Posting Someone ELSE'S work
A New Category?
Monday, April 2, 2007 by PoSmedley | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
If the work being posted is originally created by a non-member and is posted by a WC member, I think it needs to be separated from the original work of WC contributor's.
I realize this will 'piss off' some people...that's not my intent. I also realize that this would involve defining 'other people's original work' and 'altered and/or improved on' and/or 'adapted for a specific proggie' and/or of course ports. All should include permissions and that they are included should be posted in the description.
It just doesn't seem right that someone gets ratings, points, etc., for work that someone else did..whom is not even a member of the site. I think if it is going to be posted here, it should have it's own category to distinguish it from everything else...no ratings or points..and not be allowed to consume front page space that can and should go to original works of member's. (Not that I have specifically seen anything 'not-original' on the front page)
IMHO
------------------------------
 |
|
Page 7 of 11 | |
|
|---|
Reply #122 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:35 AM
Reply #123 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:41 AM
I do realize this fact but that is where the double standards come in.
Zoomba you have replied twice on this thread and still failed to answer the questions about the previously mentioned wallpapers still being in the library.
.Dreams seems to be the number one priority around here these days.
Reply #124 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:42 AM
I do realize this fact but that is where the double standards come in.
Zoomba you have replied twice on this thread and still failed to answer the questions about the previously mentioned wallpapers still being in the library.
.Dreams seems to be the number one priority around here these days.
Reply #125 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:44 AM
As far as I personally am concerned....'fair use' is a load of bull...and actually WAS such in Australia...before the latest free-trade agreement between big Bush and Banzai Bush.
US Copyright law [under which Wincustomize.com operates] has provisions for 'fair use' which definitely grey what 'could' have been black and white...but the world would be a very sad, empty place...if absolutely NO derivative [fair use] works could be had...also refer to 'fan art'.
These 'things' called Dreams are a new creature which needs some form of referencing to 'fair use' as with other existing media...so...what was arrived at was/is as Zoomba listed in #114.
Now, as to whether Item #3 is so horrid or not, well, surprise surprise...ALL works uploaded here are subject to that one, not just Dreams.....and, if I remember correctly, everybody applauded its adoption in any other gallery.....as that is why we have moderation in the first place.
Like it or not, the biggest 'noise' in Copyright enforcement/argument/litigation/rule-making is the US....and Wincustomize.com/Stardock is US-based and thus must abide by, and exist within the US interpretation of the Act, and, provided we/they adhere to that within #114 then all is well. If that situation changes or is found to need change then the Wincustomize.com management will be well placed to address such.
Please don't compare this with that which is found on Russian sites [your example]. The difference is that if and when an author takes issue with something of his posted here it is dealt with. I personally have chased Russian sites for work removals...and know full-well their response [or lack of]....
Reply #126 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:48 AM
Zoomba, I tried to make it clear that I do not doubt mods or your intentions. We are talking about a potentially large upload situation where "I" needs to be a very well educated "we" and still you are now placing the burden of the original artist to prove is ownership by underlying policy of allowing the posting of other people's work than one's own. Seems to me a different spirit for the site.
BTW, where exactly does the 15 sec and 25% rule come from. Is this law that can be referenced or is it merely company policy?
Reply #127 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:53 AM
Jafo, I believe if you read the thread you will note that everyone has repeatedly asked why the referenced walls were still there after all the time of this thread. That is the frustration with the thread and many of the responders.
Reply #129 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:04 AM
Reply #130 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:08 AM
Kenwas....some of the works have been removed...haven't checked them all...as yet...as other things got in the way.....
But...again...this is not an instance of an author requesting a rip removal...a direct issue of copyright...but a third party pointing out what is believed to be a rip, which, until the author [original] is found/contacted there is no clear certainty that it's not just a case of 2 different sites...2 different nicks...same person. [It actually DOES happen]
This new PM gizmo will help with many issues such as these....and other plans are afoot to improve things as well....
Reply #131 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:16 AM
This is confusing. Are you saying it's better they post it here cause you will take it down if the original author asks? Provided the original author even finds out about it? I've seen one wall taken and posted on many sites. To imply that you are doing a service to the original creators by removing the rip if they ever find out they have been ripped...I don't even know what the word would be for this. I mean...it's like, if the cops didn't see it, I didn't do it. So, it can be approved and remain up as long as the original author doesn't find out?
It is doubtful they have the resources to keep track of one piece of work let alone their entire collection of work and may never know where it has been posted. It's like your saying if we allow rips , the rippers will ONLY post it here? And should the author ever find out, we will remove it.
Reply #132 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:18 AM
Reply #133 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:20 AM
The person has a text file in the zip stating it is not their work. They admit it.
Reply #134 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:20 AM
Company policy. It was a compromise between allowing nothing and allowing everything that Brad and I thought very reasonable. We erred on the side of caution with imposing such a low limit.
I've cleared Deda D's walls until they can show ownership or permission.
Currently, posting reports of rips burried deep in dozens of threads is a less than effecient way to report them. Fact is there's too much on the site for myself or Jafo to read every message and click every link. Even in this thread, after a point I had to skim to get a summary of the argument.
We are working on a "report rip" feature for the site which will make this a lot easier. It will require that you provide a link to the original work as proof of the rip.
In the meantime, please use the new PM system on the forums to report rips.
Reply #135 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:21 AM
Kenwas...again, all uploads are in this same situation...they are assumed to be the uploader's to upload...until a rightful owner comes along and says 'hey, that is mine'. People have uploaded [tried to] YOUR walls here....but I'm pretty sure we actually recognized them first...so the assumption that they are theirs is voided and the upload is rejected. That's not 'burden of ownership proof'...that's simple notification. I'd love to see any other feasible method of declaring authorship, as the only way it actually works is through trust, reputation, and experience of/with the uploader......[and a long history of modding that means you may just have seen works before/elsewhere].
Put bluntly, Russian rip sites do not give a f**k whose the upload is....and if you enter a pissing match over one....they don't plead the fifth...they plead 'no-speakie-English' [cos it suits them to] and simply ignore you....
Reply #136 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:27 AM
This 3rd party is not speculating about anything being a rip - I posted a fact that 3 of the walls contained a text notepad that clearly stated that the pictures are not their original work. They mention no author or a resource to the pics. To me , that is not a permission text and Im just following the WC guidelines.
Reply #137 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:32 AM
I see a misconception about this statement.
In one of the files referenced the permission.txt file plainly says that the poster is not the owner of the work.
Also, going back to the fair use statment quoted above.. #114 rule 2. Some of these are clearly evident that the poster is not the author of the "borrowed" work. Ie.. the Rush Logo, the Game Team Logo's, The Cartoon Character..
Reply #138 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:33 AM
Po...re #131 ...... If the author does not know...and thus does not inform us....and if no-one else notices either...then existentialism rules...the rip is not a rip because it is not shown to be one...
As and when someone [author...other person] indicates there is an issue it gets resolved.
Using your cops thing....
If they don't see it you will NOT BE CHARGED.
Sure, it happened...you did it...but if no-one else on the planet is aware....then it didn't happen....because there IS NO record of it having done so.
Existentialism Rulez....
Reply #139 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:35 AM
Reply #140 Thursday, April 5, 2007 9:36 AM
I had a point when I wrote this. The rips came into it later. I did try private channels, emails, I even posted the links in IRC when I was talking to you and Zubaz a few days ago when they came to light.
I've also asked ...
because it seems to me or I should say 'for me' (I can't speak for everyone else), IMHO to be unclear at this point. I still don't understand how a Family Guy/fan art wall with only two stars gets in the main gallery and my work which the mods even rated higher got sent to my personal gallery, unless it's just that Family Guy is considered of a higher 'commercial' or 'popular' value.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 7 of 11 | |
|
|---|
Reply #121 Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:33 AM
And that seems to be the only thing that matters " Dreams " - the other galleries just don't seem to matter anymore - the fact that half the stuff sits in mod queue for 7 days or until someone mentions it shouldnt be happening but it is. I remember last year a post by a moderator reminding us that there were other applications that needed skinning at WC.
How things have changed.