The Humorous and the Sad

[Lev]

I think this question is worth a separate topic with moderator input. Perhaps an advisory, on the forum rules?

We are currently discussing this with a view to possibly using only the first couple of paragraphs of an article with a link to the original source and full story. This should satisfy any publication that may object to us using their content to generate discussion.

[MrPlum]

Sounds like a plan. Would be a shame to see a forum, which has been so commendably open, forced to rein in its cutters and pasters by only allowing links. Most people do not read them, hence my own habit of posting as much as I think gets the message across. That is not always the first two paragraphs.

The copyright laws seem to suggest that irrespective of whether a text has been registered as copyrighted, it is protected, automatically. I believe this applies to 'unique work'. I'm wondering whether political speculation falls into that bracket?

If my 'unique' verbal diarrhea is automatically copyrighted can other posters quote me in their reply? I'm short of a bob or two and thinking of suing.

Definitely needs some thought.

[dtaai-maai]

We are currently discussing this with a view to possibly using only the first couple of paragraphs of an article with a link to the original source and full story.

Good idea. Reproducing an entire article in one post is usually enough to have me skipping off to the next new post.
Having said that, I get equally put off by posts containing a link and no explanation of what it takes you to.

[ridgeydidge.au]

agreed, there has to be a compromise between copyright and public interest which can be overcome by referencing correctly and use of paraphrase and reproducing only a small portion of the text. it's more work, but its the only sensible approach to avoiding financial ramifications.
In fairness to the authors and publishers, intellectual rights need to be protected.

[Nereus]

The following is Bangkok Posts` statement posted on their Website:

Republishing policy

http://www.bangkokpost.com/republishingpolicy/

Post Publishing Plc. has joined the "Society for Online News Providers" (SONP). The formation is aimed primarily at protecting the proprietary material of news websites. SONP policy states that RSS feeds are the proper way for other web sites to receive content from news providers.

To assist readers in making fair use of content from the Bangkok Post, Post Publishing Plc. has introduced official RSS feeds that web publishers, webmasters, website owners and any person may use to reproduce content from the Bangkok Post. The official RSS feeds typically contain a headline, a 100-150 character summary and a URL link back to the original full-text article on the Bangkok Post website for each story in the feed. Only the official RSS feeds can be used for this purpose. Content of the feeds can not be altered. For details on how to use the official RSS feeds, please refer to this http://www.bangkokpost.com/wireservice/affiliated.html link or contact our Web Master at komsantj@bangkokpost.co.th directly.

We trust our readers will understand that while we encourage fair use of the Bangkok Post, unauthorized replication of content in excess of fair use does impact on our business and the livelihood of our employees.

Web readers can refer to or quote Bangkok Post contents only by posting a headline with a URL link to the source page on the Bangkok Post website.

......................more at link

[Bristolian]

The issue becomes a little more complicated than it looks at face value, Many of the images used in the caption competition thread, car and motorbike threads, history challenge etc. are also probably copyright as indeed are many of the avatars that are being used regularly by forum members, including my own.

In any forum it becomes almost impossible to check if material posted is or, is not in breach of copyright laws. This is especially true of images which are often posted on many sites without reference to the originator of the image and if the original image has copyright protection.

[Khundon1975]

khundon, that you cannot or will not understand the implications of stealing a publication and rebroadcasting it makes it pointless me wasting a reasoned response on you. Your use of that particular smilie is enlightening and says more about you than any of your words.
but I bear no malice

ridgeydidge.au

I understand the implications as well as you, it's just that I don't agree with the way the legal profession is going with this issue.

It should be obvious to even you, that the smiley was aimed at most lawyers, not you personally.
If you are not a lawyer, then why do you feel offended? If you are a lawyer, then sorry but

If you are the former, then I also bear no malice towards you.

Anyway, it may soon become academic, as LEV has stated the forum may soon change the rules on cutting and pasting etc.

[ridgeydidge.au]

ok, np...for the record my argument was academic and meant to be helpful ( and I ain't no lawyer)