Discussion of Cafe games #5

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Discussion of Cafe games #5
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 . . . 26 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352286 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 1:00:36 UTC - in response to Message 1352257.  

The thing is you don't know how someone will react seeing their images on another site.

Ah, but they aren't on another site, they are on their own site, even if they are too stupid to realize it.
Some may like the extra attention (possible sales), others will see it as copyright infringement and go straight to the layers, not even bothering with an e-mail to us saying that they don't want their images appearing on the forums and could we please remove them.

Well, then they lose by default, at least against the Regents. They first have to send a DMCA notice, or the court won't hear the case. Oh and if they expect to collect damages they will have to use US Federal Court.

Then there also a bandwidth issue. Hotlinking is using their bandwidth in showing the images here, we don't know what their penalties/costs are if they use more than X a month.

Which is entirely within their control. Just use htaccess If their IT people are so dumb they don't know it is there ... Well that would be like getting mad at spiders because you don't have a robots.txt file ...

ID: 1352286 · Report as offensive
Profile Dimly Lit Lightbulb 😀
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 08
Posts: 15399
Credit: 7,423,413
RAC: 1
United Kingdom
Message 1352290 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 1:16:40 UTC - in response to Message 1352286.  

The thing is you don't know how someone will react seeing their images on another site.

Ah, but they aren't on another site, they are on their own site, even if they are too stupid to realize it.
Some may like the extra attention (possible sales), others will see it as copyright infringement and go straight to the layers, not even bothering with an e-mail to us saying that they don't want their images appearing on the forums and could we please remove them.

Well, then they lose by default, at least against the Regents. They first have to send a DMCA notice, or the court won't hear the case. Oh and if they expect to collect damages they will have to use US Federal Court.

Then there also a bandwidth issue. Hotlinking is using their bandwidth in showing the images here, we don't know what their penalties/costs are if they use more than X a month.

Which is entirely within their control. Just use htaccess If their IT people are so dumb they don't know it is there ... Well that would be like getting mad at spiders because you don't have a robots.txt file ...

If I'm not mistaken the Berkeley fellas have done the robots thing and yet google turns up results from here.

Member of the People Encouraging Niceness In Society club.

ID: 1352290 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352299 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 1:58:33 UTC - in response to Message 1352290.  
Last modified: 31 Mar 2013, 2:05:38 UTC

ID: 1352299 · Report as offensive
David S
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 99
Posts: 18352
Credit: 27,761,924
RAC: 12
United States
Message 1352476 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 15:33:52 UTC - in response to Message 1352379.  

It is up to all owners of graphics, artwork, pictures, to clearly state that Copyright is reserved, and that prior agreement is required to reproduce it elsewhere.

It is not legally necessary for them to put the notice on the image itself, or anywhere really. Copyright is automatic as soon as the image is created. Posting a notice just makes it easier to prove your case in court.

Among the railfan community, a lot of guys who wouldn't think twice about downloading someone else's picture, even when there's a clear statement that they can't, suddenly get all snippy when they post their own pictures and then find that someone else has downloaded them, cropped off the watermarked copyright notice, and posted them as their own.

This all started because of the count to thread, which once we got to over 5000 or so was pretty much restricted to having to use part numbers and locomotives.

And sunspots.

P.S. What about the pics in the mystery kitchen tool thread? They are nearly all from manufacturers websites. Are they happy with free advertising or not. Dunno.

They might (I said might) not mind if we post a link to the site, at least at the end of the game, but we often don't.

There have been a lot of pictures posted in other threads lately, too.

The rule of thumb I use when I want to use a picture is twofold: 1. Do I have cause to call my use "fair use?" (My non-expert opinion is that, generally, we don't in these forums.) 2. Does the site specifically say I can use it? If the answer to either of those is yes, I'm okay.

(No, I haven't always used this rule when posting here, but I'm at least thinking about it.)

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

ID: 1352476 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352515 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 17:33:53 UTC - in response to Message 1352476.  

2. Does the site specifically say I can use it? If the answer to either of those is yes, I'm okay.

If their site disables hot linking, then it is obvious they don't want their pictures spread about. If they leave it enabled, that is free permission to pass it about.

ID: 1352515 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 22160
Credit: 416,307,556
RAC: 380
United Kingdom
Message 1352539 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 19:36:33 UTC

WRONG, how totally and utterly WRONG

Copyright is an absolute, that may waived or amended by a positive action by the copyright holder.
The fact that someone does not prevent hot-linking is not a sign that they permitting you to hot link to material on that site.

If someone posts an image with a copyright message, either as a watermark on the image, or as part of the page on which the image is hosted then someone is taking a positive step to say "DO NOT COPY, or HOT LINK this material". That is simply re-stating their rights.

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1352539 · Report as offensive
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 9954
Credit: 103,452,613
RAC: 328
United Kingdom
Message 1352555 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 20:31:32 UTC

This is taken from the University of California website.

Because copyright protection vests automatically to any original work that is fixed in a tangible medium, anything and everything on a posted Web site could potentially be under copyright protection. Copyright law protects not only the content of a Web site, but also the arrangement, the graphics, and the selection of links. The decision to post material on the Web and to give unrestricted access does not put it in the public domain. Likewise, the lack of a copyright notice on a Web page does not put it in the public domain. Therefore, you should assume that copyright protects almost everything that you find on the Web.



ID: 1352555 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352582 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 21:42:42 UTC - in response to Message 1352539.  

WRONG, how totally and utterly WRONG

Copyright is an absolute, that may waived or amended by a positive action by the copyright holder.
The fact that someone does not prevent hot-linking is not a sign that they permitting you to hot link to material on that site.

If someone posts an image with a copyright message, either as a watermark on the image, or as part of the page on which the image is hosted then someone is taking a positive step to say "DO NOT COPY, or HOT LINK this material". That is simply re-stating their rights.

A hot link does not make a copy. It isn't taking a screen shot. It isn't uploading the item to photobucket. It isn't printing it on paper. Making a copy is what copyright protects. The server that the link points to makes the copy, and that is presumably under the control of the copyright owner. If he doesn't want his server making copies, it is up to him to control this. If he allows it, he is giving permission for this copy.

In any case this has been decided at the Federal Appelate Court level. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking
Copyright law issues that inline linking raises

The most significant legal fact about inline linking, relative to copyright law considerations, is that the inline linker does not place a copy of the image file on its own Internet server. Rather, the inline linker places a pointer on its Internet server that points to the server on which the proprietor of the image has placed the image file. This pointer causes a user's browser to jump to the proprietor's server and fetch the image file to the user's computer. US courts have considered this a decisive fact in copyright analysis. Thus, in Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.,[5] the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained why inline linking did not violate US copyright law:

Google does not...display a copy of full-size infringing photographic images for purposes of the Copyright Act when Google frames in-line linked images that appear on a user’s computer screen. Because Google’s computers do not store the photographic images, Google does not have a copy of the images for purposes of the Copyright Act. In other words, Google does not have any “material objects...in which a work is fixed...and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated” and thus cannot communicate a copy. Instead of communicating a copy of the image, Google provides HTML instructions that direct a user’s browser to a website publisher’s computer that stores the full-size photographic image. Providing these HTML instructions is not equivalent to showing a copy. First, the HTML instructions are lines of text, not a photographic image. Second, HTML instructions do not themselves cause infringing images to appear on the user’s computer screen. The HTML merely gives the address of the image to the user’s browser. The browser then interacts with the computer that stores the infringing image. It is this interaction that causes an infringing image to appear on the user’s computer screen. Google may facilitate the user’s access to infringing images. However, such assistance raised only contributory liability issues and does not constitute direct infringement of the copyright owner’s display rights. ...While in-line linking and framing may cause some computer users to believe they are viewing a single Google webpage, the Copyright Act...does not protect a copyright holder against [such] acts..


I note the Ninth Circuit is where Seti is located, so this is the law!

ID: 1352582 · Report as offensive
Profile Mike Special Project $75 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 01
Posts: 34253
Credit: 79,922,639
RAC: 80
Germany
Message 1352590 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 21:54:19 UTC

That hits the nail on its head Gary.



With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.
ID: 1352590 · Report as offensive
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 9954
Credit: 103,452,613
RAC: 328
United Kingdom
Message 1352592 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 21:56:46 UTC

This pointer causes a user's browser to jump to the proprietor's server and fetch the image file to the user's computer. US courts have considered this a decisive fact in copyright analysis.


Tel me does your browsers jump to the server



Can you see anywhere on this page where this picture is located. No you have to right click on the image to find out anything

This is a hotlink

http://daciagallery.com/artwork/janet-a-cook.php

I would still abide by the University of California advice.

PS the website I have used here I have the artists permission.
ID: 1352592 · Report as offensive
Profile James Sotherden
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 10436
Credit: 110,373,059
RAC: 54
United States
Message 1352596 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 22:10:07 UTC - in response to Message 1352593.  

Headquartered in San Francisco, California, the Ninth Circuit is by far the largest of the thirteen courts of appeals, with 29 active judgeships.

So, what happens when the tenth or eleventh happens then? And even then it doesn't cover all the USA.


It has happend where one court will in a similar case reach a different verdict. One reason why we have the US Supreme court.
[/quote]

Old James
ID: 1352596 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352609 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 22:42:44 UTC - in response to Message 1352596.  

Headquartered in San Francisco, California, the Ninth Circuit is by far the largest of the thirteen courts of appeals, with 29 active judgeships.

So, what happens when the tenth or eleventh happens then? And even then it doesn't cover all the USA.


It has happend where one court will in a similar case reach a different verdict. One reason why we have the US Supreme court.

Yes we do. And until they say otherwise this is the law in the Ninth.

In Seti's case (the Regents of the University of California at Berkeley), the court of jurisdiction is located within the boundaries of the Ninth Circuit. (In the US generally you have to sue where the defendant is located or the act took place. One reason Delaware has so many Corporations there.)

Also you should complete the legal research and see if the case ever was appealed and Cert denied at SCOTUS. You would also see if the opinion is being cited in the other districts. This is what you pay lawyers to do.


ID: 1352609 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1352611 - Posted: 31 Mar 2013, 22:46:19 UTC - in response to Message 1352592.  

I would still abide by the University of California advice.

Obviously Seti, being an part of them would be required to or be kicked out. The Regents would also be free to establish a policy of discouraging hot linking.

ID: 1352611 · Report as offensive
Profile Shannock9
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 1396
Credit: 634,964
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1352648 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 3:10:50 UTC
Last modified: 1 Apr 2013, 3:13:01 UTC

I have been asked to remind the soon to be winner of TLPTPW to post "the rules" at the start of a new thread, and to pass the message on to the next winner. After scouring this thread >>and consolidating a few posts<< "the rules" seem to be.....

The Last Person To Post Wins thread, general rules:
1. Winner of the last thread starts the new one with a post of these rules.
2. Chooses a future event which triggers the winner, e.g. post number, date-time, and records it privately somehow (yellow sticky, etc.)
3. Everyone has fun posting until the target event is reached.
4. When the target is reached, old winner posts declaration of new winner and also PMs them.
5. Shortly after this a Mod will lock the recently won thread.
6. Go to 1.

Supplemental rules:
A. Multiple posting (the same poster posting two or more posts in succession) is frowned upon, and no element of a multiple posting may trigger the winning event.
B. However the winning event is defined it should probably take the lesser of 600 posts or two weeks to achieve.
C. Posting of larger pics is discouraged (Modem users do still exists, and these threads can get quite long.)
D. The post rules listed to the left of your post box are all enforced.

Is this OK?

ID: 1352648 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 22160
Credit: 416,307,556
RAC: 380
United Kingdom
Message 1352681 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 7:23:11 UTC
Last modified: 1 Apr 2013, 7:23:38 UTC

TLTPW roolz -
Looks good to me.
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1352681 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 22160
Credit: 416,307,556
RAC: 380
United Kingdom
Message 1352686 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 7:39:27 UTC

The issue of copyright material is not as easy as Gary would have us believe.

In addition to the US law, upon which we have one guiding note applying to one sub-jurisdiction:
The poster is bound by their local jurisdiction, thus if their post is in breach of copyright in their country then they can be pursued by the legal system in that country.
The copyright holder has the right to legal protection under their own legal system from actions either by the individual (the poster) or other parties.

The most likely first step of any case would be a "take down" request from the copyright holder - we've had one very recently. Failure to comply with this request would probably then escalate to letter from their lawyer requesting the material to be "taken down" or legal action would be taken (each getting more strongly worded). Finally the "day in court", and all that entails, with appeals, counter appeals and lawyers running up costs on both sides.

Obviously it makes sense not to get into the situation where the lawyers get involved, and "take down" the material, and other similar material on receipt of the first "take down" request.

And unlike others who have run to "Wiki" or "Google" for their guidance mine has come from a lawyer. When I was pursuing someone for breach of copyright on my own material. I am glad to say that the first letter got the desired result, at which time the legal advise had only cost me a decent meal, not the thousands of pounds a court case would have.
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1352686 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 22160
Credit: 416,307,556
RAC: 380
United Kingdom
Message 1352736 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 10:38:32 UTC


Now if it were Julie I would bow out gracefully and allow the lady to take the reins, but you it would be pistols at dawn...
(if I could find my pistols that is)
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1352736 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 22160
Credit: 416,307,556
RAC: 380
United Kingdom
Message 1352792 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 12:15:51 UTC

Done :-)


So long as you buy me one next time around
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1352792 · Report as offensive
Profile Shannock9
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 1396
Credit: 634,964
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1352811 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 12:51:29 UTC - in response to Message 1352724.  

I support and endorse the LPTPW rues as listed here, however can I suggest that supplemental rule A needs expanding upon. If a multiple posting covers the target number, and is not allowed, then should it be the previous poster that wins, or the next poster? i.e. If the number is 500, I post 498, someone posts 499,500,501, then Rob posts 502. Do I win or Rob?

As written it must be the first nonmultiple post after the event, because "no element of a multiple posting may trigger the winning event". [This was not worded lightly.]

But supplementaray B should say "However the winning event is defined it should probably take less than 600 posts AND less than two weeks to achieve". [Obviously I was getting tired by then.]

ID: 1352811 · Report as offensive
Profile James Sotherden
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 10436
Credit: 110,373,059
RAC: 54
United States
Message 1352813 - Posted: 1 Apr 2013, 12:53:20 UTC - in response to Message 1352648.  

I have been asked to remind the soon to be winner of TLPTPW to post "the rules" at the start of a new thread, and to pass the message on to the next winner. After scouring this thread >>and consolidating a few posts<< "the rules" seem to be.....

The Last Person To Post Wins thread, general rules:
1. Winner of the last thread starts the new one with a post of these rules.
2. Chooses a future event which triggers the winner, e.g. post number, date-time, and records it privately somehow (yellow sticky, etc.)
3. Everyone has fun posting until the target event is reached.
4. When the target is reached, old winner posts declaration of new winner and also PMs them.
5. Shortly after this a Mod will lock the recently won thread.
6. Go to 1.

Supplemental rules:
A. Multiple posting (the same poster posting two or more posts in succession) is frowned upon, and no element of a multiple posting may trigger the winning event.
B. However the winning event is defined it should probably take the lesser of 600 posts or two weeks to achieve.
C. Posting of larger pics is discouraged (Modem users do still exists, and these threads can get quite long.)
D. The post rules listed to the left of your post box are all enforced.

Is this OK?

I would add no clearly copyrighted pictures.
[/quote]

Old James
ID: 1352813 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 . . . 26 · Next

Message boards : Cafe SETI : Discussion of Cafe games #5


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.