Why not? It seems to be your favorite type of tactic. Everytime you try to ignore what exactly it is that I said, i'll repeat it.
I've told you your initial premise was incorrect. You don't accept my opinion. Therefore you're just repeating yourself. Let me repost the link that Liet posted in the thread where this uproar erupted last night: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html If you were aware, through your profession, of a legal matter that others might not be as aware of, wouldn't you want to make sure they didn't violate the law? Your perceived "right" to rob Parsons, Hall and Lawson of potential royalties in no way affects my income. You're coming at this from the wrong angle, and you're making yourself look foolish. Stop yelling and let's discuss this rationally.
Who is yelling? You're the one getting your panties in a twist over the point; the professional writer. You feel this author is getting his pocket picked so to speak, and are using your argument about copyright to cover that. If Marso had posted the whole book photos and all, i'd agree. Or if he said he made a torrent of the book, i'd agree. He didn't. He posted snippets. snippets that just might have caused someone to look up the book on amazon and buy it. Heck, I even posted a link to the book in this thread. I made a thread about Dicky getting Marso's thread shut down out of spite. That's all I made. But if you want to go further then that because writers pontentially getting ripped off of income is a sore point for you, fine. First, let's all get super worried over pontential copyright and trademark violations and start scouring the board for every single scrap of text, picture, video, avatar, etc., etc., that might cause a pontential problem and yank 'em, or get the appropriate permissions. When we are down to three posters, turn out the light's on your way out.
Yes, those snippets may very well have caused people to look up the book and buy it, and I hope they did. And if one of the authors was a member of Wordforge and posted them here, that would be their right as owners of the copyrighted material. If the authors' agents or a publicist for the publisher posted them, that would be their right as purveyors of the book. It is *not* all right for anyone else to do that without express permission of the authors and/or the publisher. That's the law. You got beef with the law, take it to the Office of Patents & Copyrights and quit busting my chops. Marso's intentions were pure, and none of what I'm about to say applies to him. He was unaware of any wrongdoing, and he took the proper action. In the absence of copyright law, some unscrupulous person could have taken excerpts from that book and passed them off as their own. Some unscrupulous person could excerpt the book and deliberately misquote it. The fact that numerous pilots were quoted in the book makes this doubly dangerous for the authors if they're in any way misrepresented. The authors had to get permission from everyone they quoted. That required an investment of time and money. They had to get permission for every photo they used. Another investment of time and money. Then there's the actual researching, writing, fact-checking, etc. Their work is protected by copyright. And you'd be appalled at how little of the cover price of that book actually ends up in their pockets. At the very least, their right to their own material should be respected. That's what the law says. The law doesn't care what you say. My interest in this particular issue is not just because I'm a writer, just as Liet's interest in it was not just because he's an attorney. Diacanu only brought it up because it was pertinent to the discussion in the thread at the time. The primary goal here was to make sure no one on Wordforge got into a dicey legal situation. I don't see you jumping all over Liet. I see you jumping on Diacanu, and then on me because you don't accept the facts. Take it up with the feds. Explain to them how you think the law is wrong. But back offa me, Marky, before I go Brooklyn on your ass!
The way I see it, unless someone was going to snitch on Marso to the publishing company in question, there was about a red cunt hair this side of ZERO PERCENT chance that anyone was ever going to know about it in order to do anything about it.
No, he's not usually like this. He's a wiseass, but he's from NYawk, he can't help it. But the hissy-fits are out of character.
You do know marketers use search engines, right? If someone from the publisher or the publicist was doing a random search as part of a viral marketing campaign and happened on that thread, they most probably would have made a polite query. But ya never know. There's an added dimension of the pilots being quoted in the book. The authors had to get permission to quote them (and someone had to double/triple check that they were quoted correctly). For whatever reasons, one or several of them might not want to be quoted out of context in a non-copyrighted venue.
Question: Anyone here ever write a term paper? Remember how you had to do footnotes and a bibliography? Did you imagine the teacher was just doing that to torture you?
I wonder how many in this thread have songs on their ipod or pc that they didn't pay for. Not to mention all that talk about Dr. Who and BSG downloading.
Well, for one thing, it was to teach you how to do it so you'd be prepared for college, graduate theses, etc. For another, it was to discourage plagiarism, because the teacher could potentially (not that they ever have time) check a random reference and bust anyone who was stealing. But, ultimately, there is fair use of copyrighted material, even in a high school term paper.
Yes, yes, and no - I knew they were doing it just to torture me, respectively. One was fucking ANAL about it. Full format, and between 100 and 150 words annotation. 1% off for every word under or over. Oh, and that wasn't in the policy, it just happened to work out that way on every single paper.
That's precisely the mindset that's at work here. Your generation thinks you're entitled to walk off with anything that's not nailed down. Downright communistic of you. Now, I know next to nothing about music and video copyrighting, though I understand there's a great deal of exploitation of artists in the music biz, so you're probably hurting the record company a lot more than the artist in many cases. I'm not going to get into a whole big harangue about downloading sound/video. These are instances where the technology has outstripped the law, and that's due to a lack of foresight on the part of the producers of this material and their attorneys. It's a different case for print material.
You coming in here and throwing a tantrum like a 3-year old, I suppose. Maybe it's just something you regularly do though.
I do it along with millions of other people. The difference is I'm not about to pretend that what I'm doing is legal or even ethical. But I'm also not a libertarian either.
Jeez, dude, I didn't mean to scare you THAT bad. If I would have know you were gonna piss yourself... well ... yeah I still would have said it.
