Hmm...

[miketsp]

Unless the material is being used for commercial purposes then posting it to a discussion forum is not copywrite infringment.

If scubaboard posted, "hey come toour pay site and pay us to look at ffunny pictures" then there would be a problem.

At least this is how I understand it

I frequent several forums and most of them have the following or similar ruling:

Dear users of our forum:

We believe in the rights of people to control what they create. One of the ways to insure these rights is through international copyright laws.

What this specifically means is that you cannot simply copy and paste somebody else's work into something you're posting. It is illegal. Although it is frequently done on the internet, that does not make it ethical or legal. Posts which simply copy huge hunks of someone else's work--without the creator's verifiable consent--will be edited or deleted.

What this means is that you can do the following:

1) Make only brief quotes from other people's work. These quotes should be within quote marks ("") and their sources listed. Your post should not be limited to the quotes. Rather, they should be used to support your ideas.

2) Contact the source of the material you wish to quote and get authorization to quote them. Usually they will give this to you for free.

The above to ways of including original creative material from others is both legal and ethical.

 

[downunderjenn]

I thought it was funny and am glad it was shared. There are bigger issues than worrying about copyright infringement that wasn't infringed upon. It's one thing to show someone this cool work done by someone else, another to claim it as your own. oh, and I am an artist.

 

[miketsp]

..snip..
There are bigger issues than worrying about copyright infringement that wasn't infringed upon. It's one thing to show someone this cool work done by someone else, another to claim it as your own. oh, and I am an artist.

Of course it was infringed on. The current law in the USA requires neither a notice of copyright nor registration of the work with the U.S. Copyright Office.

17 USC §106 confers to an author of a copyrighted work the following exclusive rights:
to reproduce the work (e.g., to make copies)
to prepare derivative works (e.g., translation, abridgment, condensation, adaptation)
to distribute copies to the public (e.g., publish, sell, rental, lease, or lending)
to perform the work publicly
to display the work publicly

Copying illustrations or diagrams or photographs (e.g., scanning a printed image or copying a GIF or JPEG file) always requires permission of the copyright owner, unless the works are clearly in the public domain (e.g., either a work produced by the U.S. Government or a work that was initially published before 1922 and was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office).

Posting a document on the world wide web is a "public display" of the work, which is among the rights exclusively reserved to the owner of the copyrighted work. 17 USC §106(5).


Have a look at
http://meme.essortment.com/copyrightlawla_rmep.htm

The original post does not fall into any of the fair usage categories. The copyrighted work represented almost 100% of the content of the original post.

 

[TwoTanks]

MikeC,

Thanks for sharing.

I'm sure that your glad to see so many people are worried about you getting in trouble. I'm sure that if you get sued, they will all want to contribute to your defense fund.

Remember, no good deed goes unpunished.

TT

 

[miketsp]

It's no big deal to me, I don't live in the US.
I just found it strange that a moderated forum like SB does not seem to be worried by allowing the posting of copyright material. ALL other forums that I frequent are very rigid on this subject and would not allow the posting of what was an obviously commercial work by a well-known cartoonist who makes a living by syndicating his drawings. If I can see his work for free on SB why should I buy a syndicated newspaper or one of his books?
Other posters then took up the issue saying it was not a copyright infringement when it clearly is under US law.
SB is a US based site and you are a US based poster, as such bound by the law I quoted.
A quick use of Google will reveal that many people/sites are seriously concerned about this issue. Not just me.

 

[mania]

Mike
We do worry about copyrights. But on the other hand it's impossible to check everything that is posted here - whether it has or doesn't copyrights. Generally I agree with you and I'm rather carefull on this, still we can have some fun, can't we?
So coming back to the original subject - gee, wires across the bed? That reminded me about one of the Perry Mason books in which there was a fence in the middle of house - dividing it between two owners.
On the other hand - maybe it's not such a bad idea - guys you better be carefull we - girl may pick it up
Mania

 

[H2Andy]

hmmm.... a fence running down the middle of the house, keeping my wife and the
cats on the other side?

:33:

ok, but the bathroom better be on my side

 

[emtdan]

... I love how the wife has more room on the bed, the wire isnt in the center!!
I think that copyright infringment is a serious problem, but we should raise hell about one picture!

 

[downunderjenn]

Not to raise an issue, but like previewing music (iTunes), seeing one comic I like is more likely to make me buy their book. It has the opposite effect of what you claim, if I can get it for free why buy the book. By giving exposure to the artist's work, I am now aware of their work, style, and can pursue publications containing their work. I am very aware of copyright laws, but in an informative, fun discussion, I don't give a hoot. We share comic strips at work. Educational purposes are also exempted in Copyright law.

so, back to that barbed wire. sorry about the cats Andy. I know how you feel. I inherited two cats along with the boyfriend. My dog and I stick close and keep an eye out. They're tricky beasts.