD limited license to our content. By posting here we warrant that we own or control the content! Am I missing something here? It seems clear as day to me.

[Admin]

Does this site get indexed by Google? I mean the content? How does the Copyright come into force there?

Wasn't going to try but I just did and it doesn't seem to.....

Ste

Yes, RWD appears on Google - and yes, the copyright issues with Google are hotly-contested, but not by me.

Because Google acts as a service to help locate content on the internet, and because they mostly just provide a link to the referred site, there is no need for legal action. That was NOT the case here. In this instance, a person decided to; (a) ignore the ToS agreement they accepted on registration, (b) ignore the posted copyright which appears on every page, (c) fail to request permission of the originators/owners of the material from RWD, (d) act without conscience or concern for the law or ethics - and posted information elsewhere which held up others to ridicule and presented work not their own.

The person responsible acted without a shred of integrity, with no regard for others, out of arrogance and a misplaced sense of superiority, and in violation of numerous laws. As a consequence, they are banned.

- Dan

[Admin]

I just read these terms of service and I don't see how RWD can claim ownership of either JB's post, KenC's photo or any contributions made here by the members.

Read the terms.

The following Ownership and copyright information applies only to materials we own.

Reproduction, copying, or redistribution for commercial purposes of any materials or design elements on this site is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of International Relations. As such, you are authorized to view, copy, download, and print on a single computer for personal, non-commercial use, provided that (1) you do keep all copyright and proprietary notices intact; (2) the documents may be used solely for personal, noncommercial, and informational purposes, they may not be posted or distributed, (3) the documents may not be modified, and (4) all copyright and other proprietary notices must be retained in the document.

How do you define ownership?

Read the following from your own terms of service:

Limited License

By posting or submitting content to this site, you grant International Relations and its affiliates and licensees the right to use, reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, distribute, have distributed, and promote the content in any form, anywhere and for any purpose; and warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content and that public posting and use of your content by International Relations will not infringe or violate the rights of any third party.

We grant RWD limited license to our content. By posting here we warrant that we own or control the content! Am I missing something here? It seems clear as day to me.

Jooky,

I placed a notice in the opening post that my comments are based on my understanding of the relevant laws, but that I am not an attorney.

Having spent far too much time in court - at trial - my response to you is one I have probably heard a dozen times now, and that is: your question calls for a legal interpretation, and I am not qualified to give it. Further, as you are an active Moderator at RWG, and as you could be deemed as acting as their "agent", I also do not feel it wise to engage in this debate on the open board.

I will, however, refer you to the ToS which provides a physical address where you, or your counsel, are free to send any inquiry.

- Dan

[Jooky]

I am not acting as anyone's agent.

On behalf of myself I read the terms of service and gather that I retain ownership for my contributions here. If that is not the case, it should be made crystal clear that we are giving up ownership of our own materials.

If you, as the owner of this site, are not clear on this issue, who is?

If you don't understand your own terms of service, how can you expect us to?

I am absolutely serious about this. While I think it's silly for a bunch of grown men to make such a fuss over message boards where we are supposed to help each other, when issues like this arise the ownership should be able to justify it's position.

So who owns the photos and words that we post on this site? Do you? Do we?

It is your responsibility to be clear on this issue.

[Ste]

I am not acting as anyone's agent.

On behalf of myself I read the terms of service and gather that I retain ownership for my contributions here. If that is not the case, it should be made crystal clear that we are giving up ownership of our own materials.

If you, as the owner of this site, are not clear on this issue, who is?

If you don't understand your own terms of service, how can you expect us to?

I am absolutely serious about this. While I think it's silly for a bunch of grown men to make such a fuss over message boards where we are supposed to help each other, when issues like this arise the ownership should be able to justify it's position.

So who owns the photos and words that we post on this site? Do you? Do we?

It is your responsibility to be clear on this issue.

Isn't it the same situation on RWG? T&C's and copyright issues? I think RWG claimed they own the content, thread is here:

http://www.rwguide.com/forums/topic.cfm?topic=2608

Ste

[Admin]

I am not acting as anyone's agent.

On behalf of myself I read the terms of service and gather that I retain ownership for my contributions here. If that is not the case, it should be made crystal clear that we are giving up ownership of our own materials.

If you, as the owner of this site, are not clear on this issue, who is?

If you don't understand your own terms of service, how can you expect us to?

I am absolutely serious about this. While I think it's silly for a bunch of grown men to make such a fuss over message boards where we are supposed to help each other, when issues like this arise the ownership should be able to justify it's position.

So who owns the photos and words that we post on this site? Do you? Do we?

It is your responsibility to be clear on this issue.

The ToS are perfectly clear.

I took action over what I interpreted to be a violation of the Terms of Service, and a violation of the Copyright Laws (separate and apart from the ToS) which protect information on RWD from being posted elsewhere.

I made it clear, I think, that if a member of RWD posts his/her own information elsewhere, they are fully entitled to do so.

My actions were based on what I considered to be a reprehensible act to copy material from RWD, and re-post it on RWG for the purposes of ridicule.

Are you seriously asking where in the ToS such behavior is addressed?

I agree with your assessment that such debates are generally pretty "silly." I also have been involved in enough legal matters to know that "silly" does not prevent expensive litigation. Lawyers (are you a lawyer Jooky?), salivate over just such "silly" issues.

My "responsibility" is to behave in a way which protects RWD and her members - and I will do so - and have done so. When someone stole information from this board and re-posted it elsewhere, they violated the copyright and they violated the Terms of Service. That is my interpretation.

- Dan

[BC]

Jooky,

for all practical purposes (and I am not a lawyer) I can post here and copy/paste my same words (or thoughts) to another board without problem.

No one can claim rights on what's happening in my head.

but... if someone were to copy my words here verbatim (even partial) and post them elsewhere without my consent I would think it is not correct.

Example.. you wrote a great TR in the past.  It was a hit and I remember it to this day.. but does that give me the right to copy and paste it here?

Who owns your story?.. you do and I don't think nothing will change that.

But... remember that posession is 9/10th's of the law.. I would love to have a copy of the posts I made 'elsewhere' for use here.  Do you think it would be possible for managers of 'elsewhere' to send me a copy of my posts?

[Jooky]

As far as I understand, there were two violations.

1. The reposting of a thread by JB with his permission. I don't see any problem with this, even in your terms of service. Am I missing something? Would JB be allowed to repost himself but not give permission to repost his words?

BC, JB appeared on that thread and gave his full consent for Manchester and anyone else to repost that particular thread and any of his past valuable contributions. The thread is now gone, but JB can confirm this (or deny it if I'm wrong).

2. The post of a photo of KenC. Yes, I agree that this was reprehensible and I made my thoughts on this issue public and clear. However, if KenC would allow this photo to stand posted, he should be able to do so right? It is not property of the RWD. (And I see nothing wrong with the photo, they look pretty damned happy to me).

No, thank God I'm not a lawyer, but I do have to deal with copyright issues often in my line of business. I was (and still am) under the impression that photos and text contributed by us posters here while we do give the RWD full permission to use them we do not transfer ownership to the RWD. Correct?

BC, as to your last request, I believe that the answer is yes. I know others have asked and received.

[Admin]

As far as I understand, there were two violations.

1. The reposting of a thread by JB with his permission. I don't see any problem with this, even in your terms of service. Am I missing something? Would JB be allowed to repost himself but not give permission to repost his words?

2. The post of a photo of KenC. Yes, I agree that this was reprehensible and I made my thoughts on this issue public and clear. However, if KenC would allow this photo to stand posted, he should be able to do so right? It is not property of the RWD. (And I see nothing wrong with the photo, they look pretty damned happy to me).

No, thank God I'm not a lawyer, but I do have to deal with copyright issues often in my line of business. I was (and still am) under the impression that photos and text contributed by us posters here while we do give the RWD full permission to use them we do not transfer ownership to the RWD. Correct?

There were, indeed, two separate and distinct violations - perpetrated by the same misbegotten cretin.

Re: The photo. If an RWD member chooses to post their photo elsewhere, that is their prerogative. It is *not* the prerogative of someone to copy and steal a photo of someone else and re-post it elsewhere. Surely you see the distinction.

Re: The FAQ. Look closely at the board. You will see that RWD has created a specific section for RWD Projects. Those are initiatives which are designed to benefit RWD membership by furthering a variety of relevant topics. Information presented there is the collective efforts of numerous contributors - and while jb generously offered to be the Moderator for the FAQ section (probably deeply regretting that decision to help out about now), I suspect he would be among the first to acknowledge that the works there are a collective contribution. As such, they are, indeed, treated differently than posts on the open board.

- Dan

[BC]

Jooky,

Aside from Dan's concerns, the authorization that jb granted was after the fact.

[BC]

BC, as to your last request, I believe that the answer is yes. I know others have asked and received.

Hey that is something.. I would appreciate it if you could pm me with details about who to contact with such a request.  Many thx.

[Jooky]

I absolutely agree about the photo.

I was not aware that the post attributed to JB was a collective contribution. That has not been mentioned. If all authors gave permission to repost it would it still be an issue with you?

[Admin]

I absolutely agree about the photo.

I was not aware that the post attributed to JB was a collective contribution. That has not been mentioned. If all authors gave permission to repost it would it still be an issue with you?

Good grief Jooky. You may not be a lawyer, but your seeking the 'edges' of this issue certainly smacks of legaleze.

If anyone comes onto the board, copies material without permission, and re-posts it elsewhere - yes, I have an issue with it. And to be clear - that is EXACTLY what happened.

- Dan

[tbelknap]

JB's post was copied then later asked for permission.  This may have been because of Manchester's ignorance on the subject.  Once it was brought up to Manchester that he cannot do it without JB's permission he sought out JB and asked.  I don't think there was nothing wrong with this even if he posted before asking permission.

The picture of Ken was not posted on RWG.  A link to Ken's picture on this board was posted.  I am not talking about if it was right or wrong using the picture to redicule Ken.  It should be obvious from my posts there how I felt about it.  I am talking about him posting a link to this forum compared to uploading the picture to RWG.  Which I do not see as breaking copywright since he never took it off of RWD.  If he cannot post links then I suggest we go after Google for doing the same thing.

[Admin]

JB's post was copied then later asked for permission.  This may have been because of Manchester's ignorance on the subject.  Once it was brought to Manchester's that he cannot do it without JB's permission he sought out JB and asked.  I don't think there was nothing wrong with this even if he posted before asking permission.

And you have every right to be wrong about your interpretation. If you persist in that interpretation, shall I conclude you disagree with the Terms of Service? If so, please send me a PM so that we can take the appropriate action.

The picture of Ken was not posted on RWG.  A link to Ken's picture on this board was posted.  I am not talking about if it was right or wrong using the picture to redicule Ken.  It should be obvious from my posts there how I felt about it.  I am talking about him posting a link to this forum compared to uploading the picture to RWG.  Which I do not see as breaking copywright since he never took it off of RWD.  If he cannot post links then I suggest we go after Google for doing the same thing.

I think you are mistaken.

- Dan

[Admin]

Please take note - this topic will remain open for about another 10 minutes.

After that, take your issues to PM.

- Dan

[Jooky]

Dan, I'm not trying to seek the edges of this matter. I'm trying to see the heart of the matter clearly.

If anyone comes onto the board, copies material without permission, and re-posts it elsewhere - yes, I have an issue with it. And to be clear - that is EXACTLY what happened.

If this is this issue, it was a mistake on the part of Manchester who was not clear on the rules or legalities of posting links and materials from other sites.

He posted JB's post without knowing it was violating any rules. Once he was warned, he did ask for permission and permission was granted. Why do you still have an issue with that particular thread being posted on the RWG now? If permission has been granted, can it be reposted? This is why I ask about the other contributors to that post, if indeed they exist.

A while back material of mine was posted here without my knowledge or permission. I came in quite a bit later and gave that permission. You didn't delete that thread, approach me regarding the matter, or pay any attention to it at all. It was obvious that the poster was using material from a private message no less. Why didn't you look into the matter? I've seen this happen more than once on this board and it seems to go unnoticed.

Of course I didn't bring it to your attention or complain. Why would I? The poster who used my words did so with the intention to make a point and help others. Sure, like Manchester, he did not undestand the terms of service, but the idea here is to help each other out, not get bogged down in legal matters. At least that's my opinion.

Now, Manchester also posted a link to a photo. Apparently he did not do so to ridicule, but to make a point and I believe that this matter has been cleared up between himself and the photo's owner.

So can JB's post be brought back now that he has given permission or not? Is he not the rightful owner of that piece?

That's all I'm going to say.

[Admin]

Dan, I'm not trying to seek the edges of this matter. I'm trying to see the heart of the matter clearly.

If anyone comes onto the board, copies material without permission, and re-posts it elsewhere - yes, I have an issue with it. And to be clear - that is EXACTLY what happened.

If this is this issue, it was a mistake on the part of Manchester who was not clear on the rules or legalities of posting links and materials from other sites.

He posted JB's post without knowing it was violating any rules. Once he was warned, he did ask for permission and permission was granted. Why do you still have an issue with that particular thread being posted on the RWG now? If permission has been granted, can it be reposted? This is why I ask about the other contributors to that post, if indeed they exist.

A while back material of mine was posted here without my knowledge or permission. I came in quite a bit later and gave that permission. You didn't delete that thread, approach me regarding the matter, or pay any attention to it at all. It was obvious that the poster was using material from a private message no less. Why didn't you look into the matter? I've seen this happen more than once on this board and it seems to go unnoticed.

Of course I didn't bring it to your attention or complain. Why would I? The poster who used my words did so with the intention to make a point and help others. Sure, like Manchester, he did not undestand the terms of service, but the idea here is to help each other out, not get bogged down in legal matters. At least that's my opinion.

Now, Manchester also posted a link to a photo. Apparently he did not do so to ridicule, but to make a point and I believe that this matter has been cleared up between himself and the photo's owner.

So can JB's post be brought back now that he has given permission or not? Is he not the rightful owner of that piece?

That's all I'm going to say.

Jooky,

Once again, if you read the ToS, you will find there is an explicit provision for reporting a perceived violation of copyright. I assure you, had you reported anything, I would have acted to resolve the matter. I cannot take action on an issue which was never brought to my attention.

Everything else in your post has been asked, and answered. Time to close this off and do some real work.

- Dan