A heads up everyone needs to read

[Mike]

This is one of those posts that will bore some people to tears, but you need to read it, irregardless.

Some factions within our federal government have been on their hind legs, with respect to copyright issues on the Web. Thankfully, saner minds have prevailed, but don't get lulled into thinking the problems have disappeared. They most definitely have not.

When a member of this site posts something that breaches another person's copyright, that is all wrong. But what is really wrong is that when that happens, the authorities start looking for the publisher. And that, boys and girls, would be yours truly.

I'm not naming any names, I am not pointing any fingers, nor am I assigning any blame to anyone. I just need for everyone to understand my position, as the publisher of this site.

A member of this site mentioned he had some scans of a magazine article, available on another, external Web site. That is risky stuff, but it has naught to do with me, so if that member wants to run those risks, I am quite alright with it.

Another member then posted some scans of a magazine article, to a thread on this forum. I've no idea if they were the same scans as mentioned earlier, or not. It really makes no difference, because the scans were suddenly breaching copyright in my playground, which means I would be liable for the unlawful publication. As a result, those scans were removed. Thanks to 409T for catching what had happened and bringing it to my attention. There will be a small percentage added to his weekly pay, trust me. <cough>

This tells me it is time for a quick review of what is permissible and what is not, under present copyright laws.

Many people think that once something has been posted to the Internet, it no longer has any copyright protection. That is a myth. The truth is that if someone has published photos, graphic images, songs or articles to the Web, you cannot use them, copy them, or post them, without permission.

The person who created these works owns them. And they have copyright protection from the very instant they are published.

Many people this they can copy something they have found online, just as long as they give the copytight holder credit, or a link back to the originally published work. That is a myth, unless the copyright owner specifically provides permission to copy the work. Without granted permission from the copyright holder, the work/s cannot be used.

Many people think they can edit copyright material, in order to make it their own. That is a myth. Work derived from other work is still covered by the original copyright. Editing the original or altering the original work does not change the copyright.

There is one exception to be noted - You are allowed to refer to original work, if you are writing a review of that work, as the review would fall under fair use.

Many people think if they do not see a copyright symbol or a copyright notice, then work can be freely copied. That is a myth. Original work does not require any kind of copyright notification, in order to have copyright protection.

Many people think they can use copyright material, as long as they do not realize and income or financial gain from the use. That is a myth. Whether you make any money or not, you are still in violation of the copyright. Trying to claim you are giving the copyright holder free advertising is not a valid defense, although a court decision on copyright violation might very well attach any income derived from the breach of copyright.

For instance, if you post something to this forum, you hold the intellectual copyright for that work. By using this forum, you also agree to give me and my assigns free license to use, publish and display your work. But that does not mean another member of this site can copy your work to another forum, without permission from both you and myself. You hold copyright to the content expressed in the post, whereas I hold copyright to the post, itself. Although it is quite unnecessary for me to do so, I make our copyright policy very clear, in multiple areas on this site, so there can be no confusion as to how you and I are both protected.

Please, believe me when I say I hate all this legal stuff. I just want to run a discussion forum, without any hassles or problems. But the end game is that by operating this site, I have to endure all the hassles and problems that come along with it. And, at this stage of the game, I simply cannot afford any legal mistakes to be made.

So I am asking all of you to be mindful of what you are posting. If it is a picture, was it a picture taken or created by you? If not, then I need you to provide me with permission from the copyright holder, before we can publish it to this site. If it is a post from another site, then I need you to provide me with permission from both the author of the post, as well as the owner of the other site, before we can publish it to this site. I honestly don't like issuing yet more limitations as to what we can and cannot do on this site, but I also need to be sure I am covering my own bum. So help me out, by not posting material for which you do not hold copyright, or do not have permission to share.

CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act) is not dead, people. It is rearing its ugly head, yet again. Which means we need to proceed with caution, whilst reminding our employees (read: elected officials) that CISPA is a bridge too far. For those who are interested in maintaining their liberties, I will cover CISPA's reincarnation in a subsequent post.

 

[Mike]

OK, if you are still here, then get yourself busy, one more time. We need to knock CISPA in the head, since Congress cannot seem to understand we do not want it.

People, CISPA allows your online activities to be spied upon, without benefit of a warrant. And it allows you to be spied upon, without you even having knowledge of the fact. I know, most of us are not violating any laws, so the tendency is to say, "So what if Big Brother is snooping, I'm not doing anything wrong."

Well, there is a really big problem there. Because Big Brother should not be snooping, since it is a violation of the law. And I am also not willing to believe you want all of your online activities to be in the hands of strangers. Whether it is a credit card transaction to buy something online, whether it is a negotiation to purchase tangible property, or even if it is just you telling your significant other how you plan to nibble on her thighs, you are sharing information with others that you do not want Big Brother looking in on.

Do you really want your personal text messages, to and from your wife to be shared among major corporations and legal authorities? How about personal messages to and from your mistress being shared with those same entities, so your wife can find out what you've been doing from the wrong people?

And do you really expect me to believe you are willing to roll over, play dead and give up your Fourth Amendment rights? Really? What other Constitutional rights are you willing to surrender? How about your Second Amendment rights, are you ready to willingly hand over your firearms, when Big Brother comes calling?

What people need to understand is that once Big Brother starts knocking over the dominoes that are our Constitutional rights, there is not going to be any stopping them, until the last one has fallen.

What CISPA is doing is turning Web sites you visit into government spies. At present, the NSA is illegitimately spying on you, but if CISPA passes, then that list will expand to, and not be limited to the IRS, FBI, FEMA, DEA, Federal Student Aid, Interpol, the US Army, Veteran's Affairs, Homeland Security, Immigration Services and even the Post Office.

Huge online companies like Google want you to think they are supportive of your online privacy, but don't you be fooled. Log into your Gmail account and send a couple of e-mails about some topic you normally do not discuss, such as weight loss or tooth whitening. Then visit the Web as usual and pay close attention to the contextual ads that are being served to you. Maybe Google doesn't want to to Big Brother, but they are already spying on you for their own benefit.

I have some rather unfortunate medical issues that my physician feels could be best treated with cannabinoids. (Don't go searching for the definition of cannabinoids, they are compounds found in cannabis, a.k.a. marijuana.) To the extent that he has been regularly recommending I move to a medical marijuana state. Over the last 3 - 4 years, I have done a lot of online study of medical cannabis and have become supportive of the Indiana NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) Chapter, which is seeking legalization of medical cannabis, as well as decriminalization of recreational cannabis. I belong to NORML and at one point in time, was even responsible for maintaining the Indiana NORML Web site, as a volunteer. So I know I am a very bright blip on NSA's radar. On one hand, I am not violating any local, state or federal laws concerning cannabis, but on the other hand, why should my research into my personal medical conditions be any concern to anyone within our government? Where is my medical disclosure protection in this case? I'm not looking to get high, I spent a lot of my youth doing just that and outgrew all of it. I simply want to stay in touch with where I stand with the current laws and medical technology, so that I might be able to treat multiple issues without the harmful side effects of pharmaceutical medications. Personally, the idea the law may one day allow me to grow my own medicine, which can alleviate and eliminate my medical problems without any harmful side effects is quite exciting. Indiana now has two bordering states that are allowing medical cannabis, as well as decriminalizing its recreational possession, so my fingers are crossed. But the underlying point is that I know the NSA is looking over my shoulder and doubtless drawing a long list of wrong conclusions.

If CISPA passes, be careful you do not use Apple's iCloud services, because everything from your Address Book to the playlists on your iPod are going to be fair game for Big Brother.

No, I am not foolish enough to think that major corporations are not already snooping where they shouldn't, but we still have legal recourse if we catch them at it. People, when a grocery store can afford the technology to track your discount card throughout their store, to see where you spend the most time whilst shopping, then I think there is a clear-cut reason why groceries are as expensive as they are.

So, for all of you who boast you have naught to hide, I suggest there may be quite harmless aspects of your life that you do not need big Brother snooping into.

Tell the U.S. Government that violating our privacy is not an option, by signing the petition on that page.

 

[old round fart]

Can we still post links to catalogs for instance? Links to events? This can be a real can of worms me thinks. John

 

[Mike]

Yes, posting links is fine, because you are not using anyone's protected content.

Yes, it is a can of worms. At least the attorneys are making money from all of it.