Trolling and flaming in the Green Room

A certain poster decided today that he should spam up a thread in the Green Room, filling it with trolling and flames. Then he got unnerved by the idea of a moderator warning, and edited his posts. It's still a rules violation in my opinion. What are people's thoughts on this tactic for getting away with Red Room posting in other rooms?

There was no trolling or flaming happening in the Green Room. What there was, was a discussion of ownership of imagery uploaded to the Green Room. It's not addressed in the board rules, so it seemed prudent to warn potential new posters that -- per admin action so far -- anything uploaded to the Green Room becomes de facto property of... well... everybody.

Also, per indications from Tamar, at least, the same goes for any image uploaded anywhere on the board other than the Blue Room. For example, Forbin is no longer the exclusive owner of his kitbash artwork, having uploaded it into the Workshop. Now that he's done that, anyone here can use anything he's uploaded there any place and any way they wish. He no longer owns it -- so says Wordforge staff -- just as I no longer own the images I uploaded to the Green Room and therefore can't expect to have my ownership rights over my imagery respected. Neither can anyone else who uploads images into the Green Room. That's not in the rules, and it should be.

I think it's important for Wordforge posters to be aware of this rather interesting, and frankly, unique, wrinkle in the board's policy toward intellectual property.

That's not trolling, nor is it flaming. It's just a PSA.

Of course, since a couple of people were unnerved by it, I redacted most of the posts explaining it and left just the one.

No one is claiming ownership of anyone else's pictures.

They can engage in Fair Use on the board, just like anywhere else on the internet. The Blue Room is different. It's hidden and not really public exposure and there is not only the expectation of privacy, but a demand for such.

Or no one anywhere would have avatars of copyrighted images and logos.

Exactly. That's what I made clear in the Picture Thread 2012 in the Green Room, because it simply isn't in the board rules and -- since $corp is aiming for new members -- they would be unaware that what they post in the Green Room stops belonging to them the instant they post it. They lose all of the rights that come with ownership of the image at the instant it hits the board. New posters need to know that. I sure didn't -- like I said, that's not posted anywhere on the board, it runs totally contrary to common sense, and I don't want any newbies to find out the way I found out.

So the drama has shifted to the Help Desk now? It's like musical chairs in here.

It's odd for a self-proclaimed writer with mad skilz not to understand fair use doctrine. But I tell you what, I'll split 50/50 all proceeds from the "life is too short for bad beer" t-shirt sales.

Oh, fair use doctrine doesn't matter here. No, it's been made clear that any image posted on this board outside the Blue Room automatically belongs to everyone who sees it. Which is fine.

The problem is that that isn't in the board rules anywhere, so new posters need to be made aware of it. I suggest something to that effect be added to the description for the Green Room. Like this:

Obviously, it wouldn't read just like that, but something along that line. That way no one will be upset or taken by surprise.

It doesn't need to be a WF rule when it's the law.

If you didn't understand Fair Use before posting your pictures online, that's kind of your problem.

Anyone who puts a photo on the internet expecting privacy is frankly, a fool.

Understood it just fine, posted links to relevant sections which bar what the images have been used for.

No, new posters need to be made aware that, unless they're sufficiently popular, their images and any other contributions they make will be abused for purposes of harassment, those who abuse them will play endless games of lawyerball, and board staff will do jack shit about it.

But please, tell me some more about how board rules allow it. I shoot down "fair use" and you race for "board rules allow it" to save you -- I shoot down "board rules allow it" and you race back toward "fair use" again.

It's neither. Neither allows it. And prospective new posters need to know that it will be permitted anyway.

Fair use absolutely allows it, but my concern is that you trolled in the Green Room, something explicitly against the rules, then thought you could get away with it if you edited the posts before the mods saw them.

You're thinking of fair use as it applies to the written word. It applies to photography quite a bit differently. In any case, new posters need to beware: You upload it, everybody owns it. Anybody can do whatever they like with it. Because the staff says so, and the law be damned.

A helpful article on copyright and Fair Use:

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/copyright-fair-use-and-how-it-works-for-online-images/

There are four things only I can do with my images:

1. Reproduce the copyrighted work;
2. Display the copyrighted work publicly;
3. Prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work; and
4. Distribute copies of the copyrighted work to the public by sale, rental or lending, and/or to display the image.

Gul and El Chup have engaged in #3. Faceman engaged in #1. Neither of those is allowed under copyright law, and neither is excused under Fair Use.

There's your "Fair Use" argument, shot.

Nowhere in the board rules does it say that either is permitted.

There's your, "board rules allow it" argument, shot.

Now, that doesn't mean I expect staff to make them stop doing it; various staff members have already made it known that no such thing is going to happen. But what staff perhaps should do is put something in the board rules -- maybe a sticky in the "Introduce Yourself" forum -- saying something to the effect of, "We here at Wordforge don't give a shit about copyright law -- if you upload it, anyone here can do whatever the hell they want with it, and tough titties for you."

John Castle is a public persona, he even has an IMDB entry. This means either we have an imposter on this board, or the images are freely available for parody purposes.

Should we adopt the TrekBBS rule of never posting complete news stories, just a few paragraphs and a link, then?

Neither is the case, actually. You're thinking of "works in the public domain," but those are defined, according to the article, as follows:

My images are original works. They're not government works, blank forms or short phrases. You're confusing "public domain" with "in the public eye." Just because you can see it doesn't mean you can use it.

I thought we already had, about a year and a half ago or so; that's why that's how I post articles for RR topics.

Again, though, and this is important: I know the staff isn't going to keep posters in compliance with copyright. Not a fuck is being given; this is understood. I only posted this revelation in the Green Room picture thread because this concept is peculiar to Wordforge, specifically to the defense of a few posters who simply cannot rein themselves in where others' intellectual property is concerned.

Any other poster, on any other board, would consider it a given that images created by him or her -- particularly of himself or herself -- are going to be considered his or her own property and, therefore, would be off-limits for harassment by other posters of the board.

I, myself, was surprised to learn that a subforum in which trolling is barred can still be harvested for trolling material. I had assumed that since one can't troll in the Green Room, one likewise cannot troll with the Green Room.

This board is unique in permitting it, and that peculiarity isn't stated in the board's rules. Anyone who joins and has that done to them will not have had any forewarning that board rules allow it -- because no board anywhere else that's run and populated by mature adults does allow it.

So newbs should be made aware that Wordforge does.

You published the picture in a public place. No one else, you.

Once in the public sphere, the fact some people are using the photo for the purpose of cariacture and satire is not illegal. No one pretends the picture belongs to them. No one is making money on it. No one put a private picture in the public sphere but you.

And this board does not claim to own anything anyone posts.

Public sphere is not public domain. It would have to be the latter in order to be used for any of the four purposes laid out above.

And no one may display it in any form, in any place including here, except me, without my consent. If I post it in a thread, limited implied consent is granted, to the extent that if anyone quotes the image in a subsequent post, it would be displayed by them.

That's not the same as displaying the image -- which, again, only I may do -- in any other way. Such as, for example, as an avatar.

Then I own my images. Not gul? Not El Chup?

When Lanzman gets a cease and desist, we'll talk.

Should it really have to go that far? $corp is talking about bringing more traffic to the board -- how is that going to look to them? How is any of this going to look to new posters? You all think I look bugfuck for having a problem with this, but it's the board that looks fucked up for driving a long time poster to this behavior.

"Hi! Welcome to Wordforge, where it takes a legal notice to get the staff to do something about our members misusing what you post!"

Cite the exact wording of the law that says this. The one in the Real World, not the one in your fevered imagination.

Because if anyone knows just how loose the law is on WF, it's me, and you've been here long enough to see how many times one specific image of me has been Photoshopped for the amusement of Tamar and her little friends.

That image, BTW, is not a photo, but a screen cap from a video that was posted on a fan site located in, I believe, the Czech Republic.

Did I consent to the video? I did. I have the documentation to prove it. (Also had a whole lot of fun and a bit of remuneration for my participation, but that's beside the point.) Did I consent to the use of the screen cap on the fan site? Not officially, but by implied consent, since it accompanied an online Q&A session I participated in.

Did I consent to the cutesy little Photoshopped versions used on WF? I did not. Nor did I first post that screen cap here - it was copied from the Czech fan site and used without my permission, back before there were rules against that. IOW, back when the Tamarchives could be used to post anything about anybody before they were fenced around and controlled.

Nevertheless, do I have grounds for complaint? No. Why? Because Tamar says so, and no one else on staff has ever contradicted her.

So cite the law as it exists outside of WF, or go obsess about something else.

So, since you got trolled everyone should be allowed to be trolled?

I maintain now as I did for garamet and everyone else - don't be an ass with other people's information.

Pretty sure Lanz made that a rule, too.

I'm not even sure who the photo is of, who took the photo, or who is really asking us to take it down. You're just some troll handle on the internet. You're not real.

I prefer to think that Chad took the photo and has given us permission for its use. It seems just as plausible as Visionrazor's theory.

Ownership of copyright:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/201

Fair Use:

Infringement and Remedies:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/501

Scope of exclusive rights in pictorial, graphic and sculptural works:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/113

So those photoshopped pics of you? Those should not have been allowed to go unwarned, either.

Also: The attached images are obviously trolling in nature. There they are in the Green Room.

http://www.wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2412769&postcount=3

Is trolling allowed in the Green Room?

In the Help Desk?

http://www.wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2403350&postcount=56

Media Central?

http://www.wordforge.net/showpost.php?p=2402628&postcount=206

I guess it is, provided I'm the target of it.

But Tamar's right -- nothing in the rules against it, is there?

But here's an idea -- and it's just an idea, I'm just thinking through the keyboard, here. Update the rules.

John Castle claims it belongs to him. Previously there was a guy calling himself skinofevil making that claim. This, a person who had misappropriated a user ID that had been previously used by somebody else. As far as I'm concerned, Chad makes the most viable claim.

Quite the contrary. I'm simply amused that JC's acting as if he just hatched from the egg.

What I'm doing is reiterating that the majority of the privacy rules on this board were established after Tamar took liberties with information gathered elsewhere. It's ironic that, more often than not, she's the one enforcing - or sometimes either over- or under-enforcing, depending on the poster - rules that were put in place to contain her shenanigans.

Well, yeah, this is cool, and all in good fun and games. But new posters should be made aware that this is what they have to look forward to. Rules? Nah. Keeping things legal? Hell, even just drama-free? Nah. Because gul wants to misuse photos that don't belong to gul.

I agree, and I like that you noted the "depending on the poster" part, because that really is the key as to why this is being permitted.

While I agree that Tamar has a difficult time being fair and impartial, I don't agree with tit for tat.

You, 14th Doc, Kirk, even Sokar, and now JC have all been trolled with personal information.

And it's always the same people involved - either on the prosecuting end or the defending end, depending on with whom they are "allied".

Since Tamar, and I doubt Scorp as he's been as much involved as any, can't be responsible enough to enforce such a basic rule - unwritten or otherwise - I implore Bailey and Paladin please step forward and stop this nonsense.

I'm tired of it myself. Does anyone here think I want this bullshit to be what my WF time is about? Not even a little. But I want the troll avatars and sig gone. Out of self-interest, out of a desire to see more members on the board, out of a desire for more than being trolled in every goddamn subforum I post in.

The rules, if there is any point in having rules, are going to have to restrain all posters and protect all posters equally. They don't. That's why the population of this board has been decreasing. It's not having negrep taken away that did that, it's the fact that there are cliques here. Rep was just the worst example of clique behavior at the time that led up to it being eliminated.

Now we have this bullshit. It's time to take this away from the cliques as well and start enforcing the damn rules fairly.