Flare Sci-Fi Forums: copyright stuff

This is topic copyright stuff in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/120.html

Posted by Tachy on :

You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.

taken from the registering rulez.
To me it means noone can post any Trek Pics.
Unless StarTrek isn't copyrighted of course.

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

He has a point. *Graham Chapman speak* Right, meeting adjourned forever!

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

It should say that the material does not violate the copyright, yadda, yadda, yadda.

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

Posted by Warped1701 (Member # 40) on :

It can't be that simple. What happened to all the legalese?

------------------
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."

Posted by Tachy on :

and wher is the so-called constitution ?

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :

What about quotes from books and stuff? Or scanned images?

Posted by Tachy on :

same stuff man.
here's an exemple :

'make it so!'

AAAAAAAAAAAAARGHHH *gets strangled by the BB's copyright guard*

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

[This message was edited by Tachy on March 12, 1999.]

Posted by Krenim (Member # 22) on :

We're doomed! Doomed, I tell you, doomed!

------------------
Ah... Now I enter these hallowed halls a conqueror... Yes...

-Megatron, "The Agenda, Part Three"

Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :

There's something called "fair useage"...

------------------
"Okay, so I'm not "SANE" so to speak, but uh... I'm the lovable kind of psycho"
http://solareclipse.net/

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Charles, take away some peoples' right to over-react, and you remove the only way they can react.

------------------
"I'll be the sky above the Ganges
I'll be the vast and stormy sea.
I'll be the lights that guide you inward.
I'll be the visions you will see."
--
R.E.M.

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

And that means no Akira pics, by anyone.

But wait my freinds! We must venture into that unknown land spoke of as Public Domain. . .

Posted by Tachy on :

It wasn't neccessary to say such a thing since the topic had nothing to do with THAT.

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

[This message was edited by Tachy on March 13, 1999.]

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

doesn't it mean, that we or anyone here can't make a buck out of using copyrighted stuff?

I'm sure if people were in the street, looking at a picture of an Akira, and someone walked over an saw them, they couldn't sue them cause it was copyrighted.

SUITED MAN: "You there! let me see that book"
CHILD: "wha, what book s-sir!?!"
SUITED MAN: "that one"
suited man points
boy holds out a book with starship pictures in it
(the long awaited starships compendium ;o))
SUITED MAN:"a-ha! I thought so, its copyrighted. Police Police! these children a reading and discussing COPYRIGHTED material"
Policeman walks over
POLICEMAN "would you like to press charges sir, you are after all from viacom...?"
SUITED MAN "ummm..."
suited man looks around hurridly then bolts away.

events or persons depicted in this skit, are fictitious and bear no resemblence to any persons living or dead, and if they do it was not intentional.

------------------
With the first link, a chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all
irrevocably." Capt. Jean-Luc Picard - The Drumhead

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

Are you being funny or stupid?

Copyright. It means right to copy, reserved to the person of the material created, or reserved to the owner of the purchased copyright from the creator. In some circumstances the creator or owner may extend permission for another party to copy the material.

Remember that goofy band Green Jell-o? Green Jell-o was forced by Jell-o to change their name (to Green Jelly) because of a copyright issue. Green Jell-o wasn't making any revenue of the Jell-o name. (Who thinks, "Humm, Jell-o, must be a good band.") And surely Jell-o didn't suffer profit loses because Green Jell-o somehow defamed the Jell-o name. Now I can write Jell-o a million times and that is not a copyright infringement. However, a Jell-o class starship would be. The word Jell-o is property. I don't own it. I can't use it.

Needless to say but going full steam ahead anyway, every picture in all the Trek books and stills and videos from episodes are owned by Paramount. We can scan and photocopy, and download, and hand draw all the ships and whatnot for our own private pleasure--like recording CD's to cassette-- but we are prohibited by law from selling such copies. The internet is unique in that it is both private and public. The internet is the new legal battle ground for protecting intellectual property. Etiquette so far is ask for permission and give credit. When you don't, you are violating the copyrights of the individual, or company than either created the work or owns the work.
On my Starship Designs webpage, I have an image I scanned from a Paramount publication of the Enterprise and the DY100. I did not ask Paramount if I could scan the image--just like I never asked any record company if I could record a CD to tape--so I am infringing a copyright law. Eventhough I give credit to Paramount, I don't have their permission. Just like everyone else.
Only if you make a profit from coping will the law be enforced.
And yes, getting to the nitty-gritty, the famed Akira class is owned by Paramount. Any copying of the Akira class by any means is prohibited by law unless permission is granted from the owner. No ifs ands or buts about it.
Let's say that I painted two good counterfeits of the Mona Lisa. Then one of my friends decides he likes the rendering I've done so much that he steals one and hangs it on his living room wall. I say I want the painting back and he must remove it from his wall. He says no. Can I call the police and have it recovered? that is very iffy. If I do, I could be charged for forging a painting. . .for violating a copyright. I may not plan to sell the painting, but the potential is there, and the law will frown down upon me greatly. The paintings would be confiscated I would be out of two paintings, not just one.
It's cool that Adam's ISP agreed that the Akira models be removed, but they didn't have to. The situation could have gotten so ugly that even Tachy would have been forced to remove his models from his page, if Paramount got involved.

Let's even go further and say that I sell my Rapier class to Paramount. That would mean that not even I, the creator, would be allowed to copy the Rapier anymore. Even my personal doodling would be violations.

Well that's that. I don't claim to know the whole story surrounding the Akira crisis, nor do I want to, and if I hit things so far off mark, then I aplogize to all parties concerned of any misconceptions. But teh fact reamins never-the-less, all of us violate copyrights in some form or another. That's my main point.

Hey legal guy!

Pretty cut and dry ain't it?

[This message was edited by Cargile on March 13, 1999.]

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Woah!!!!!!!
hold on there Cargile!
woooo.
OK first, are you talking about my post...
I, yes was just having a little humour, basically saying, that whats wrong with using these boards as a place to discuss trek, and I don't think any of us are getting money out of talking about weather an Ambassador class appeared in TOTP or not!
I think I may have inadvertantly stumbled across something - about an Akira class!?!

I really don't know what most of your post is cocerned about re: akira models and isp's - I was just chatting, yet I assume it was me, you blast me out of the water, rather forcefully!

I was just poking fun at Viacom, too, just on their attitude to a lot of fan sites out there on the WWW. something that everyone one on the net has heard about.

you work for Viacom?

woah.

Andrew
didn't know what he was getting into, when typing a little funny skit involving a viacom suit and a little boy with a book with an Akira in it.

PS - I think thats the first 'full on beat up' post I've got on this board - including previous incarnations...

should i feel honoured )

PPS - thinks that on the net a ) - can mean the difference between someone taking a sentence with a grain of salt, or with personal insult.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Well, the Akira thing, put shortly, was the latest war between the Vorlon and Tachy, which resulted in Vorlon's being fired as an admin/mod. That's all I'm gonna say.

And I think this whole thing has gone a bit far. I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Tachy's original complaint was just about the wording of the rules, which seems to suggest that no copyrighted material can be posted at all. Obviously, that was not the intent of the rule.

------------------
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-Albert Einstein

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

ahhhhhh okies thanks - I think i ran into something that i shouldn't have - but its not gonna stop me posting (self inspiration ;o))

also, excuse the ;o) - i'm used to doing ';o)'s

thanks

Landru, errrr Andrew

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

No, I was asking a straight forward question. The answer being that you were being funny. Cool. The rest of my opinions was seperated from that query by a single space to indicate change of topic.

------------------
. . .I don't believe in God, I just believe in me.
--John Lennon

Posted by Tachy on :

*sees the replies counter & also sees all the answers that are drifting & drifting from the initial subject*

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

Posted by Tachy on :

maybe the thread should be locked before i start harmin people.

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

hehe

who are you harming?

------------------
. . .I don't believe in God, I just believe in me.
--John Lennon

Posted by Curry Monster (Member # 12) on :

Or, conversely you could just keep your mouth shut =).

------------------
I drink therefore I am.

-Descartes

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

okies, Carlile - I thought you were having a go at me...

and as above, for what i've already said.

Don't touch - Willy
hmmmm good advice.

Andrew

Posted by Tachy on :

That one's for ya, Cargile

------------------
-- *GLARE* --

Posted by Federation Shipmaster (Member # 15) on :

Ummm...it doesn't say U.S.S. Thunderchild on the saucer.

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

And such a tragedy that is, Shipmaster, yup.

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
Wildrider: "These guys better have some energon for us!"
Dead End: "Or what?"
Wildrider: "Or...I'll think of something!"

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

OK, is that pic of the Akira, the same stuff that was being discussed over at TNO forums?

It doesn't seem as refined...

whats with the bussard collectors!?!

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

They look like they're about to explode!

DUCK!

------------------
The hyperhamster is alive and well.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

*shoots at the duck* Damn. Missed... :-)

Anyway, to answer the question, Tachy has a tendency to get a bit... excessive... when it comes to Bussards and nacelle grills... *L*

------------------
"Look into any eyes you find by you; you can see clear to another day..."
-The Grateful Dead, "Box of Rain"

Posted by Katana on :

*disengage lurking field*

It all comes down to what you like and dislike, and of course which side of the whole thing you are on.

Both meshes and textures are very good ... some of the best ever, I have seen both in extreem detail, and they are amazing. The new version has the advantage of some mesh corrections that make it a more accurate mesh, but more importantly Pedro's textures are more subtile than Vorlons. That is not to say that Vorlon's textures are not good, in fact I was blown away by them when I first saw them, but his are higher contrast which at first glance may make his look more detailed. but on the new version, the textures are always a surprise ... especially when you zoom in on the ship.

I have never seen the set of textures that Vorlon did (he never shared them with the group), but I did get to see many high-res renderings of them and in no way can Pedro's textures be called less refined, if anything they are more complex.

And now for the qualifying statment .... IMHO.

------------------
Engage lurking field.

Posted by OLDAdmin5 on :

Right, seems Mr tach doesn't want to keep recieving those emails that tell you there's a reply to the thread. *L*

*Hint - next time, don't ask for them! LOL.*

Anyhoo, thread locked.

- Daryus.

[CC edit]
I think I need to be more explicit when telling Daryus what to do... *rolls eyes*

[Note: This message has been edited by Charles Capps]