Dr. Shades wrote:Now on to the copyright issue.
Even if Everybody Wang Chung is 100% correct and we'd win any lawsuit that came our way, that offers me precious little comfort. The idea is to not go to court at all. Even if one is 100% sure that one is in the right and will win any and all court cases, who wants to bother with all that time, hassle, and headache? I certainly don't.
When it comes to DMCA takedown notices, even if there are countermeasures available to us and even if we can sue anyone who issues one in less than good faith, that too offers me precious little comfort, since it will involve having the board shut down for X number of days in the interim. As before, the idea is to not get shut down at all.
People have called for banning Joseph, but he's acted as the voice of warning, telling us what could happen (regardless of his tenor). He hasn't broken any rules that I can see. My feeling is that if he starts criticizing you over whether you own the copyright of an image you posted, the correct response would be to just take the image down rather than argue with him. Likelihood of litigation doesn't alter legality.
I've got things set up so that they can be. If it isn't working, I don't know why.
Shades,
Everybody Wang Chung's entire point (which I specifically asked him to clarify) is that the case would never see the light of day to begin with. It would be thrown out and not proceed to legal proceedings due to the fact that this board is noncommercial. So, if he's correct, you don't have to worry about wasting time in legal wrangling. It would never proceed to wrangling.
Here's what he said, when I asked for clarification on that exact point:
I asked:
I admit that I know little about this entire situation. I think a lot has happened behind the scenes. But here's my concern, and I'm hoping that Everybody Wang Chung can assure me it's unfounded.
I've always believed that, it it were taken to a court of law, of course Shades and this board would win. But going to a court of law, even with the assurance of victory, still requires significant time, effort, and money. I've been told there are groups that prey on that fact, and pursue charges in the hopes of attaining a settlement. The settlement isn't much in terms of corporations, but significant in terms of an individual - like a couple of thousand dollars. The victim goes ahead and settles at this financial loss just to avoid the time, effort, and money involved in taking it to court.
Everybody Wang Chung replied:
My whole point is that your above scenario would never happen with this board, despite what Joseph would have you believe. This board is protected from a copyright lawsuit because it is non-commercial in nature, there is no negative effect on the market of any copyrighted material posted here and any copyrighted photos posted here are not duplicate copies in size and/or resolution. Anyone stupid enough to file a lawsuit against this board, not only would have their lawsuit immediately dismissed for failure to state a claim under which relief can be taken, but would also open themselves up for lawsuit by Shades (as explained in the OP).
There are also legal remedies available to Shades if someone submits another takedown notice (see OP).
Beastie, my whole point was to try to convice some people here to not buy into all of this silly hysteria that so many on this board have done lately. It's terrible to go through life, afraid, paranoid and hesitant because of some idiotic bully who doesn't know what the hell he is talking about.
viewtopic.php?p=481299#p481299Regarding Joseph -
Now that I believe Joseph is a toothless tiger, I don't care if he's banned or not, but I do want to state that my impression of his comments has been that he's not just being a "warning voice" of what could happen, he's actually threatening to report the images HIMSELF.
I wouldn't have a complaint with him if he just pointed out to folks when he thinks they're violating copyright law (and they can defend themselves), but he's not just wanting to point it out. He's said he would report it himself, has he not? I mean, by saying that he will FIRST give you the chance to delete the photo implies that there is ANOTHER alternative he would follow - ie, reporting. And he's refused to give Liz his word that he would follow even THAT agreement.
