|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 | ||||||||||
JoeJoe Inner circle Myrtle Beach 1915 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 19, 2016, S2000magician wrote: No it does not - the United States Code of Law is authored by Congress. When someone says something is "against the law", they are referring to that law. The court can only affirm or deny something is or is not against that law. And Danny quoted you so I accidently stripped his quotes wrong ... I'm partially blind and it is hard to see this so get over it already and be thankful that I take the time to post here at all. : ) This isn't even "my" system - this is your own system cannibalizing itself ... I'm just pointing it out to you, don't shoot the messenger. Being as how Elsevier no longer has to incur the cost of paper and mailing and can now let their clients "download" the data, I'm wondering why anyone would expect them to be making the same money they "traditionally" were able to make. I've noticed most small independent publishing companies have gone under, including Kinko's which I'd think would have qualified as one of the largest ... this is like Kinko's claiming if they copy something on their machine for you, they then own it and you have to stop letting other people make copies of it. -JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
|
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 19, 2016, JoeJoe wrote: I never said that it's "your" system. You're not being chased here. As for case law, it's used all the time . . . as law. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
I for one would be happier if you didn't struggle to post JoeJoe.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 16, 2016, landmark wrote: This is something I've been wondering about. I think there are plenty of dupe posts across the lines of Genii and the Café. The second matter is of more concern to me. Would the Café copyright preclude me from publishing my own words elsewhere? I confess I composed a script last year with exerpts of posts I've made here. A little late in asking but, is that allowed? At the time I couldn't bring myself to actually ask for permission to quote myself. Does the Café own that form of my words, or just precisely the form posted here? Can I take them elsewhere? I would think the Café's not necessarily trying to take my words from me, but more likely trying to prevent them being appropriated by someone else. Would someone like to give me an opinion or declaration on that? I'm working on a documentary right now and it would streamline things for me if I could use my words as originally written at the time rather than rewriting. Maybe I'll start posting on my own website blog. I have a wordpress site, too- maybe I'll do some writing over there, or at Medium- but would I be in the same boat in regards to transferring text/narration to my documentary? Appreciate any thoughts on this, thanks, and, Steve, if you'd like to chime in, that would be appreciated also. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
My guess would be he is stopping others from misappropriation of your thoughts and words.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
I don't think I agree with JJ on the way the law works but I don't know how it works in the USA. I am not too sure how it works in England but still, I think the government can make a law but the courts interpret that law and that is case law. In other words the law is not set in stone. The government try to write the laws as tight as they can but the courts have the power to interpret it as they will and as they do it changes. suppose the government made a law that stated that all ginger haired people must be sentenced to death. The courts will decide who is and who is not ginger and if they decide this one is not then neither are the others of same color, even if the government thinks they are.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 19, 2016, Dannydoyle wrote: I don't think so, since if the words simply belonged to the authors (i.e. no Café copyright notice), it would have the same effect. I think it's specifically to lay claim to compilations and re-printing in the future.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
JoeJoe Inner circle Myrtle Beach 1915 Posts |
Quote:
On Feb 19, 2016, magicalaurie wrote: Every time a page is displayed here, the Café has created a "copy" of the poster's words ... thus, we are obligated to give them some sort of right to copy them. But they do not own the actual words so your script itself belongs to you. Don't take my word for it, you can read this yourself in the actual US Code of Laws: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/202 And here is a layman's explanation ... the script your wrote is the material object, all the Café gets is the right to copy what you give them: http://copyright.uslegal.com/copyright-o......-object/ I should point out that the Copyright Right Act changed this, so that may be where some members are getting their confusion from. They made this change after people like Elsevier were stealing other people's work by claiming they owned the copyright and the original author was no longer allowed to use his own work. In order for Steve to own your script, you would need to give him rights to the script itself - not just the right to copy it. Steve Brooks himself is on record as saying it is no different than sending a letter to the editor of a magazine; if you send a letter to the editor of a magazine, the magazine cannot stop another magazine from receiving and publishing the same letter. http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......c=2918#1 -JoeJoe
Amazing JoeJoe on YouTube[url=https://www.youtube.com/user/AmazingJoeJoe]
|
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 2962 Posts |
O.k. that makes sense, JoeJoe, like the photo sites need a right to display members' photos but the photographers retain ownership. I think that could be said a little clearer here at the Café, as the photo sites certainly reassure photographers of as much very clearly in their terms of use. I know, as landmark says, an author/artist's original work is their own, copyright is implicit, but then when you see a notice like the one here at the Café it can make you wonder what it intends.
Btw, I'm with you on this thread issue, I think, landmark. The way some people do things and the authority they claim, continually leaves me wondering and inspired to stay present and LIVE NOW. I think North American culture is so brainwashed, going on and on about places like China and can't even see itself in the mirror. Free country, my a**. Pardon my ranting, once more, if you will. Thanks for your help with this, all. Have a great day. Pouring rain here and I haven't even got my snowshoes out yet this winter. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
Look at the question of authentication/bogons/dogma/science.
For folks who've forgotten their readings: Science(tm) or perhaps sience as off brand/knockoff?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Researcher illegally shares millions of science papers free online to spread knowledge (12 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |