editor Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 This is a reminder for all members of HAIF that when you signed up, you agreed not to post any copyrighted material to this web site that is not owned by you.The Houston Chronicle has sent us a letter asking that we remove certain content that belongs to them that was posted to the forum by well-meaning members.Please remember that if you'd like to discuss a newspaper or magazine article, summarize the article and provide a link to the original content. Doing much more could cause legal problems that could end up with this forum being shut down.Thank you for your attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debmartin Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 oops.... i've done this a time or two and did not even realize i was breaking the rules. i for one am flattered that the chron reads our forum - no wonder there's been such a dramatic improvement lately in the content of their stories! from now on i promise to quote'm right.deb martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Lord knows I'm quite guilty of doing this, but for a little clafification:We can post a LINK to the refering Chronical story, but we can't copy and post the story AND provide a relative link, right?Ricco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I'll agree to this but I have to ask - don't they have better things to do than to pick on us?I'm cancelling my subscription. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lowbrow Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 This very well could be me... actually, I bet it is. My apologies. I'm tired of people replying with the entire quote anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bachanon Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 i'm guilty too. sorry, i wasn't aware. so, a brief synopsis of the article and a link is OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimberlySayWhat Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I do it all the time! Sorry, won't happen again. I'll just provide links from now on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamtagon Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 That's one for the Chronicle way to increase the number of hits to its website and therefore increase ad revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CincoRanch-HoustonResident Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 I do this all the time. Guilty . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
713 To 214 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 That's one for the Chronicle way to increase the number of hits to its website and therefore increase ad revenue.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Exactly!! Someone at the Chronicle is overreacting here. The U.S. Copyright Laws do provide an exception for "fair use" of material. Someone at the Chronicle needs to get a grip. . .on the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UrbaNerd Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Same here, and I apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Exactly!! Someone at the Chronicle is overreacting here. The U.S. Copyright Laws do provide an exception for "fair use" of material. Someone at the Chronicle needs to get a grip. . .on the law.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Yes, there is a "fair use" exception. But I don't think the copying of entire articles onto a website would qualify. And Tamganon's point is one of the reasons. The "effect of the use on the potential market" is one of the elements courts examine to determine whether there has been "fair use." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
713 To 214 Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 Yes, there is a "fair use" exception. But I don't think the copying of entire articles onto a website would qualify. And Tamganon's point is one of the reasons. The "effect of the use on the potential market" is one of the elements courts examine to determine whether there has been "fair use."<{POST_SNAPBACK}>I respect your opinion. I stand by my comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 13, 2005 Author Share Posted April 13, 2005 Yes, there is a "fair use" exception. But I don't think the copying of entire articles onto a website would qualify. And Tamganon's point is one of the reasons. The "effect of the use on the potential market" is one of the elements courts examine to determine whether there has been "fair use.""Fair Use" provisions usually apply to academic, personal, and educational use. While we may find reading the discussions here educational, I don't think a court of law would agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 13, 2005 Author Share Posted April 13, 2005 I'll agree to this but I have to ask - don't they have better things to do than to pick on us?I'm cancelling my subscription.They're probably cracking down on a bunch of web sites. If they let one get away with it, it opens the floodgates for others I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 13, 2005 Author Share Posted April 13, 2005 Lord knows I'm quite guilty of doing this, but for a little clafification:We can post a LINK to the refering Chronical story, but we can't copy and post the story AND provide a relative link, right?RiccoYou can post a link.You can post a summary.You can post a link and a summary.You cannot post the entire story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmancuso Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 i have done that on SSP (copy/paste entire article and provide link) but i think the "chomical" is over-reacting a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I know I'm guilty. But in all fairness to the Chronicle, if you look at other online forums, just posting a link and summary is very consistent with how it's usually done. I don't see it as unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groovehouse Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I'm tired of people replying with the entire quote anyways.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>me too, in a threaded forum, like we have here, the original post exists up top... it is not necessary to quote an entire post, news story or photo spread just to reply with a small reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 13, 2005 Author Share Posted April 13, 2005 i have done that on SSP (copy/paste entire article and provide link) but i think the "chomical" is over-reacting a bit.I'm not sure why we caught their attention, as opposed to SkyscraperPage or SkyscraperCity. I guess because we're American. SSP is in Canada (small town on Vancouver Island), and SSC is in The Netherlands, I believe. We're probably easier to enforce.Of course, it's not like there haven't been lawsuits that spanned countries. A group in Belgium threatened to sue this web site's parent web site by hiring lawyers in New York to file suit in a New York court. But I don't think the Chronicle cares enough to go after people in other countries.Of course, I've considered blocking their computers from accessing the forum. All it takes is a few clicks. But restricting information is not really what we're about, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_oneal Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 But restricting information is not really what we're about, anyway.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>but it does seem like it is their motive. i for one am an online subscriber to the chronicle. however, not everyone is.as i mentioned to you in another post, it seems that a link will force members to sign up (and login) to read the full content. not everyone wants to do this. i guess it is a way for the chronicle to:pad its readership numbersincrease hits to their websitebully little people that are in all honesty just posting something of interestthey can claim copyright protections, but i think it is just intimidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineda Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I, too, am a subscriber to the Houston Chronicle and therefore have full access, which others do not. But, the reason we post full articles, with credit to both the paper and the writer, is that after a while, the links become obsolete and therefore no longer viewable. I don't get it. Rick Casey says subscribership is stale and stagnant, you'd think they'd want all the exposure they could get, not restrict it further. People constantly send me news articles and posts that they ask me to send on so that they get more exposure. I understand protecting their "intellectual property", but we're (the people posting articles) not making any money off this website. We're just commenting on local issues. The Chronicle already has so many upset subscribers, why are they courting for more? I just don't understand all this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citykid09 Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 When I first joined, I was real careful not to post copyright material, but as time went on I guess I got carried away and forgot, sorry.So do we need to remove the articles/pictures our self? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 So do we need to remove the articles/pictures our self?I'm slowly going through and trimming them out when I see them. Of course, with 23,000 messages on HAIF, it may take a while for me to weed them all out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2112 Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I would think you quote partial paragraphs as part of our own summaries and such, cant we? As long as you credit the quotations, right? Its the copying of the entire COMPLETE article that is the problem.??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I think it's fine to include brief summaries and quotes. I've been editing out quoted articles as I run across them. It helps if links to the source are included so people can still access the original source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_oneal Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I think it's fine to include brief summaries and quotes. I've been editing out quoted articles as I run across them. It helps if links to the source are included so people can still access the original source.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>which leads to the other point...sometimes you cannot ACCESS the other material (unless registered ... which can be a pain in the you-know-where).i understand your point and respect and honor your decisions regarding this, but honestly, i think the chron has lost some points with me and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 17, 2005 Author Share Posted April 17, 2005 I would think you quote partial paragraphs as part of our own summaries and such, cant we? As long as you credit the quotations, right? Its the copying of the entire COMPLETE article that is the problem.???I believe so. And they were more particularly unhappy with the linking to photographs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brijonmang Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 When you say linking to the photographs...do u mean the actual links posters posted...or posting pictures w/o them or proper credit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted April 21, 2005 Author Share Posted April 21, 2005 When you say linking to the photographs...do u mean the actual links posters posted...or posting pictures w/o them or proper credit?Sorry, I should have been more clear.It's OK to post a link to the image.But don't post the actual image here, with or without credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.