 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:27:04 -0500, Greg M. Johnson wrote:
> "simian" <mik### [at] localhost localdomain> 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.
An analogy would be a bomb set off by a timer. The timer did
it not the bomber. People are completely responsible for the consequences
of their automated systems.
> 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 rules are regarding the contest not suitability for inclusion on
the CD.
>> 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.
I do not say they are all knowing. I say if they believe a problem
exists it should be removed from the contest. Leaving them in the contest
is continued dissemination of the material regardless of the automated
manner in which is first appeared.
Vigilante action based upon personal knowledge of copyright law is
unwarranted and leads to chaos.
If they remain in the contest then there should be no consideration of
copyright issues.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:32:31 -0500, Warp wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
>> The issue raised was voting and nothing else.
> "And nothing else"? Where's all that I have written? Is it worthless.
> You are a typical troll. You stick to some tiny detail mentioned
> incidentally and make a big number of that, as if it was the only and
> main thing ever claimed in the whole thread.
There appears to be some sensitivity to the expression of a different
opinion. I have not presented your posts as worthless. I simply do not
agree. I have posted my reasons for disagreeing. You have cut three
paragraphs of what I consider to be relevent commentary to object to one
sentence.
Are we not all reasonable people who can disagree?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:25:54 -0500, Warp wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
>> The issue is the voting
>
> That's where you are wrong.
There has been discussion of having individual opinion in the matter of
copyright law being used as guidance for scoring.
> It's a legal issue. Why are you people sticking to some "voting"
> thing?
> Forget about that. That's not the issue here.
If the discussion is a legal issue then I am not an attorney. Are there
any attorneys here who practice copyright law who would be willing to
give a free opinion?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:30:11 -0500, Warp wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> You don't seem to understand what "wanting to stay out of trouble"
> means.
> Lawsuits require lawyers, money, time, and it's always a risk in many
> ways, one of them being getting negative publicity.
> You might, as an individual, be ready to risk all that, but they, as a
> reputable entity, may not.
As I and others have pointed out, there must first be a cease and desist
order. If upon receipt of that order the material is removed from the
website there is no further recourse. Any possibility of trouble ends
there. There is no call of any lawyers unless the IRTC wishes to contest the
order and challenge the assertion of copyright. Adverse publicity? For
making a mistake?
Why are you being so confrontational? Are we not just exchanging
opinions as laymen in this matter?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote in
news:3e2deeb1$1@news.povray.org:
> As I and others have pointed out, there must first be a cease and
> desist order.
That sounds like:
If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one there to hear it...
Does it make a sound?
The IRTC admins could just chuck out the entries in question at their own
discretion.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:23:27 -0500, Tom Galvin wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote in
> news:3e2deeb1$1@news.povray.org:
>> As I and others have pointed out, there must first be a cease and
>> desist order.
> That sounds like:
> If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one there to hear it...
> Does it make a sound?
> The IRTC admins could just chuck out the entries in question at their
> own discretion.
I have had enough. I tried to add some clarification and all I get is
grief.
So I leave you all with this. Literally hundreds of copyrighted fonts
have made their way into the public domain but still have copyright
protection. How many contest submissions both animation and stills
incorporate copyrighted fonts? And who is going to take on that exercise
in futility?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
> If the discussion is a legal issue then I am not an attorney. Are there
> any attorneys here who practice copyright law who would be willing to
> give a free opinion?
You still don't get it, do you?
The issue is that if there *might* be some problems, it's better to stay
out of them. Simple.
Searching for tons of excuses is just searching for problems, when the
alternative of staying out of problems is so simple.
--
#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:
> Adverse publicity? For making a mistake?
It doesn't sound like a mistake if they have a rule that no copyrights
may be violated and still they allow such material to be in their website.
> Why are you being so confrontational? Are we not just exchanging
> opinions as laymen in this matter?
It's because you sound like a troll. In the internet it's difficult to
know what is the tone of voice of people when they say something. They might
say something completely calmly and innocently, but since other people only
see letters and words, they might understand it as if it had been said
aggressively and angrily.
--
#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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:39:26 -0500, Warp wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
>> If the discussion is a legal issue then I am not an attorney. Are
>> there
>> any attorneys here who practice copyright law who would be willing to
>> give a free opinion?
>
> You still don't get it, do you?
>
> The issue is that if there *might* be some problems, it's better to
> stay
> out of them. Simple.
Then it is for the IRTC team to remove it from competition and from the
server. Simple as that. As I noted elsewhere, if they consider it a
copyright violation then permitting it to be viewed and listened to
constitutes a violation in and of itself.
> Searching for tons of excuses is just searching for problems, when the
> alternative of staying out of problems is so simple.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:44:47 -0500, Warp wrote:
> simian <mik### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
>> Adverse publicity? For making a mistake?
> It doesn't sound like a mistake if they have a rule that no copyrights
> may be violated and still they allow such material to be in their
> website.
Which is what I have said. If there is a question it should be removed
from the competition. Questions regarding scoring are moot.
>> Why are you being so confrontational? Are we not just exchanging
>> opinions as laymen in this matter?
> It's because you sound like a troll. In the internet it's difficult to
> know what is the tone of voice of people when they say something. They
> might say something completely calmly and innocently, but since other
> people only see letters and words, they might understand it as if it had
> been said aggressively and angrily.
It appears we agree of removing it from the competition as the means.
Are we both trolls?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
