Great, let the stories appear in newspapers. Put the story in OMNI or Newstand. It's turned into more a debate on TOS and what rights a deceased person has .... hardly community material IMO. Let the guy rest in peace ... no need to BBQ him here some more. It has nothing to do with what this forum is generally used for.

The essence of CommunityBuzz! is sharing our joys and sorrows, interacting with each other as fellow humans on matters both superficial and solemn. Witness the wedding last Thursday of our most generous host.

If the thread topic dealt solely with a public figure qua public figure, indubitably it would be grist for OMNI. But here was a person who posted prolifically in our midst, in an outspoken manner, as a moderator no less! The very archetype of a community member. And we were the only "friends" he had!

It is only natural that larcency and fraud on such a larger-than-life scale, followed by a grisly death at his own hand, should inspire revulsion. Death is a topic Americans are wont to sweep under the rug. Fine, if death disturbs you, don't open the thread -- which is very well labeled and descriptive of its subject matter, by the way.

The very fact that Barton Watson inspires such strong emotion shows how appropriate this thread is for community. The ongoing senses of betrayal, vindication, loyalty, disgust, sympathy, sorrow, and mercy -- it sounds like this is one soul who definitely needs our prayers, to those deists who are so inclined -- are compelling evidence of the influence this episode still has on our community.

This is confirmed by the number of views to this thread.

As with all topics, no one has to click on any of them.

I certainly feel that the "Update on book about b watson" is a matter of community interest, and look forward to reading the subject of this thread if and when it is published.

For those wishing to discuss or learn more about our fallen community member's conduct as a public figure, or their reactions such conduct, there is indeed an OMNI thread on those topics. Likewise, legal ownership of posts on internet bulletin boards.

This Thread Creeps Me Out
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=376280

FT owns you vs Fair Use?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=430895

Shall we keep further posts on topic?

I am starting to get a sick feeling that some of my FlyerTalk posts will end up derailing my future Supreme Court nomination.

Not to mention the United States Court of Appeals.

"Say it proud."

This is completely wrong.

In the US, an author automatically gains a copyright to every work he or she creates, including posts to FlyerTalk. No notification or registration is required.

The only way to lose a copyright is to expressly transfer it to another party. There is no "becoming part of the public domain" because of lack of a notice.

The word "FlyerTalk" cannot be copyrighted. It can be trademarked, which is different.

Anyone who thinks he is free to republish my posts without permission because there is no copyright notice on them had better hope that a court decides it is "fair use."

QL

Any attempt to use any of my posts for any commercial venture without my express permission will be contested legally, if appropriate. I mean it. I do not consent at this point to any use outside of the FT website.

That being said, I do believe that a book on Watson's life MIGHT be interesting. I also think that book would be better written by someone who did not have a personal vested interest in the subject.

And I am dead serious about that first paragraph.

I think it's silly to threaten legal action for use which would clearly be fair use. It would be a nuisance suit with no damages or reasonable chance of success.

Furthermore, the withdrawal of consent to any use outside of the FT website means you no longer agree to the TOS and you should email one of the administrators to request the removal of your account. The TOS includes a license for FlyerTalk to republish posts as they see fit. Your prior posts are already subject to this license, so you might need to go and delete all of your prior posts before you resign.

Unfortunately, I've already exercised my rights to quote your post for the purpose of commentary and criticism, so you cannot entirely remove your previously published posts.

I do agree with this. It seems like the additional insight gained by a personal relationship is outweighed by the loss of objectivity. It seems like a strange arrangement.

I think Los Angeles County Traffic Court is about as high as you can go.

Oh wait, I forgot how fast you drive that RX-8... nevermind

Robb-

I am not an IP lawyer. I will consult one. I don't disagree with FT's ability to use my posts. But this is entirely different.

There are several misconceptions about Copyright law in this thread. One involves the conflation of very limited "fair use" rights by third parties with those we have granted pursuant to any applicable express contracts or terms of service.

Anyone wishing to learn more would do well to consult with the treatise by Professor Thomas McCarthy of the University of San Francisco School of Law.

Thank you, QuietLion, for your clear and succinct explanations.
Isn't FT great for data mining and voluntary surrender of personal privacy?

You must be confusing me with someone who drives a repectable vehicle.

See Truck or SUV?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showt...11#post4034511

Perhaps someday we will be reading FlyerTalk threads at a Senate hearing near you. Hopefully someone on the Judiciary Committee understands hyperbole.

How about if the author of the book substitutes the moniker "Anonymous Poster" for your real name, "BoxSoxFan45?"

Oh, wait.... That isn't your real name anyhow. Or is it?

So, being quoted in a book under an alias like "BoxSoxFan45" upsets you?

And really, it seems hypocritical to post on a PUBLIC forum (you don't even have to register as a MEMBER to read FlyerTalk, not that membership is that exclusive anyhow), and then complain if you find yourself quoted somewhere outside of FlyerTalk/WebFlyer/InsideFlyer.

Tell that to Boswell. Although Barton was hardly Samual Johnson -- and I haven't seen Barton in 25 years.

Actually the Watsons were very private people. No one has in depth knowledge of Barton's childhood or adolescence outside of the family, except for me. After the High School years, the rest of the book is straight reportage based on, so far, close to a hundred interviews, and hundreds of pages of public documents.

Jim Cameron

I think it's odd that people would sneer at the idea of a childhood friend of Barton's writing a book about him. It just sounds like people are reaching for any weird excuse to bash the OP and his project. I for one would welcome the unique insight that such a connection provides. ^

And, if I may wax philosophical for a moment, I think a lot of the reason that some FTers are so uncomfortable about seeing Barton Watson exposed for what he was, is that we see something of ourselves in Barton Watson. FT unfortunately seems to encourage incredible snobbishness and elitism; there is a tendency to trash and bash service providers for any and all ridiculous and trivial reasons, to whine about not getting upgrades, to rant and rave about being left out of targeted offers, to b!tch and moan endlessly about "status dilution," etc. All of which makes us feel superior, I guess. So maybe we're all self-important, self-deluded phonies like B Watson himself? OK, not really, but there's at least a grain of truth there.... @:-)

Perhaps my criticism was taken too harshly. I simply think it's an unusal arrangement, that's all. I didn't say he shouldn't do it, and I didn't say it wouldn't sell, I just said it's out of the ordinary.