Listen

[Slayer]

No Slayer. We can not expose the message board. Must remain kayefabed....

I can't talk to you outside the board, because I am heel and you are face

 

...or am I face and you're heel?

[Zack Malibu]

I have no intentions of suspending him unless he wants me to do it. If he doesn't, then I won't.

 

The post was meant to be a joke, but I guess it's still early in time zones.

If it was a joke, that's all well and good, but you can't translate emotion through a computer screen. I was just calling it like I saw it at the time.

[Guest Loss]

Perhaps I should have added an emoticon.

 

[Guest SP-1]

Looks like you are using some copyrighted images yourself, SP. Infact, your breaking the rules more than anyone else here as you manipulated the original photo which tends to be implicitly described as an act you cannot do.

 

Unless, you took those pictures of the WWE stage and from American Outlaws yourself.

I like that firefly pic there, chief. It's right purty.

 

The stage photo was taken by a fan so no worries there. The American Outlaws pics you might have a case for. However, I'm making no profit with the pics, nor robbing anyone of profits with them. Pictures don't seem to be such a big deal. Video footage, television broadcast footage, film clips, song clips, etc. That seems to be where the crackdown is taking place. If there was a crackdown on pictures being used in a non-profit way, I'd not have them up. And, hopefully, neither would you.

[Guest Loss]

For the record, if we turned off sigs and avatars, I wouldn't have a problem with it, simply because it'd force people to get noticed on the content of their posts instead of the shiny metallic objects. But that's a road I hope we never have to go down.

[Slayer]

For the record, if we turned off sigs and avatars, I wouldn't have a problem with it, simply because it'd force people to get noticed on the content of their posts instead of the shiny metallic objects.

...who are you?

[Zack Malibu]

Perhaps I should have added an emoticon.

 

Well, they do serve their purpose in cases like that, lol.

[RavishingRickRudo]

I like that firefly pic there, chief. It's right purty.

 

But I'm not the one speaking out against the use of "copyrighted" material; I have no problem with it, infact

 

The stage photo was taken by a fan so no worries there. The American Outlaws pics you might have a case for. However, I'm making no profit with the pics, nor robbing anyone of profits with them. Pictures don't seem to be such a big deal.

 

Doesn't matter. Look at any terms-of-use agreements on a website, the WWE's for example, http://www.wwe.com/help/terms/, you can only use it for "personal use", and when you post it on the internet, thats no longer personal. This covers both commercial and non-commercial use.

 

Video footage, television broadcast footage, film clips, song clips, etc. That seems to be where the crackdown is taking place. If there was a crackdown on pictures being used in a non-profit way, I'd not have them up. And, hopefully, neither would you.

 

But the "reasoning" used here -and by you, for that matter- is that its board law that you can't use "copyrighted material". But you are only using that to cover part of the material used, while the majority ie: pictures, are still freely used. Its being used as a convenience. You live by the sword and you die by the sword, is what I say.

[Guest SP-1]

Fair enough, Rudo. Since I've picked the side, I'll stick with it.

 

Poof. It's gone.

[RavishingRickRudo]

You might want to remove the line "what's cooler than bein' cool" - which is a line from an Outkast song - which I imagine is copyrighted; lyrics and all.

 

Though I thank you for your consistency.

[Guest SP-1]

If you can't quote words from something, then CE needs to be shut down immediately. Because those AP news stories are copyrighted. But I can't recall quoting something being illegal. If someone could provide evidence for that, I'd be grateful.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

I'd like to note that under the copyright laws the PPV threads can no longer exist as well. People are discussing a live event that costs money to see and yet can get the results from the thread for free. You're taking money out of Vince's pockets with each one.

[Jobber of the Week]

I think we need to understand Fair Use on this board, which is why they wouldn't go after sig pics. They fall under Fair Use. Sheesh.

[Sass]

Bloody hell...

[KingPK]

I know Sass, these people need to get out more.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

In fact the only way this board can safely stay out of danger from being sued is if nobody ever posts again.

 

...........

 

 

*Eerie music begins to play...person behind eerie music sues for his music being used without permission*

[RavishingRickRudo]

Copyrights protect creative works, such as song or a book.

 

- Critical Concepts of Canadian Business Law 2nd Edition.

 

"Why would anyone sell their (college) books"

 

- Gil Grissom, CSI.

[Ripper]

*copyrights the term "booty" and all it describes*

[Jobber of the Week]

I know Sass, these people need to get out more.

Better remove that avatar, King.

 

 

Anyway, mods, users, I think there can be a middle-land here:

 

Old shows (i.e. WCW Nitros, old school WWF programs, whatnot) that aren't competing with a product on sale, and aren't being distributed for profit, fall under fair use.

 

 

I personally didn't mind the whole rule about having an HTML page between the TSM page and the multimedia file, but outside of that PM conversation, nobody knew anything about it. Of course people would be upset if they feel out of the loop.

[Jobber of the Week]

*copyrights the term "booty" and all it describes*

*Somewhere out in the south pacific*

 

Pirate: Ahoy, mateys! Let's go find some...

*a crewmate steps up and whispers in the pirate captain's ear*

Pirate: Hoist anchor and let's find some boo...boo...boo-buried treasure!

 

*cheers*

[RavishingRickRudo]

Fair Dealing isn't covered under the board nor is it in any of the term agreements I've read; plus, it tends to deal with educational/research purposes only. From what I've read of various sites, the use of any picture without permission is considered illegal under copyright law.

[Guest SP-1]

Could someone be so kind as to explain Fair Use? For the rest of the class.

[Guest Dazed]

I'd like to note that under the copyright laws the PPV threads can no longer exist as well. People are discussing a live event that costs money to see and yet can get the results from the thread for free. You're taking money out of Vince's pockets with each one.

 

Wow, you really do know nothing.

 

It really seems that some of you want to stir shit or whatever, rather than reach a conclusion on this.

Edited May 20, 2004 by nikjohns

[RavishingRickRudo]

Basically, fair use allows you to go into a library and photocopy a page out of a book.

[Guest SP-1]

I'd like details, though. Clearly spelled out as to why it applys to TSM.

[Fökai]

WWE's copyright statement:

Copyright and Trademark Notice

 

The textual, photographic, video, audio, and combined audiovisual programs and products resulting from the World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.'s events and television programs, including the material contained in this web site, are protected under U.S. and international laws as copyrighted works. Anyone who displays, reproduces, copies, creates derivative works, or sells our textual, photographic, video or audiovisual programs for commercial or non-commercial purposes without our permission violates the copyright laws and is liable for copyright infringement.

 

Likewise, the World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.'s trademarks and service marks, including not only its world famous WWE and WWE marks, but also the names of its superstars, like Stone Cold Steve Austin are protected by state, federal, and international trademark laws. Any person who uses our marks for commercial or non-commercial purposes without our permission on goods or services in such a way that it dilutes the distinctive quality of our marks or that creates the likelihood of confusion with our marks is liable for trademark infringement.

 

Liability for copyright or trademark infringement involves the potential for significant civil damages, including in particular cases, statutory damages, liability for up to three times actual damages, and attorneys fees.

 

If you have any questions regarding this notice, please send an e-mail to [email protected]

 

***Disclaimer: WWE would like to remind you that its Superstars are trained professional athletes. You should never try to emulate what they do in and out of the ring.

[RavishingRickRudo]

It doesn't apply to TSM, really. The Terms of Use agreements regarding pictures implicitly states that you cannot use _any_ of them outside of your own personal use. However, in terms of things like quotes, it would probably apply.

 

"What constitutes fair use? When does copying reach the point that it is virtually reprinting the original, and therefore reducing the demand for it? Researchces may want to copy a few pages from a book in a library, rather than take notes. Teachers may wish to photocopy a page or two from a textbook to hand out to a class of students. These acts are considered fair dealing. In addition, a classroom is considered not to be a public place, and screening a video to students is also considered fair dealing. If a teacher photocopies a whole chapter, is this still fair? The question is not an easy one to answer, but as the purpose of copyright is to protect the artist's economic interest, the amount of copying permitted under the fair dealing exception will be small."

 

There are some situations where it is legal to copy material without the concent of the copyright holder. These include:

 

- fair dealing with the work for the purpose of private study, research, criticism, review, or newspaper summary.

 

- short passages photocopied for use in schools

 

- public readings of extracts from works

 

- performance of musical works for religious, educational, or charitable purposes by educational or religious bodies

[RavishingRickRudo]

Unless you want to justify showing a video/picture/music/soundbyte for the purposes of critiquing it. However, how the courts would define a critic is a problem.

[Sass]

Like with the "go kill yourself" type posts, Dames doesn't want to regret letting something like that slide in regards to the multi-media stuff FS was posting. It could possibly come back to bite him and the site in the ass.

 

Let's make a deal everyone:

 

Dames will be online here later.

 

I will make sure he sees this thread so that he can come in here and clean-up this mess.

 

Deal?

 

Otherwise, neither side is going to get anywhere since Dames ultimately has the final say on matters like this, which concern his board and possible legal litigation.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

There is no use in arguing about this since I evidently violated TSM rules. I'd like to aplogize to the mod staff as well as the posters who decided to speak out for what happened to me as well. I appreciate everyone voicing their opinions on the matter like I did but this is getting us nowhere since neither side can debate the issue like civil human beings without getting personal or abrasive. There needs to be a middle ground that both sides can meet and so far this hasn't happened. I'm going to probably stay away from the WWE folder for now since it's not worth getting into possible trouble over and I'm also going to cutback the time I spend in Site Feedback as well. I'm still willing to share my media but I'll do so through other means. I tried starting a good discussion but also wanted to share the match the discussion was based around so everybody could be involved. They say "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" and everything going on in this subject matter that includes me shows that, as I had nothing but good intentions.