 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:00:33 -0500, Lance Birch wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote in message
> news:3e2c1908@news.povray.org...
>> My point (and I believe the original one as well) is that this is not
>> about accusing anyone of anything. This is about the IRTC team taking
>> the *risk* of a possible lawsuit because they are distributing
>> copyrighted material in their website.
>
> Yes, that was my original concern. It appears everyone else thinks I
> was talking about voting though - I obviously wasn't clear enough with
> my original post. I was short on time and wanted to get something on
> here before I had to leave, otherwise I probably would have forgotten
> about it by the time I was able to get access to my computer again.
>
> This isn't about votes for me (I only mentioned that I was planning on
> voting in my second post, as I've never had the chance to vote before -
> it's unrelated to this issue), it's about whether the material should be
> there or not.
The issue is the voting not the CD-ROM. If the team is uncomfortable with
including it on the CD-ROM, don't. If there is a complaint about what is
on the website, remove it and the copyright owner has no further recourse.
That has nothing to do with scoring the entries. No place does it say all
entries must be suitable for CD-ROM distribution.
In fact the copyright mention in the rules clearly refers to models and
not to any other content.
There is also the issue of fair use.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:06:23 -0500, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Program ended abnormally on 1/20/03 8:56 AM, Due to a catastrophic argus
> error:
>
> [some snippage]
>
>
>> You are the one making the accusation, John. Make your case. Provide
>> some facts.
>
> Here are the facts:
>
> 1 - This is why the rules say:
>
> [ quote from http://www.irtc.org/copy.html ]
>
> THE STANDARD RAY TRACING COMPETITION COPYRIGHT (oct97 version)
> ----------------------------------------------
> Ownership
> ---------
> The uploaded files are the original work of the entrant, who
> retains all copyright and ownership rights.
>
> The entrant represents that, except for any public domain code,
> the entrant is the sole creator of, and owns all rights to, the
> submitted work.
>
> [end quote]
>
> Therefore, any entry that uses material whose copyright is not owned by
> the creator of said entry does not conform to the rules of the IRTC and
> can be dropped by the admins.
Therefore ..... of course. As the belowmentioned entries have not been
dropped it is presumed they have determined there is no copyright issue
in regard to the competition for those entries.
> 2 - The songs:
>
> 2harps.mpg: "Prelude" by Clyde of Triumph. (c)1990. Possibly in the
> public domain.
>
> amc.mpg: "Magdalena" by A Perfect Circle. (c)2001. Definitely not in
> the public domain.
>
> ferrari.mpg: Possibly "Opus Four 4", definitely by The Art of Noise.
> (c)1990. Also not in the public domain.
>
> maal_asf.mpg: The author makes absolutely no mention of the songs he
> sampled, but I could recognize part of the "Mission: Impossible" theme
> by U2. Still not in the public domain.
>
> etc...
Music is code?
> Even if, in the animations mentioned above, the authors had received a
> written permission from the legal owners of the music excerpts, it would
> not make them the "legal owners" of those copyrights. Therefore those
> entries do not conform to the rules of the competition and the admins
> should remove them.
>> What have you done other than point a finger, make an unfounded
>> accusation and attempt to sway other's votes?
>
> I do not think John was trying to sway the others' vote, but in the
> past, giving low scores has always been the preferred method of
> "punishing" rule violators.
It is not clear rules have been violated. Rather it appears the rules
overlooked something they feel to be important to the CD publication.
Again, that is separate from the rules.
As for tradition, reading past comments suggests some downgrading but
not 1,1,1.
> [more snippage]
>> How can you justify, John, your apparent unthinking, blind act of
>> unfounded accusation of copyright violation done in a short shrift
>> manner with only the goal of influencing other's votes?
> Unfounded????? The above examples were all taken from either the
> rolling credits at the end of the animations, or the accompanying .txt
> file, along with a little Googling.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> THE STANDARD RAY TRACING COMPETITION COPYRIGHT (oct97 version)
>> ----------------------------------------------
>>
>> Ownership
>> ---------
>> The uploaded files are the original work of the entrant, who
>> retains all copyright and ownership rights.
>>
>> The entrant represents that, except for any public domain code,
>> the entrant is the sole creator of, and owns all rights to, the
>> submitted work.
>> Animations rules section 3 part d:
>> You may use objects and textures downoaded from the internet or
>> purchased commercially, but it is not encouraged. Similarly you may use
>> other people's images as image-maps or textures within your own work.
>> In all cases, you must get permission from the creator of the object or
>> image. If you use such objects or images, you must make this known with
>> proper acknowledgments in the text file accompanying your submission.
>> You may not violate copyrights of any sort.
As you do not seem to have read or understood the rules, I will not debate
this issue with you any further.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque <fla### [at] videotronca> wrote in news:3E2CB92F.1000808
@videotron.ca:
> maal_asf.mpg: The author makes absolutely no mention of the songs he
> sampled, but I could recognize part of the "Mission: Impossible" theme
> by U2. Still not in the public domain.
>
Actually the author did. He said:
"Music was added for fun, using the SmartSound automated
soundtrack generator that come with Adobe Premiere."
If the pseudo random notes sound like something else, that is normal. You
can only have so many melody lines in western music. So it does comply
with the letter and spirit of the rules, but that is the only entry with
music that does.
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 03:44:04 -0500, John VanSickle wrote:
> Exactly what part of "You may not violate copyrights of any sort" do you
> not understand?
I think he is making many valid points. Try it this way. They sell a CD.
Whoever they are they are the responsible party is the one who collect the
earnings. The CD may be non-violative of the copyright laws of their
country as interpreted in court decisions but may violate the statuatory
and law in other countries.
Is the standard copyright statement in the entry binding in all
countries? Make the statement then sue under some arcane court decision
in one's home country of Lower Silesia. Although winning does not have
a tangible reward intangibles are held to be of value which can be
considered an inducement. As an inducement requiring the statement can be
viewed as coersion. An argument can be made that giving up something of
value for a chance at winning something of value is gambling -- consult
your local gaming laws.
That is far fetched but have you read the RIAA statements lately?
And they are suing with very novel arguements. Novel in anything courts
have not previously decided in hopes of winning at least one case. The
RIAA is in America. What are equivalent organizations doing in your
country?
Now lets say there is unauthorized reproduction of the CDs. The owners
of the works on the CD have reasonable grounds to sue the IRTC if the
IRTC does not vigorous pursue the offending pirates.
Again far fetched but no one knows what any law really means until there
is "much" case law as precedent.
Speaking of case law first we assume there is a violation which puts the
IRTC at risk. If it is regarding the website, they have only to remove
the offending material and there is no further legal recourse. If such
material should be included on the CD, if the IRTC agrees to pay standard
royalties on each sale that is the end of it. Ordinarily royalties are
based upon their fractional contribution to the entire item. That
fraction would be the ratio of the music bytes to the total bytes on the
CD. The courts do not put up with vindictive lawsuits.
And then there is fair use. I recall a stills image with a movie poster
as an image map. Movie posters are copyrighted. One of the challenges in
modeling is looking like something famous like the Enterprise or a Tie
Fighter. The better the model the closer it is to violating copyright.
But in the first case it was a small component of scenery to make the
image appear realistic. In the second neither copyright holder has complained and
therefore it is not only fair use but likely in the public domain because
of the lack of complaints. Out-takes from the copyrighted works remain
copyrighted.
And a final point. Unless those CDs are selling like hotcakes all over
the world the IRTC is judgment proof. I would be surprised if there were
any profit at all after recovering the cost of conducting the contest
which is the cost of this website. There is no malice. It is intended as
a recreation not a source of income. The material was open for public
inspection for a year or more before the CD is released and there were no
complaints. This is not an obscure website as the monthly bandwidth must
certainly indicate.
More simply, the whole discussion of risk is like a corporate attorney
trying to earn his keep and cover his ass giving advice based upon worst
case possibilities.
The solution? Amend the rules to prohibit anything soundtrack unless
wholely created by the person submitting it.
A final comment. The movie Heavy Metal took so long to go from the
theater to TV because the people who made it did not get permission to
use the music. Even Hollywood doesn't pay attention to the rules.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:43:04 -0500, Warp wrote:
> argus <arg### [at] npqrnet> wrote:
>> No, I'm not missing the point. I am trying to get a few people to
>> undetake the difficult task of learning how to make a basis for an
>> accusation before attempting to influence others votes.
> Right, you are not missing *your* point. However, you are missing the
> *original* points, as well as *my* point.
> My point (and I believe the original one as well) is that this is not
> about accusing anyone of anything. This is about the IRTC team taking
> the *risk* of a possible lawsuit because they are distributing
> copyrighted material in their website.
And he is correctly saying there is no risk at all. If the copyright
holder notifies the IRTC of the violation and the IRTC removes it, that
is the end of it. Lawsuits are not permitted if the material is promptly
deleted. If one were filed it would likely be considered barotry which
could make the IRTC rich should the RIAA file it.
The recourse they would have would be against the person who
submitted the material and they could sue for every penny he earned from
the creation and treble damages. Zero plus three times zero is still zero.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:35:38 -0500, Tek wrote:
> argus <arg### [at] npqrnet> wrote in message
> news:3e2bfe36$1@news.povray.org...
>> What does getting sued have to do with anything?
> I think the point here is the IRTC want to protect against being sued.
> It's possible that one day the copyright owners will pursue legal action
> against the IRTC for distributing their music, and that would doubtless
> mean the website would have to shut down.
That is moot. The IRTC is now distributing it. The IRTC obviously does
not have a problem with the music at this time.
The issue raised was voting and nothing else.
Even if it is the most blatant pirated material, the IRTC has put it
online for voting. The IRTC as the creator of the rules is the sole judge
of compliance with the rules. They have allowed it in the competition
therefore it is in compliance with the rules.
As the IRTC does not consider it a copyright violation there should be
no voting reflecting an opinion contrary to that of the IRTC.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:14:20 -0500, Lance Birch wrote:
> I've just looked through the latest entries for the animation round
> (Speed) and noticed that there are several instances of copyright music
> being used without permission.
> What gives? I take it this isn't allowed (it never used to be).
Pardon if I am being repetative but I think this is the bottom line. The
IRTC is solely responsible for determining if an entry complies with the
rules. The IRTC has put all the entries up for voting therefore the IRTC
has judged them to be in compliance with the rules.
Therefore no one should vote under the assumption they are contrary to
the rules when the IRTC has determined they are in compliance with the
rules.
If the IRTC feels these were oversights they can removed them from the
competition.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
> The issue is the voting
That's where you are wrong.
It's a legal issue. Why are you people sticking to some "voting" thing?
Forget about that. That's not the issue here.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"simian" <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote in message
news:3e2d0fc4$1@news.povray.org...
> That is moot. The IRTC is now distributing it. The IRTC
> obviously does not have a problem with the music at this
> time. The issue raised was voting and nothing else.
> Even if it is the most blatant pirated material, the
> IRTC has put it online for voting.
>
A server put it up there in an automatic process before anyone saw it. It
has also only done so for a week so far. IIRC most legal action would start
with a cease and desist order. One gets in bigger trouble if one SELLS the
music, which would happen if the animations remain in the collection until a
CD is sold.
> The IRTC as the creator of the rules is the sole judge
> of compliance with the rules. They have allowed it in
> the competition therefore it is in compliance with the
> rules.
> As the IRTC does not consider it a copyright violation
> there should be no voting reflecting an opinion contrary
> to that of the IRTC.
Is "IRTC" some all-knowing guy? I thought it was a committee of volunteers
with a Life and a day job, with multiple reasons for being a slow-to-act
body. They haven't been fully aware of it yet.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
