Closing down the "IN THE NEWS" threads?
 

Maybe not, but perhaps you should shut down any news posts.

And even if FT does not, perhaps you should think twice, or maybe even three times about posting any news events yourselves.

Why? Well, essentailly since I've been informed by Essexjay, in no uncertain terms, that "You are in serious voliaton of your TOS with Flyertalk by posting copyrighted material that you do not own." Cease and desist

In summary, she has in effect threatened to turn me in to the Associated Press.

Who am I to argue this? I don't even know if I need to retain legal counsel. Since I do not want to be doing any "time" I will simply refrain from posting.

Perhaps FT can simply eliminate all my "inviolate" posts.

If not, I can edit them out, if necessary, slowly but surely, one by one, as I've done with the offending one under which the threats to me were made.

I'd hate for FT to suffer from my misdeeds.

Again, I recommend that perhaps the "IN THE NEWS" aspects of the board be shut down.

I have another recommondation. The Doc Bulletin Board. All Doc. All the time. Everything he thinks you might be interested in. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

And I mean everything!

I have appreciated the news reports and would miss them very much.

I just finished posting my thought on copyrighted material, but I have some more thoughts...

First, news is public information.

Second,

I seem to remember the U.S. Supreme Court(for everyone currently in the U.S.) ruling that it is ok to make copies of copyrighted material so long as it is for person use. In relation, the posts on this board are generally for the personal sharing of information, thoughts, ideas, etc., not commercial or for profit as in - I do not receive profit from someone reading my post. So, by posting a copyrighted article on this board, a person is really doing no more than passing a newspaper to the person sitting next to them. So, I conclude that unless a person is trying to profit from a news article or take credit for the article, I can't see anything wrong with posting the article on here although it might be better and easier to just post the link to the article.

Anyone with further thought on this?

News is indeed public information, but the version I wrote (and copyrighted) is my property - not the public's. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Second, if soemone grabs the news release and stores it on their HD, I would consider that personal use. But positng it on a medium where you do not know who many eyeballs this is getting - I would hardly consider that personal sharing of info.

Lastly, just because it is not commercial or for-profit, it does not mean you can use copy righted material without permission - for example, the common practice in US colleges of compiling/assembling textbooks from various sources.

Yeah, I have further thoughts on this. From the General Travel Talk section -->
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/001056.html

I could show you about a thousand more like this from the same poster. How would you like it if everyone on this board posted whatever "they" thought others would be interested in, without control, considertion, or regard to theme? Yes it's an open forum. But we do have a general theme here don't we? This person has shown time and again after many pleadings both public and private, to be incapable and unwilling to "put a lid on it".

Randy has said many times he appreciates the "self-policeing" aspect of this board. I think you should read between the lines as to what Essxjay is trying to accomplish here.

If this guy could show a little self control and cut down on the dribble by about 80% and keep his news stories somewhat controlled, no one would mind. But the sheer volume of this stuff is getting to people. And that's a fact Jack!

It's not about his right or even if some find value in his off-topic posts, it's about FlyerTalk and it's charter. Is it a personal dumping ground of news stories that some guy thinks the world should enjoy with him, or is it about a community of Frequent Flyers that want to keep the volume/noise ratio down in order to avoid losing valuable members?



[This message has been edited by Dr. PfP (edited 03-01-2000).]

Nearly all of us have posted news articles at some time or the other. I find news articles of interest, though most of the times I have read the article and simply skip it unless there are followups. The followups can be interesting too.

essxjay once proposed that there be a digest of news articles, but there was a fair amount of disagreement from the "community" on that.

If there is one thing more offensive than censorship (euphemistically called "self-policeing") it is selective censorship.

[This message has been edited by PG (edited 03-01-2000).]

I agree with PfP on this one. The chatter to information is approaching USENET levels on the general areas of FT.

As to copyright and profit, there is a common misconception that if you don't make a buck off the copying, then it's not illegal. In reality if you do it for profit you violate criminal and civil law, whereas not for profit you violate only civil law. [Note: I am not a lawyer and do not play one on television. Nothing stated here should be construed as legal advice [/CYA]) The copyright holder is within their rights to request a court restrain your illegal copying and to attempt to recover damages. And don't scoff at damages, "damages" are what a court and jury decide they are, not what one might consider reasonable.

For me, I would not make a habit of reposting copyright material from a gigantic organization on an easily accessible site.

I don't think anyone disagrees that news is public information, but that's not what a copyright applies to. It applies specifically to how to a story is reported and written by a particular person. It becomes their (and their publisher's) intellectual property. News organizations basically produce only one good - ideas - so they must vigorously protect their stock in trade from theft (plagarism). That's what a copyright does.

No need to shut the news boards down, doc. But if you're going to report the news, do it in your own words. And please be judicious in the amount and type of news to pass along. Yes, I find some of your posts interesting, but we're all quite capable of picking up a newspaper, flipping on the telly and browsing CNN online for our general and airline-related news. Keeping us informed without clogging the board would probably make you more appreciated.

[This message has been edited by essxjay (edited 03-01-2000).]

if one really feels the need to post news items maybe a single post each day with several links to the ORIGINAL sources would suffice. That could be helpful for those who dont have time to look for all the news on their own and it should also not take up space and cause unecessary controversy and of course it wouldnt violate any copyright laws.

Just an idea http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Thank you, indogulf. I couldn't have said it better myself. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Yes, right! Just say it again and again- enough so and people will begin to believe it.

BTW-"Self-policing" aspects, NOT "lynching!" Of course, what do I know, you're the "Sheriff!"

Yes, and Randy has also commented numerous times about the massive growth in the number of posts on FT- and the point is?

Simply put, as many of you well already know, the comments expressed are untruthful nonsense.

Help yourselves to an exhaustive search/ critique if you like. Here's just one thread where this discussion has come up before:
http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/Foru...ML/000491.html

The result was always the same and by a substantially wide margin.

I have always tried to accomodate all on the board as best as I know/knew how to- and that is evident in any past post(s) or exchange(s).

There will be some who will never be pleased no matter what I or anyone does, as I've noted previously.

Incidentally, you may want to do a search of "Dr.Pfp" to help evaluate their contribution to FT. Please enjoy as you read!

Again, it's a mute point as I said. I'm not going to post news items in a "community" under threat of prosecution- period.

This is no great loss for anyone on the board, or for me. Others will be picking up any slack and I have a bit more time to read, etc- and maybe I could even learn to criticize others!

While I'd always tried to give proper source credit and/or paraphrase, increasingly I've been "sloppy" and have copied more stories rather than provide a link. This is my mistake. When you're wrong, you are wrong. I admit to that.

Ironically, this is because many FTers like essexjay, who specifically encountered a recent dead NY Times link, could not read the story that been posted. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Thanks for listening/reading this far!

With apologies, especially for ranting,
Mark

PG this is not about selective censorship, IMHO. This is a community, a society. There has to be some self control or you have chaos.

I don't think this really has anything to do with copyrights. That's just the total frustration coming to the surface, IMHO.

I hate to say it but I too agree with Dr. PFP. We have gone over this before in:


http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum94/HTML/000834.html

As I suggested in that thread, what's to stop me from posting hundreds or thousands of stories about cigars, toys, collectibles, cars, wine, goldfish, pavement tar, sheep, television or whatever else I want to post here? Inherent guidelines, hopefully. But if not, self control. And even peer pressure.

Doc, I honestly get so sick of some of it that I feel like literally flooding the boards with "my" favorite news stories, just to make a point.

As I mentioned in the above thread, I think everyone welcomes posts that defines a person, or that shows what they are interested in. That's what helps develop a community. But Doc, there's a limit to what some people consider appropriate quanitity, let alone quality or relevance.

Hey, we all have a little fun here with our personal stuff and that's great. But like so many others have said time and again, we can get our general news elsewhere. And we should! And I do! I don't want FlyerTalk to become my one source for everything! I want to talk about the airlines, hotels, programs and the personalities here!

In so many other threads Doc, you seem unwilling to admit errors in judgment. In others you do and promise to change. But we always seem to end up right back here. You seem to argue that because many readers appreciate some of your posts, that is justification for using this forum to continue, and perhaps even increase the flow. I think that is an error in judgment.

Sadly, if things don't change we will lose some more very high quality people who came to this board from others and other newgroups to get away from the spam of unrelated stuff. I would hate to think that NJDavid was right in his final assessment of things in the last post of the above mentioned thread.

IMHO.

I'll come off my soapbox now.

I'm sorry PremEx - it is selective censorship. We already have more than enough posts about sheeps, cigars, cats, silly spelt articles which qualify for OMNI awards, etc.

I always do. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif



Silence is golden.



:::sniff, sniff::: What's that I smell? Burning martyr??



That's the most honest thing you've said so far. Much appreciated.


Oh, bunk! I'm straight forward about my beef with you, which is 1) sheer volume of posts, and 2) copyright infringement.

Sigh. Maybe it's time I joined nathan detroit on the other side.

Signing off now ...

[This message has been edited by essxjay (edited 03-01-2000).]

We discussed this copyright rule before. And the Associated Press is very very picky on this. The news service has not acted YET but they do get angry when news stations run their material word for word.

We have a rule on our job that we are UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES TO WRITE VERBATIUM from any source. Newspapers. Wire Services. Reporter info. The powers that be have sent memos on this and we have had dragged out meetings on this.

The object if you have to write something on Flyertalk is to do it in your own words. A short summary of what it's about and then posting a link. That's it.

I see about a dozen or more stories that I could post. But like Baobab suggests I don't because I figure "we can already get most of this stuff from T-V, radio or newspapers."

This is in no means an attack of you DOC. I think we ALL need to limit our posts. Like the "Who wants to Marry a Millioniare stuff." I frankly don't want to hear of this junk when I get home from work.

OMNI: And I'm sorry that some of you are sick and tired of me posting about my cats. If you get to know me you'll understand why I do talk of them so much. I'll only share my reasons once I get to know you and trust you. There are a few Flyertalkers who know me very well and understand what I do and i"ve built some special friendships from all of this.

SO maybe i"ll post "Another stupid cat post" and number them so people don't have to waste their time with them.



[This message has been edited by Catman (edited 03-01-2000).]

But I'm begining to think we don't have enought News Stories about those subjects here! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

PG, maybe you're starting to get my point. See, you are annoyed by the cat, cigar, silly spelt stuff. Well that stuff is at least about the people on this board! Imagine the annoance that some feel when the topic has nothing to do with either the people or topic of this board!

Any post you make about you or your cats is welcome by me, Catman. As is any post by Doc about himself and his hobbies or personal experiences. That's what makes things interesting and us a community.

As has been said, it's the volume of non-related news service items that I find inappropriate.


[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 03-01-2000).]

I certainly respect and agree with copyright law. I'm a national account manager for a global publisher selling to a global e-commerce retailer, and intelluctual content should be vigourously defended. But I also really like reading the news. I know there has been some issues with some of Doc's posting (news and other incidents) in the past, but I really like finding out some of the news FIRST here on FT. In reality, I can't skim every single news source on the web. Most of the news Doc posts is FT-related. Because, Doc has posted, for the most part descriptive headers, I can decide if I want to read it or not, much like PG suggested.

Copyright law may disagree, but in my own mind, I've always view Doc as the messenger, not the owner. I think he usually gives credit, especially with the links. I've seen this issue in the past couple years here on FT and all that I can say is that news is important.



[This message has been edited by jeffreyt (edited 03-01-2000).]

Well, I guess it's time for me to give my 2 cents. I do not profess to be a great fan of doc's. I agree with many that the sheer number of his posts are too many, and it wastes board space, time and patience wading through them. More importantly, though, the outright reproduction of copyrighted stories is a serious (albeit probably civil) violation of the copyright laws. Last I checked (and I don't specialize in copyright), I think that the issue of whether simply posting a link to a news source is permissible under the copyright laws is in flux, but certainly seems less problematic in my mind. I would therefore recommend that if Doc wants to bring things to our attention, he simply give a brief description and then include a link. (and, of course, the extra effort which that may take may discourage too many posts.)
My problem with the idea of "policing" posts on the board is that it goes against the grain of my philosophy. As Voltaire (allegedly) said (paraphrasing): "I disagree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it." One of the true measures of a free and democratic society is it's ability to put up with offensive speech, of whatever nature, whether it be criticism of a government, espousing of heinous racist views, or other unpopular speech. After all, it depends upon whose ox is being gored. The problem with censorship is that SOMEONE has to be the censor, and may not like democrats, or republicans, or short people, or cat lovers, or people who can't spell, or people who seem to have nothing else to do with their lives than post every thing they can find on FlyerTalk, whether anyone else cares about it or not. It is, therefore, a job I do not choose to give to anyone, if I have any say in it, either here or elsewhere.

My five cents worth. This TOPIC hits a VERY raw nerve with me. I have a REAL problem with "OTHER" people on Flyer Talk policing posts. CENSORSHIP can be a VERY dangerous thing. That is the reason I left Usnet after a year.Because of all the craziness.. I have had two "incidents" on the Marriott board in the last three weeks with other posters making "critiques" of my posts. And ONE outright personal remark.And YOU wonder WHY I don't have my e-mail address listed? As I always say... "IF YOU DON"T LIKE MY ADVICE OR INFORMATION OR COMMENTS,INQUIRIES" I see things as they are FROM my perpective BTW... And you see MICHAEL
MAHONEY listed on the post skip it.. Move on. THERE ARE PLENTY OF POSTS TO READ!




Sorry I can't help on the copyright issue. I do enjoy "some" of DOCS posts.

P.S. I have enjoyed the civility on this board thus far. I am NOT going to take sides on this issue!

Regards,

Michael Mahoney

At no time have I suggested or advocated censorship of these boards, and to introduce that idea in the current discussion only serves to inflame. Let's stick to the original issues of the thread: copyrighted material and volume of posts.

The only request made by me of other posters was to practice some self-restraint and good judgement about the amount and types of content placed here. No way, no how can that possibly be construed as a call for censorship to anyone who understands the definition of the word.

I will also not stand by silently as post after post is made that violates copyrights and the terms of service that each of us agreed to when we joined this community.

To borrow the Voltarian phraseology, I stand by my right to speak out on such matters, and of course, defend your right to disagree with me.


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

I have to say I disagree with self policing. I think when someone gets a little power there is the possibility of corrupting the board/person. Anyone has the ability to post whatever... there is also Flyertalk who is responsible for illegal activity.. which we can complain to. If something violates law, great get rid of it.. is someone wants to post... they can do it.. eventually they will get ignored... if not interesting.. but if they are... more power to them!!

As I have said before, I have several problems with any sort of 'top down' censorship of posts. However, copyrighted work is protected - I think Indogulf makes the ideal suggestion i.e. post an appropriate link, not the article. If the material is not online, write a brief summary and give a source.

As I have also said before, I like In the News. It provides a lot of (links to) aviation/FF related material which is less accessible in this country as it relates to US airlines. That makes it useful resource for the few of us in other parts of the world http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif.

Common sense and self-restraint? Oh sorry, wrong board...

Everyone is making good points.

Of course there should be no censorship on this board. That would take away the sense of community here.

But maybe we should try our own idea of "self-policing" (See if this makes sense http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif we sit down, think about what we're going to post and then decide "will I post this and no body responds.

That way we don't have to exaust our fingers cutting and pasting articles that no one will even care about.

PremEx: ditto back to you on any sheep or cigar or wine stories.

I think the person stuff adds character to this board and makes it more human. You get to know the characters behind the names. I like that.

essxjay, I think you need to chill. Unless you work for the agencies or sources that you believe were ripped off, you should have better things to do. If you do work for those folks, then I'd like a job as surfing the net for a living seems to be the ultimate way to get frequent flyer miles.

Onefreeman, that's a little harsh. I think there is enormous self restraint here. If you disagree, try reading just about any alt.* newsgroup for a week - It'll drive you spare.

Duped from the South Africa thread:

Which would you rather have:
1) A flyertalk where copyrighted material is not posted?

or

2) No flyertalk at all because Randy has his pants sued off of him?

It's just sooooooo easy to provide a link to yahoo or msnbc or any of the thousand other non-subscription news sources without violating any U.S. federal laws that I cannot understand why anyone would want to jeopardize the whole forum for the sake of saving one click on a hotlink. I find that attitude wantonly selfish. And if the news service is not free, then you're REALLY asking for trouble by reprinting it here or anywhere else!!!

As someone who has had to (sucessfully) pursue copyright violations of my work (ok, so it was my employer's copyright of my work, but I still took it personally), this is a pretty sensitive topic to me, too.

As my copyright attorney says: Speech is free in America so long as they are your words. If not, be prepared to pay. (I suggested he put that on his business card, he declined http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif )

As a former system operator of a bulletin board, my thoughts are simple; only Randy Petersen or one of Inside Flyer's representatives or delegated representatives should be able to make any comments on content here. If they don't like doc's post, they should tell him, and for all intensive purposes, here their word is God. Period.

The only thing I care about as common courtesy is a descriptive headline, so when I see it on my 'latest' list I can ignore it if it's not of interest to me.

As per the copyright thing, again, only two people should be concerned -- InsideFlyer and doc. Let InsideFlyer make their own decision. I've posted news articles in the past. I snippet one to two paragraphs and link to the original article. Works for me.

I've run bulletin boards and mailing lists for over ten years. Self-policing does NOT work. There has to be authority in one place and only one place, and that is the hoster/owner of the bulletin board. After all, due to the jumbled state of laws they may be held responsible so they and only they have the power.

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!