|
Grex > Coop11 > #174: A motion to protect Grex from copyright infringement suits. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 78 responses total. |
orinoco
|
|
response 11 of 78:
| 
May 31 20:52 UTC 2000 |
I don't know much about copyright law. Could this motion be implemented in
such a way that people who post creative works here -- I'm thinking of the
Poetry conference in particular -- can retain teh rights to them?
|
davel
|
|
response 12 of 78:
|
May 31 21:10 UTC 2000 |
What Mark said in #5.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 13 of 78:
|
May 31 22:38 UTC 2000 |
Re #11: That depends on whether you consider the right to withdraw your
work from publication to be important.
|
spooked
|
|
response 14 of 78:
|
Jun 1 00:13 UTC 2000 |
Vote - no. We're not too bad at the moment, except we allow a few stupid
commands (whatever their names hide/expurgate/scribble???) which I never
use, and strongly believe are troublesome.
|
gypsi
|
|
response 15 of 78:
|
Jun 1 07:17 UTC 2000 |
I agree with Eric's new proposal. Sounds fair.
|
jep
|
|
response 16 of 78:
|
Jun 1 15:44 UTC 2000 |
I think it's perfect except I don't like the 1-week limitation.
|
mooncat
|
|
response 17 of 78:
|
Jun 1 16:24 UTC 2000 |
I think the one week limitation makes sense. Being that if it is a
case of someone losing their temper- they should cool off in a week
(probably less). This way at least the option to permanently delete is
there- if only for a short time. The text might be there long enough
to create a thread from it, but perhaps not.
Say someone enters a blistering response- INTENDING to delete it all
and not enter it, but just types it out to vent their frustrations. By
accident they hit return. Their horrible response is now in public-
and even scribbled is readable. This way they can remedy the
accidental posting and just get rid of it.
Yes, we should all be mature and responsible and take the brunt of our
mistakes. But something like that, that was never intended to be
public- are you REALLY going to tell me that it's so awful to
permanently delete it? We all slip up, we all make mistakes. If you
even TRY to sit there and tell me you haven't... well, we'll all know
you're a liar.
I like this idea- neither side is fully happy- but with an issue like
this they won't be. Postings can be gotten rid of for a week, but
after they're 'established' in the item they're there to stay.
|
pfv
|
|
response 18 of 78:
|
Jun 1 16:34 UTC 2000 |
Ahh, the Art Of Compromise.. ;-)
I personally do not see the point <shrug> Either you CAN or you
CAN'T delete your "property".. It's that simple.
NOW.. on the side of "eww.. I was hacked!" - it MIGHT make sense
to NOT allow a RANGE to scribble.. or even to arbitrarily code
to permit no more than 'N' "scribbles-per-day".
As I've said before, staff/root has never been vindictive or
'personal'. So, fine - let 'em see the log if they need it to
recover from a twit: they'd do the same with mail if they could
help. Monthly waxing the censor-log may also be sensible - or at
least as often as BU are made.
BTW, I've rarely had to "go back" to a post to puzzle anything
out. Most responses are specific for a reason, and if I get
confused, I can typically "ask around" to see if I missed some
significant crapolla.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 19 of 78:
|
Jun 1 17:18 UTC 2000 |
I think the week is too short. I agree with Pete that, if people own their
posts, they should be able to delete them any time; I also agree that it
probably won't happen very often. But the option should be there.
I don't have much of a problem with having that log accessible to staff from
a user point of view, but I think it could lead to more hassles for Grex as
a coprporation, and the Grex staff, than simply nuking the stuff would.
|
scg
|
|
response 20 of 78:
|
Jun 1 17:34 UTC 2000 |
I'm not a lawyer, and don't know how to words this in legalese, or whether
that's what Eric did in #0, but it seems to me that it would make sense for
Grex to be able to keep stuff posted in the Grex conferences in the Grex
conferences. If people post it there, I would assume they are willing to have
it there, and don't have so strong a copyright interest in it that they would
want to withdraw it from Grex before publishing it somewhere else. I don't
think Grex should have any right to stuff people post here beyond the right
to keep it in the conferences where it was posted.
|
pfv
|
|
response 21 of 78:
|
Jun 1 17:48 UTC 2000 |
That end-runs deletion by the owner, soon or later.
|
flem
|
|
response 22 of 78:
|
Jun 1 18:25 UTC 2000 |
resp:20 makes sense to me.
I'm still against the notion of a scribble command that actually scribbles
things (I'd be far more comfortable with a motion to disable the scribble
command), but it seems to me that if people really want this, resp:9 is a
much better proposal than any of the other motions I've seen so far.
I especially like the last paragraph of it.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 23 of 78:
|
Jun 1 19:04 UTC 2000 |
Meaning that the staff has the right to do whatever they want, including
restoring a scribbled post if they feel the person shouldn't have scribbled it?
I'll accept that if you change the senior staff title to Big Brother.
|
other
|
|
response 24 of 78:
|
Jun 2 02:49 UTC 2000 |
Come ON, Joe. Show me precedent for that concern. On GREX. The point is that
the actions of the staff in regard to the contents of that file would reflect
the same values Grex has maintained all along. Staff simply do *not*
unscribble responses just because they feel like it, and I've yet to hear of
ANY instance of a response being restored to conferences once scribbled (by
anyone other than the scribbler).
resp:16 jep, can you be a little clearer on what it is you didn't like
about the proposal in resp:9.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 25 of 78:
|
Jun 2 02:53 UTC 2000 |
If the policy isn't intended to authorize them to unscribble stuff without
the permission of the author, make that clear. As you've written it, it
says that the Grex staff can do whatever they want with the contents of
that file, at their discretion. You write well, and have previously said
that you understand legal documents, so I assumed that you intended to
give them the incredibly broad latitude you gave them. Statements like
"consistent with Grex values" (paraphrasing here) are so broad as to be
useless as guidelines. Some feel that refusing to allow any text to be
hidden once it's entered *is* a core Grex value.
|
aruba
|
|
response 26 of 78:
|
Jun 2 03:12 UTC 2000 |
Joe, on Grex we have a long history of getting along well without needing to
make lengthy rules for what staff can and cannot do. We've trusted staff to
use good judgement, and it hasn't been a problem.
I'm well aware that the situation on M-Net has been very different. But
there's no need to assume that the problems there will be the same ones we
see here.
|
other
|
|
response 27 of 78:
|
Jun 2 03:19 UTC 2000 |
Ultimately, what I'm trying to sort out here is *what* exactly are the values
that the policies should reflect, and what are the practices that, though
commonplace, should not be codified. I am loathe to tie the hands of staff
by policy which cannot necessarily foresee all possible situations. That also
is my reason for wanting to resort to making policy only if absolutely
necessary in any given circumstance.
Basically, the more we codify our practice in policy, the more we ossify Grex
itself, and by so doing, I think we'd be slowly killing it. Ergo, I want to
find a way to solve the problems of inconsistency in expectation and function
of commands and continuity and flow of discourse versus user ownership rights
without making grossly detailed policies to effect the solutions.
The upshot is that I would far rather see us deal with issues on a case-by-case
basis than strangle ourselves in the attempt to legislate solutions in
advance.
The process I'm trying to avoid within Grex is the same EXACT process I see
as the decline of liberty and democracy in the US. We legislate in the
attempt to solve problems before they become widespread without awareness of
the problems we create by that legislation, and simultaneously we sacrifice
liberty incrementally as we empower laws and policies instead of taking
responsibility for our decisions as individuals.
|
janc
|
|
response 28 of 78:
|
Jun 2 05:26 UTC 2000 |
Well, everyone seems already to have determined (correctly) that the
proposal in response 0 is a terrible idea. Among other things, I think
it would allow Grex to republish people's postings in other media
without their permission. That wasn't Eric's intent, so I'm pleased he
withdrew it.
The second motion has problems too. I don't see why it is talking about
hide/expurgate. There haven't been any big complaints over the current
policy on that, so why legislate on it. Anyway, the only way I could
make viewing hidden responses any easier or more obvious in backtalk
would be to display them for you automatically, which would kind of
defeat the purpose.
I'd leave the "staff discretion" part out. It just doesn't need saying,
because all such issues have been decided by staff in the past. I don't
think the board or membership ever set a policy saying E-mail should be
private, or deciding what the exceptions to that are. Staff set those,
with due reference to the law of the land. A person's entry in the
censored log should be treated just like his email, or a depermitted
file in his directory. We aren't paving any new ground here.
I don't see the point of the time limit thing. Why is it better to
allow censorship for a week than to allow it forever?
This has all the problems of allowing censorship - I can mess up
continuity in a week just as well as in a lifetime. In fact, most of
the people who ever read a posting are probably reading within less than
a week, and once they read it, they'd never notice if you censored it.
It also has all the problems of not allowing censorship, if it takes a
person more than a week to change their mind.
So depending on the timing, we sometimes get one set of problems, and
sometimes get the other set of problems, and which we get in which case
is determined entirely by the clock, not by any kind of application of
good sense.
Though it shouldn't be a consideration, there may be problems
implementing the time limit. I'd do it in Backtalk if people want it,
and even if I didn't want to some other staffer could, because Grex has
a Backtalk source license. We don't have Picospan source. The vendor
(Marcus) may be willing to do Grex a favor and give us a version
modified to our specifications, but there is no guarantee of that. If
not, we either need to buy Yapp (really expensive), convince Dave Thaler
to donate Yapp (dunno if this is likely), or implement a new
command-line conferencing system. I could do a command-line version of
Backtalk. It's on my TODO list. I hadn't anticipated getting around to
it for years, since it would add little to the marketability of Backtalk
and wouldn't be all that much fun to do. How many years and how much
money is the Grex staff allowed to spend implementing this policy?
|
pfv
|
|
response 29 of 78:
|
Jun 2 13:11 UTC 2000 |
Jan's right: "KISS" (keep it simple, stupid).
Either the log is depermed and periodically flushed - which
presumes authors own their text and are adults;
Or, the commands are disabled - which implies Grex is the owner
and does not care to treat the authors as adults and legal owners;
Or, the situation remains unresolved and static: satisfying folks
that seem unable to "free their minds".
It's gonna' be pretty difficult to convince folks to try bbs if
all we can say is: "It's like Uselessnet, but more parochial; It
presumes you give up all rights to your written material; and, the
Powers That Be manage it on the principle that you are too
incompetent to be trusted, but that such management fosters a
thoughtful, mature environment."
|
jep
|
|
response 30 of 78:
|
Jun 2 13:46 UTC 2000 |
re #24: #9 includes the following:
The erase/scribble command in Backtalk/BBS shall continue to function
as it now does, except that the command shall be modified so that it is
only available for any given response for not more than one week after
the response is posted;
I think this part should read:
The erase/scribble command in Backtalk/BBS shall continue to function
as it now does;
I agree with all of the objections to the 1 week limitation on removing
your own postings.
|
other
|
|
response 31 of 78:
|
Jun 3 04:39 UTC 2000 |
Hmm. I'm pleased to see that the motions I've made have stimulated some
thoughtful discussion which has given me enough additional perspective that
I can now comfortably withdraw the motions, so consider it done. I'm now
motionless.
I am still a little lost on where to go with this, but I feel like I'm helping
less by my efforts to come up with a solution than I might by simply asking
questions...
|
remmers
|
|
response 32 of 78:
|
Jun 5 17:56 UTC 2000 |
Hm. I'm just back from a trip and catching up. You can sure
miss a lot when you're away for a few days. Multitudes of motions
can surface and sink like whales coming up for air. Guess they've
all sunk for the time being, except for a pending one in another
item. Less work for voteadm that way, so I suppose I'm happy.
I'm pleased from a philosophical standpoint as well -- aruba's #26
is right on: Trust people to behave responsibly and there's a
good chance that they will (that goes for users as well as staff);
don't make unnecessary rules; don't fix what isn't broken. Nine
years of stability on Grex attest to all that, I think.
Since this item is now motionless, maybe we can just talk about
some of the issues raised by the motions. The issue of ownership
of postings intrigues me. Now, I occasionally post material
on Grex that I certainly want to retain rights to -- creative
efforts, entered mainly in the Poetry and Writing conferences.
In fact, I often put explicit copyright notices on the stuff,
just to make it clear. (I'd have voted no on #0, which would
have denied me the right to do that.)
On the other hand, most of my responses here are not of that
kind at all, but rather are contributions to a conversational
flow. I haven't gone to law school or anything. I'm not in a
position to evaluate what's been asserted about the implications
of copyright laws for electronic postings. But I'm a bit
uncomfortable with the notion that I "own" all the things that
I've posted here, every little part of every conversation that
happens to have my name attached to it. Frankly, I don't *want*
to own all those things. I view the vast majority of my postings
on Grex as contributions to a public record, and I believe that
there is a public interest in maintaing the integrity of such
records. I am uncomfortable with the notion that one has some
kind of basic right to edit history, even one's own contributions
to history.
If the copyright laws do indeed imply my personal ownership
of selected pieces of public records, then I think one needs
to question the wisdom of those laws. A balance needs to be
struck between private privilege and the public interest, and
this would not be the first time that the law has erred on the
side of the former (software patents, for example).
Even with the laws as they are, I suspect that there are details
of their application that have yet to be resolved, and may end
up being resolved by the courts. In the meantime, I hope we
don't rush into making fundamental changes in the way Grex
operates because of what we think certain laws might mean.
|
other
|
|
response 33 of 78:
|
Jun 5 18:40 UTC 2000 |
You've just stated in wonderfully clear terms the things I've been struggling
with about this.
Trying to draw the line between entries which are part of a conversational
flow and those which constitute intellectual property (in practical terms)
is beyond my means. It just took me a while to realize that.
|
void
|
|
response 34 of 78:
|
Jun 5 19:31 UTC 2000 |
grex isn't a public record. it's a public bbs, but the two are quite
different. if grex stored official birth, marriage, and death records,
or was primarily a news reporting entity, i could more easily agree with
remmers. since it is none of those things, grex cannot usurp ownership
of its users' text.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 35 of 78:
|
Jun 5 22:27 UTC 2000 |
Correct. And unlike remmers, I believe that I do own my words, that I own
all of them, and that my rights supersede the "right" of Grex to retain
everything I've ever written forever. I shouldn't have to invoke copyright
law in order to back that right up, but I will if need be. I don't intend
to go through and delete my comments wholesale, but I should have the right
to if I choose to do so, because they're mine.
|