My point was who gives you the RIGHT
to tell other people on FT What and
what NOT and HOW much to post. You
are esentially saying to DOC you
can't post "certain" articles. In a
sense that IS a form of "SELECTIVE"
censorship..
The decision on issues that are
being
discussed copyright
infringement,number of posts..
should
come from Randy Peterson the OWNER &
HOST of this board FT.As he was the
one who outlined the rules and
policies. And as I understand CAN
ask people to leave.BASED on
inappropriate material. As the terms
and conditions are VERY clear as to
what is acceptable here. BUT you
have
a right to free speech as this board
is based here in the goood ole US of
A.

Regards,

Michael Mahoney

P.S> I have NO intention to start a
flamewar... YOU have the right to
disagree with everything I just
posted. As I have the right to say
what you did in sending that e-mail
to Doc WAS wrong and inappropriate..
SELF POLICING IS THE KEY> AND SELF
RESTRAINT!

I am VERY confident DOC knows what
the appropriate subject matters are
for FlyerTalk. That very obvious. On
the copyright issue. One needs to be
very careful. Because it is apparent
a lot of companies are very
sensititive about it. And I do'nt
blame them.

[This message has been edited by
MIKE MAHONEY (edited 03-02-2000).]

[This message has been edited by MIKE MAHONEY (edited 03-02-2000).]

DUP

[This message has been edited by MIKE MAHONEY (edited 03-02-2000).]

My point was that I find selective censorship offensive. I do not say that you should not post about cigars.

You are making a value judgement that it is ok to post about people on this board, but it is not ok to post about travel related news items in a forum titled "In The News".

Maybe we should limit the personal experiences to "FlyerTalk Community", since you say that it has relevance to the community. I would much rather read about a travel related news item than about doc's (or anyone elses) hobbies.

I think that it is high time that Randy/ Michael publish some guidelines that we can go by.


[This message has been edited by PG (edited 03-02-2000).]

Just a couple of notes from the new internet service provider provisions of the Copyright Act, which appears at 17 U.S.C. 512, for those who are interested. First, it provides that with respect to information posted by users on a service provider's domain, the ISP is not liable unless and until it receives a required notice, in the form prescribed by the statute (which includes certification under penalty of perjury) that copyrighted material has been posted in violation of the statute.

Second, however, the Act provides that a person alleging a copyright violation who has given such notice to an ISP can go to any federal court, file a copy of the notice, and then get a subpoena to the ISP to obtain the name, address, etc. of the person who posted the information in violation of copyright. Word to the wise, therefore, you may not even know that the person whose copyright has been violated has obtained your name and address until you are served with a federal complaint.

I disagree with dingo and dg1 that this is an issue which ONLY Randy and FlyerTalk should care about, and agree with Matt (kokonutz). We all have a readily definable interest in not wanting to see this board shut down because of copyright violations, or the owner's or ISP's concern about it hosting copyright violations. Therefore, I agree that the concerns are valid. However, I think that these concerns are properly directed at doc, with the appropriate requests for self-control, which have been made. Doc seems like a reasonably intelligent fellow, who I believes like this forum also, and I would certainly think he intends to conform his posting to a type (i.e., linking to stories elsewhere) that don't appear to risk getting him in trouble or causing problems for FT. I would certainly prefer to see that happen before FT gets a notice, and then has to begin policing to make sure copyrighted material isn't being posted, to avoid their own liability.

I guess I'd second the proposal, then, that we just post the news in our own words, giving proper credit where it is due. For example, if we read about something online that we feel would benefit other FT'ers, then making a general statment and a link would be really great. That's my 2 cents worth.

It's not an issue of censorship or free speach, you are free to say whatever you want, but at the same time this isn't an open meeting area in a public park, it's a Bulletin board that somebody is responsible for with some company hosting it someplace on their machines. Those people certainly have a right to say what is posted here, and if there is any chance of copyrighted violations then it shouldn't be done.

I actually would prefer a link, because cutting and pasting gives the person doing the cutting and pasting the ability to edit the post to their means. I'm not saying it happens here, but we all know it can and does happen.

There isn't any thing wrong with something like:

Tower files for bankruptcy, the details are at www.abcdef.com/hhhhh

PG wrote to PremEx: No, no, no. PG please re-read my posts. That is specifically not what I'm asking.

Travel related stories In the News are fantastic. It's the NON-travel related stuff In The News or General Travel Talk that I'm asking Doc to show a little personal editorial judgement on.

And by the way, I make "value judgements" every day. I would hate to see what life would be like without them.

Why can't we all just get along!!

djlawman - thank you very much for the information. I think we should address the copyright issue intelligently and your comments certainly do so and are food for thought.
It seems to me that what we should focus on are the rights of the folks creating the original material, not whether it is or is not censorship of the board to be reprinting information from other sources. As long as one can announce news, make comments and cite the source, where is the censorship?
I do appreciate hearing that there is breaking news and the comments and insight that board members make. I agree with those who suggest that headlines be created with links to the actual stories.

p.s. Catman - please don't stop talking about your cats!

also - Catman - please don't stop talking about the cats!

Simple solution. Summarize the article in your own words and post a link to the whole article for those that want more than a summary. End of story.

Excellent suggestion BAZE.Put it in
your own words.(non-infringement of
copyright) and link (more bandwidth)
: )... That is what I have attempted
to do(no link) since day one. And I
can sleep at night without the threat
of being sued for copyright
infringement! To clarify: I agree the
point on my posts should have BEEN
focused more (Marriott thing Pi%$ me
off) on copyright issues and the
legalities of posting/using that
information in a public forum such as
FT. Not the as much the "free
speech/censorship angle".. And BTW I
just love to read about each of the
individuals on this board. That is
what makes this board interesting.
And Mark. PLEASE don't ever STOP
posting about your cats. And PREMEX
don't ever stop posting pictures like
you did re: you sitting on plane with
disney shirt. And who posted that pic
of the food (gooey mess)??.. This is
what makes this board effective!

Regards to all FT members,

Mike Mahoney

P.S.Thank you DJLAWMAN for the details on the new ISP provisions.It benefits us ALL. I am too up an any intelligent conversation on this topic!

[This message has been edited by MIKE MAHONEY (edited 03-02-2000).]

Interesting thread. Although I do enjoy the 'In the News' forum, it is tedious when not so relevant stuff is posted. Look at the forum for the last, say thirty days, and see how many posts have ZERO responses!! Some stuff is relevant and should be posted here, but a little bit of self-restraint so as not to post just to increase your post count would work wonders.

And as others said, anyone can go to other web-sites and get the more obscure stories like:
http://www.airwise.com http://biz.yahoo.com/n/y/y0002.html

[This message has been edited by leroy11 (edited 03-02-2000).]

Since this episode was started by a travel related item in General TravelTalk, I fail to see the point. We all make value judgements, nothing wrong with that. It is the imposition of one's values on others which is the problem.

Again, the incredible persective(s) (and perhaps lack of such among some FTers, IMHO) manifests itself. The lack of truthfulness/ objectivity is astounding to me and to any others with evejn a hint of objectivity.

essxjay- You simply told/ordered me to "cease and desist" or else. Nothing could have been more clear.

There was literally NOTHING about the NUMBER of posts. This was/is an "afterthought" at best! It's good, I guess to cover all the bases!

I have always, up until very recently, simply summarized and directed FT'ers via link(s) or otherwise. I watched as others routinely violated copyright etc., for nearly a full year- which I should apparently do no longer, thanks to the heightend sense of awareness I now possess thanks to you!

I had been hesitant even to use a link! One of the FT posters you noted enjoying reading commented just recently, as you may recall that "doc has learned to cut and paste." As I noted previously, a current relatively high profile case, stemming from DVD, has challenged quite effectively, it seems, the propriety of even using links.

Another problem with links, aside from the often (24 hr) limited nature, is that they many are "live" and thus change as time passes.

You say "bunk", yet it is on the record that a NY Times article was on a dead link and would cost $2.50 to open/recall! The poster was- you got it- essxjay- not "essexjay!" Sorry for the previous typo/mispelling.

The fact is, I believe, as your friend Premex noted, that this has nothing to do with copyright! Nor is it about the material being posted. It is, in fact, IMHO, the POSTER- "me"- and not, as you lay claim- my "actions!"

You profess to not be willing to stand by and watch others violate copyright, yet it is in fact precisely what you have always done from the day you arrived up 'til now! Shame on you- you should know better!

Recall when Ken (kyklin) recently noted so matter of factly that he sometimes posts an entire article despite knowing it's a copyright violation and despite the fact that he knows it is wrong- but that he simply does NOT CARE!!! Perhaps that would have been an excellent time to openly threaten someone about going to the AP???!!! Even the most inastute among us can see that the "rules" are applied in a less than egalitarian fashion!

Just a bit of candor, along with a little respect and tolerance of others goes a long way! THERE ARE OTHER PERSPECTIVES OTHER THEN YOUR OWN. If any FTer, no less many do not like my posts, I'm sorry. That's a fact. It's the risk in posting!

Yet, various FTer's have commented as DJlawman just did, that no one cares. Again, I must be the only one who can NOT read others minds and also the only one who unfortunately misreads posts.

What I see is a handful of vocal FTer's who apparently feel that they rule by fiat. This group takes every opportunity to harass/flyme me under other false handles as well as their own real ones!

I'm a fairly well informed individual. I see alot of things I already know. I see quite a bit that I don't care for and/or don't agree with! Or don't like. So what? I just move on. I suppose that makes me silly. Well, I'm learning albeit slowly. Perhaps I can soon attack with venom! Then I too can grace the board with scurillious aspersions to the mutual benefit of all! Is that whats wanted? I think not!

In the interest of keeping peace and in direct specific response to your threat, I say I'm not posting any more news items. So you now apply the term "martyr!"

Having said all this, you are right, silence is golden! I WILL practice more of it.
PremEx is correct in that I've promised to show restraint and done poorly in that regard. Again, while I don't necessarily agree entirely, thanks for the polite reminder.

Yet, while "right," whatever one wants to say or think, that's their point of view. It does not, however, make it necesarily right for EVERYONE, IMHO! This is in sharp contrast to a rule or law such as the copyright issue where, as I plainly noted above, I was wrong!

Nonetheless, I will continue to respect everyone else and their rights even while some FTers hurl thinly veiled insults and profess to never be insulting!

My view is that this entire fiasco should have been handled somwhat differently- perhaps alot differently! YOU could have easily been more fair and shown some RESTRAINT. Unfortunatly, IMHO, you've been lured into a kind of cabal which makes it their business to harass/ flyme me at every opportunity.

FWIW- In ant case, let's let bygones be bygones and move on from this ridiculous distraction. I already have! I've already said FAR too much.

Again, with apologies for the rant,

Mark

PS I dont have the energy to go back and put in HAPPY FACES. Just try to imagine them, they are there in spirit!!!