A first! Banned at high noon :-)

wtf

Let me see if I understand this... tell me if any part of this is off-target.

-A bunch of BCN videos are posted to youtube by this guy 'bclub'. It might be legal for these videos to be there. For all we know, bclub works for the bcn and they want these on youtube (it's more eyeballs getting a look at 'chalk-off' commercials, right?). Anyway it doesn't matter.

- Scara finds bclub's treasure trove of videos and posts links to each of them. He didn't need to do that, you can just link to bclub's user page and see all the same links. So scara did a little extra work by posting individual links anyway, I guess to oragnize them. Personally I don't think the work was necessary, he coulda left it at "here's bclub's user page, there are like 50 videos here." ...but it was a nice thing to do.

-The links are reposted, without credit to scara. But... is credit REALLY necessary? I mean, scara didn't have to break his back searching for hours finding these links, they're all grouped together on a single page. It doesn't take much work to copy these links and paste them here. And obviously he didn't create the content or upload it. So really, scara's role in these nice videos is pretty tiny. He might not even have been the first one to discover the stash.

Look at it this way, if I repost a link to the four year old drummer video, which has been linked in forums and email like 100,000 times...do I really need to mention the name of the friend or family member or forum member who first showed it to me?

- Mr. Barton (who I think makes some good posts and I generally think is a good guy) gets in their face about the lack of credit and they ban him.

Is that pretty much it? Cuz if it is, I think this is one of the unfortunate cases where Mr. Barton's in the wrong. Good youtube videos get reposted a thousand times, and any single 'reposter' doesn't 'own' the link and deserve credit for it. If credit is due at all, it goes to bclub.

Also...there's a polite way to point out 'you should credit someone if you just copy & paste from a poste he made', and I doubt saying it like that would get you a ban. So I think you must have gotten in someone's face a little too hard. You only got a weekend ban, which is pretty light.
 
I picked up a copy of Racking secrets on DVD at my local pro shop the other. I tried it out for a while, seemed to work really well. defiantely good for your game, being able to read a rack and stuff....

oh, wait a minute... I thought this was a pool forum for a second there, shit, what was I thinking....
 
CreeDo said:
Let me see if I understand this... tell me if any part of this is off-target.

-The links are reposted, without credit to scara. But... is credit REALLY necessary? I mean, scara didn't have to break his back searching for hours finding these links, they're all grouped together on a single page. It doesn't take much work to copy these links and paste them here. And obviously he didn't create the content or upload it. So really, scara's role in these nice videos is pretty tiny. He might not even have been the first one to discover the stash.
Click to expand...


I feel that credit is necessary. Scar did the work to create the post, while the reposter just copied and pasted.

Dave
 
I couldn't go without posting here. ;) Did you see SactownTom's signature? "What are you going to do to promote pool in 2007?" Evidently, that. lol There's no need for Scar to have a copyright protected disclaimer. It should be commonplace that if we appropriate someone else's work that we give credit, even if it's not illegal, or even if the likelihood of harm is so slight despite legality. And as to whether it was "work" on Scar's part, I think it was. The organization and arrangement of information in the public domain becomes a copyrighted compilation if it possesses sufficient creativity and originality. (Like a phonebook, compilations are protected by copyright.) I'm not sure that Scar's post/compilation is protected by law, but regardless, shouldn't credit be given where credit is deserved?

-yow!
 
I Know What's Right.... or write... or written

psykoyow said:
I couldn't go without posting here. ;) Did you see SactownTom's signature? "What are you going to do to promote pool in 2007?" Evidently, that. lol There's no need for Scar to have a copyright protected disclaimer. It should be commonplace that if we appropriate someone else's work that we give credit, even if it's not illegal, or even if the likelihood of harm is so slight despite legality. And as to whether it was "work" on Scar's part, I think it was. The organization and arrangement of information in the public domain becomes a copyrighted compilation if it possesses sufficient creativity and originality. (Like a phonebook, compilations are protected by copyright.) I'm not sure that Scar's post/compilation is protected by law, but regardless, shouldn't credit be given where credit is deserved?

-yow!
Click to expand...


Yes, and I just read what YOU wrote and I enjoyed it and I'm giving you credit for writing it and my enjoying it.
Doug
( and I'm going to read it to my wife and tell her that YOU wrote it )
 
I'd like to give credit where credit is due.

I'd like to give credit to my mother and father for teaching me to speak English and to Mrs. Brian @ Wilson Elementary School in San Antonio, Texas for teaching me my ABC's and how to write.

Now, I guess I'm good to go on posting now since I've gotten the credits out of the way.

Stones

(And one more: I'd like to give credit to my older brother for all the four letter words he taught me.)

LOL
 
Last edited:
Ktown D said:
I just thought of something that seems to be very similar. A couple of months ago I saw some info on a female player named Shanelle Loraine and being the borderline perv that I am I made a post about it on IP since the pic and the info came from IP's mainpage. I had a few replies on that site and, low and behold, a post emerges on this site with very similar content.

This is practically the same situation but since the info went from there to here I didn't hear anyone crying foul. That seems kind of hypocritical to me. I personally couldn't give a sh*t because I really don't see the reason for the uproar. Just wanted to make sure you knew that it happens over here as well. I realize this could be a coincidence but probably not.

I just checked the post times to show the time difference to illustrate my point but that was pointless as JR's site had the clock wrong for the forum for a long time. I do however remember when the original post was made here as I frequent both sites at work.

Basically the reason I posted this was to question whether you are really standing up for OP's right to be acknowledged for shared content or just to rip into Jim's rear end. Feel free to tear me apart.

BTW- I am not a Jimbo loyalist although I see no problem with his point of view a great deal of the time.
Click to expand...

And it may well be the same situation, and if so then the person who did it should have given credit. But like I said, the posting itself wasn't THAT big a deal - it was the fact that Jim asked for more that really got me going.

I am USING this as a example to rip into Jim. And I WAS using it at IP where the issue occurred. I am not the copyright police. I could usually care less because it is up to people who own copyrights to protect themselves. I doubt that Scaramouche cares in the least. I don't care about his list being distributed without his permission. I care that a place where the owner is all about honesty and integrity and intellectual property theft, condones it. I was UP FRONT about my reason for starting the topic. I have never seen the owner of any other board that I frequent ask for people to "borrow" content before.

To Creedo: Of course I was particularly hard. That's the whole point. Not once did either Jim or Tom acknowledge that using other people's work without credit is theft at worst and just bad manners at least. Instead Jim sought to obfuscate the issues through red herrings and personal insults and Tom's ONE response was a ban without a reason given or warning. And THEY call AZ Nazis?
 
Jeff said:
For the most part, most forums dedicated to the same topic, usually don't like links directing people to the competition. Even though 99% of the people on each forum know about "the other forum", it is like an unwritten rule you don't link to the "other forum".

I own a Rottweiler forum and I pretty much don't care if people link to stuff on other Rottweiler forums but I know of two or three other Rottweiler forum owners that will "quickly" remove any links to another Rottweiler forum and warn the poster not to do it again. :rolleyes:

What if the poster on IP had said, "Look what I ran across on youtube"? Would you have said anything about it?
Click to expand...

Of course not. I wouldn't have said a word about it. Why would I? YouTube encourages it. I don't think Mike is encouraging people to go and get content written by people on other boards and reposting it here. He may very well be happy if they do it but that is something that resides in his mind. The three things that pissed me off were A. that the info was incorrectly titled. B. that it was credited in a mealy-mouthed fashion, and C. that the owner of the board condoned it.

Honestly, how would you feel if someone started pulling the best content of your members and posting it to other Rottweiler boards? I personally would be pissed off if my member's content was being used to populate other boards and build their content. Sharing is one thing. Calling for the good content to be reposted is another all together.

I post to a woodworking group. The have a FIRM rule that you don't LINK to other boards. But you can mention other boards. You can give credit if you saw a post somewhere else that is on topic. You are allowed to post quotes and say this came from so-and-so at such and such place. But they don't call for their members to go out and retrieve the best content for verbatim reposting without credit.
 
George H:

I can see how it would appear to you. That's fine you are entitled to your opinion. I provided the link so that you could form your own opinion.

What is sad is that you are condoning the practice of content theft. That's too bad. I hope that you are never in a position to be responsible for creating something and have to watch as others use your work without profit to you. And I hope even more that you are never in a position to direct others to steal content.

As for my interaction with Jack. I did not mention it because it is completely irrelevant to this topic. But it does illustrate one point of my character that has remained consistent. When I do step over the line of decency to a friend then I promptly take steps to correct my offense and repair things if I can. When I m wrong I can say it just as solidly as I can hold the line when I am right.
 
Rich R. said:
This is childish!

First of all, it is apparent that Jimbo didn't ban you from IP, yet you blame him. Jimbo is definitely no angle, and I will be the first to admit that, but he didn't ban you. Obviously, you and Jimbo have an ongoing battle and this is just an extension of that battle.

Now, you bring this crap to this forum, like a little kid running back to his friends to tell everyone what he has done.

You present yourself as this protector of internet truth, yet you admittedly create a web site, using Jimbo's screen name, Jimbo's avitar, and naming Jimbo as the soul moderator, when it is obvious that Jimbo has nothing to do with it. That isn't exactly honest.

It seems to me that you are doing nothing but stirring up trouble between internet forums, just like a little kid on the playground.
You were just "grounded" by one of the moderators on IP.
Click to expand...

1. Yes it is childish. So what?
2. Jim has every opportunity to get his own board and NOT be subject to IPM's moderator whims.
3. I created the website to SHOW what it's like when one plagiarizes content. Jim however has full administrator rights there - he can change it to suit himself - he can do WHATEVER he wants to. Change the domain name (although I think it's apt) - change the look, whatever. It's HIS to do with as HE pleases.
4. If I were stirring up trouble then I would have mentioned it here long beforehand. I was discussing an issue there that just happened to have AZ involved because the content came from AZ's board.
5. I got banned forever, because I don't go back. Tom has silenced me from the IPM board forever which is how it should be in an environment that can't take criticism. Just particularly ironic that it happened in a place where free speech was supposed to the cornerstone.

And yes, this is an extension of my utter distaste for Jim Brennan and what he stands for. I didn't have to post anything here. I confess to not being above emotion and above feeling indignation. I posted here to illustrate what I feel is a example of Jim's hypocrisy in action. And it's not the banning, it's the condoning of content theft. I am venting. Sorry for wasting your bandwidth.
 
John Barton said:
George H:

I can see how it would appear to you. That's fine you are entitled to your opinion. I provided the link so that you could form your own opinion.

What is sad is that you are condoning the practice of content theft. That's too bad. I hope that you are never in a position to be responsible for creating something and have to watch as others use your work without profit to you. And I hope even more that you are never in a position to direct others to steal content.

As for my interaction with Jack. I did not mention it because it is completely irrelevant to this topic. But it does illustrate one point of my character that has remained consistent. When I do step over the line of decency to a friend then I promptly take steps to correct my offense and repair things if I can. When I m wrong I can say it just as solidly as I can hold the line when I am right.
Click to expand...

I have been reading this war for sometime now and this shit is funny as hell.
Give 'em Hell jon...
I got your back.
LOL
power to the people...
 
Ktown D said:
I just thought of something that seems to be very similar. A couple of months ago I saw some info on a female player named Shanelle Loraine and being the borderline perv that I am I made a post about it on IP since the pic and the info came from IP's mainpage. I had a few replies on that site and, low and behold, a post emerges on this site with very similar content.

This is practically the same situation but since the info went from there to here I didn't hear anyone crying foul. That seems kind of hypocritical to me. I personally couldn't give a sh*t because I really don't see the reason for the uproar. Just wanted to make sure you knew that it happens over here as well. I realize this could be a coincidence but probably not.

I just checked the post times to show the time difference to illustrate my point but that was pointless as JR's site had the clock wrong for the forum for a long time. I do however remember when the original post was made here as I frequent both sites at work.

Basically the reason I posted this was to question whether you are really standing up for OP's right to be acknowledged for shared content or just to rip into Jim's rear end. Feel free to tear me apart.

BTW- I am not a Jimbo loyalist although I see no problem with his point of view a great deal of the time.
Click to expand...

K-Town,
I don't think this is a good analogy or event to compare. The reason is your content was not cut and pasted. There were two similar posts that occurred within a few hours of one another based on the same topic. Could Rackemsucker have seen your post? Sure, its possible. But you weren't copied verbatim on anything you said.
I have seen similar instances on both boards. Now IMHO posting the topic for discussion on both sites is not the same as a cut and paste job.

JMHO..

JV
 
Wellll...

John Barton said:
Ah - who cares about CCB.... :-) At least 9-Ball girl gave credit to AZ as the place to find the information. Much better than a snide "another poster at another board" - followed up with a "good boy, go fetch some more" by the main man.
Click to expand...

The same poster has copied me without credit before.

But I digress. Ignore is a great function on some boards.

Barbara
 
ridewiththewind said:
John, I am not trying to be right or wrong here......just a voice of reason....but that is part of my character. What can I say, I'm a Libra, and just really like balance...lol.

As to the issue at hand. It is my understanding, having been married to an artist, that unless a copyright disclaimer is expressly attached, there is no copyright infringement. That which is published in a public forum/arena, becomes public domain, unless that copyright disclaimer is attached. Now, I am not sure you are addressing the original list compiled, or the videos in question....or if the original compiler of the list is the contributor of the videos......I have not followed all the threads as closely...because, with my work schedule, computer time is limited these days.

As to YouTube......the reason that most, perhaps not all, but most, people post their videos to YouTube is in the hopes that they are viewed, and eventually, go 'viral'. They are free for the viewing. Since the poster on IP stated that he 'stole' the complied list, and was not making any monetary gain from the list, I do not see where the issue came from by not making a direct link to the original posters thread here. He was just sharing the information with members of another forum, without linking to this forum here. He was not taking credit for compiling the list. He just simply chose not to add the original AZ link.

What am I missing here?

Lisa
Click to expand...

:-) Balance is overrated. I used to be all about balance as well until I found out that you spend all your time trying to maintain it.

First a copyright should be assumed on any work that is not yours. The assumption that everything is copyrighted keeps the protection in place and puts the onus of obtaining permission for use on the person seeking to make use of the material. Copyrights exist on work without the attachments of copyright notices. The mere creation of a work is copyrighted.

I understand what YouTube is about. This has nothing to do with YouTube in the slightest.

Let's see if this example is better.

What if someone here wrote a detailed five page post on the proper way to put on a tip and posted it here and only here? What if that person HATED Jim and JR and had no intention of his work ever being posted there? But this post was like the best information EVER on how to put tips on. I mean it was like critical information.

Would it be right to grab the entire post and repost it there if the author did not intend it to be posted there?

No it would not. What would be acceptable would be for anyone to post a link or a reference to the material as a way of guiding people to the great resource. And if people wanted to read it then they would need to cruise on over to where it is and read it there.

That is the whole issue right there. Not YouTube. Not Scaramouche. But the idea of whether content theft or "borrowing" is acceptable or not. And how it should be handled.

As for Jim. Well he just happened to deliver himself up to be the example of the issue as if it were scripted. And I will admit, as I have done there, that I blew it up and I was inflammatory there. I guess I just have to accept that my dislike for Jim incites me to be much more inclined to needle him than I would be with others.

John - off balance...
 
Honestly, I don't know what to find funnier.... The fact that you're getting so worked up over something that never directly concerned you in the first place, or the fact that you've spent several hours defending it....

May I suggest some light reading?

7222353.jpg


edit: thanks to Barnes & Noble for supplying the image, and to Dr. Richard Carlson for his infinite wisdom and literary masterpiece.
 
Last edited:
1pRoscoe said:
Honestly, I don't know what to find funnier.... The fact that you're getting so worked up over something that never directly concerned you in the first place, or the fact that you've spent several hours defending it....

May I suggest some light reading?

7222353.jpg


edit: thanks to Barnes & Noble for supplying the image, and to Dr. Richard Carlson for his infinite wisdom and literary masterpiece.
Click to expand...

I read it, didn't help. Small stuff pisses me off. Because small stuff IS preventable. Big Stuff is the stuff I don't sweat because it is just a problem to be solved and I enjoy solving it.
 
John Barton said:
:-) What if someone here wrote a detailed five page post on the proper way to put on a tip and posted it here and only here? What if that person HATED Jim and JR and had no intention of his work ever being posted there? But this post was like the best information EVER on how to put tips on. I mean it was like critical information.

Would it be right to grab the entire post and repost it there if the author did not intend it to be posted there?

No it would not. What would be acceptable would be for anyone to post a link or a reference to the material as a way of guiding people to the great resource. And if people wanted to read it then they would need to cruise on over to where it is and read it there.

That is the whole issue right there. Not YouTube. Not Scaramouche. But the idea of whether content theft or "borrowing" is acceptable or not. And how it should be handled.

As for Jim. Well he just happened to deliver himself up to be the example of the issue as if it were scripted. And I will admit, as I have done there, that I blew it up and I was inflammatory there. I guess I just have to accept that my dislike for Jim incites me to be much more inclined to needle him than I would be with others.

John - off balance...
Click to expand...
Apples and oranges. In your example the OP has a compiled a procedure of operation and composed it entirely of his own experiences and practices. The OP owns the content theoretically.

In the situation with the post on this board with the links, the OP only made reference to another person's property that was made available of their own free will. I do not see it as the same thing.

Just another way to look at it. Continue on with your high wire act.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top