asbestosman wrote:I have another idea. Instead of banning Joseph, can we just have the board automatically translate everything he says into Adamic? If not Adamic, then maybe reformed Egyptian.
Do you know where we could get a cipher to handle that translation?
sock puppet wrote:Do you know where we could get a cipher to handle that translation?
I have an ouija board but I don't want to make any Seattle writers nervous.
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07
MASH quotes I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it. I avoid church religiously. This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.
I have not given this much thought but here are my initial thoughts.
Joseph
I am one who thinks that the thread topics that Joseph creates aren't worth my time to address. I also don't like that he contacted a photographer over one photographic image that was used here.
I understand that copyright issues might be a passion for Joseph. I have my own passions, for example, child advocacy. There is nothing that could make me ignore signs of child abuse or neglect. In that case, I am bound by law to make such reports and have made such reports.
So, I can understand why Joseph might feel passionate about acting on copyright related issues.
That said, like it or not, this is a community. What Joseph should have done was to contact Blixa or Shades directly and inform them about the image used. From what I understand, he didn't do either of those.
Based on what Shades has stated, he and Joseph have made an agreement. It doesn't escape my attention that Joseph has made that agreement conditional on what criticisms have been leveled at him on this board.
Not a good thing!
So, while I dislike what Joseph does on this board in terms of posting habits, I would be less than honest if I didn't say that it disturbs me to some degree that people are calling for his banning.
Yet, I think Joseph has the potential to target specific posters who post images based on the fact that they are critical of him and he's already indicated that he would stray from his agreement with Shades based on that condition.
Would this make him a ban-worthy nuisance to the board?
The truth is, is that it doesn't matter if he remains a member of the board or is banned. He retains the ability to make reports on copyright images no matter what his board activity status is.
What are the choices here?
1. Ban him and perhaps ensure that he will retaliate by targeting this board with copyright reports?
2. Learn to coexist with him in some way?
3. Use the Cartman Ghost technique, giving him nothing to respond to?
I need more time to think about this...
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
liz3564 wrote:I think that there has been genuine confusion as to what is considered "Fair Use".
A lot of what goes on here is fair use. The problem is that it isn't worth it for the web host provider to defend it. SGW's picture with funny subtitles added is a good example. It is clearly fair use, but as long as SGW can show a colorable copyright claim, the web host will roll over, play dead, and pull the image. One of the web host's Mormon related forum loses a few images. So what? It doesn't care.
Some things probably do violate copyright laws, but the violation is de minimus. Posting a nasa photo on this forum is probably a violation, but so what. Has nasa been harmed in some way? No. The only reason Nasa cares is if some busy body takes it upon himself to tell.
liz3564 wrote:I think that there has been genuine confusion as to what is considered "Fair Use".
A lot of what goes on here is fair use. The problem is that it isn't worth it for the web host provider to defend it. SGW's picture with funny subtitles added is a good example. It is clearly fair use, but as long as SGW can show a colorable copyright claim, the web host will roll over, play dead, and pull the image. One of the web host's Mormon related forum loses a few images. So what? It doesn't care.
Some things probably do violate copyright laws, but the violation is de minimus. Posting a nasa photo on this forum is probably a violation, but so what. Has nasa been harmed in some way? No. The only reason Nasa cares is if some busy body takes it upon himself to tell.
I agree with everything you said. The way I understand it, if an image with a copyright is removed upon request, no harm-no foul.
Just a note, all official NASA images are public domain. We pay for them, they belong to all of us.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
When I post images I link them to Google where they're found. If that violates some copyright law, just tell me the rules. Post the rules and tell us what's acceptable. "Outing" someone on Facebook is uncool and that should be part of the rules.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. 2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths
Well, this poll has been up for a little less than a day, and the results are pretty overwhelming already.
Looks like we'll get them back. Give me a while to go through and enable them for everyone again. I'll also need to make an announcement to that effect and lay down some ground rules. . . not that I'm a fan of rules and restrictions, but to avoid getting ourselves taken offline again.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
I agree with Rambo. . . put Joseph to good use. You can designate him as moderator of images, and he can go through and delete the ones that are copyrighted. Perfect solution!
Another solution, maybe people can tweak the image they are posting, just enough to make it their own, if that's what makes it "fair use".
Come on everybody, let's show some love and instead of calling for banishment (not the spirit of the board, by the way. . . shame on y'all!), let's find a middle ground. Whether we like it or not, we're stuck with Josephcop, like the pestering little cousin at the annual family reunion. . . FAMILY, people!