01 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 21st comment:
Votes: 0
It's always interesting how people are so eager to explain how the law works based on how they would prefer things to be instead of legal fact.
01 Jun, 2010, quixadhal wrote in the 22nd comment:
What? No exact description of the appropriate law with numerous citations to show how pathetic and uneducated we non-legal peons are? I'm disappointed.
01 Jun, 2010, Tyche wrote in the 23rd comment:
Sandi said:
Let's accept that Samson was a special case.
As a matter of policy, I don't think users should be allowed to request deletion of either their posts or accounts, no matter how hissy their fit is. A "contribution" is exactly that - a gift to the community. Individuals should not be allowed to weaken or bereft the community.
And just to get it out of the way, yes, Tyche, I'm a pinko tart. :cool:
As a matter of policy, I don't think users should be allowed to request deletion of either their posts or accounts, no matter how hissy their fit is. A "contribution" is exactly that - a gift to the community. Individuals should not be allowed to weaken or bereft the community.
And just to get it out of the way, yes, Tyche, I'm a pinko tart. :cool:
In Soviet Union removing author attribution was criminal act. Of course that was just on paper, determining special case of which was party member in good standing would determine who goes to gulag.
Well I'm not sure if you're a "pinko tart" or not. The only scientific way to tell is the water test. Since your basic hardcore pinko commie drinks a lot of vodka, they would tend to float if thrown into a lake. The only thing I could say for certain was that regardless of the results, you'd certainly be a "watery tart" or "moistened bint". ;-)
01 Jun, 2010, kiasyn wrote in the 24th comment:
David, if you're willing to find us some lines we can put in our ToS to state that all posts yadi-ya then that would be great.
01 Jun, 2010, Igabod wrote in the 25th comment:
how about
By signing up, you are hereby granting authority to the admin of Mudbytes.net to display any content you submit to the forums indefinitely and at their discretion.
By signing up, you are hereby granting authority to the admin of Mudbytes.net to display any content you submit to the forums indefinitely and at their discretion.
01 Jun, 2010, Dean wrote in the 26th comment:
Something like
? :thinking:
Quote
Upon posting any content to the Mudbytes Forums, you grant Mudbytes the non-exclusive right to publish, modify and use such content for the sole purpose of displaying such content.
? :thinking:
01 Jun, 2010, Orrin wrote in the 27th comment:
kiasyn said:
David, if you're willing to find us some lines we can put in our ToS to state that all posts yadi-ya then that would be great.
You should use a professional terms of service which someone else kindly hired lawyers to write for them so you don't have to, and adapt it as necessary. If you don't want posters being able to insist on removal of their forum posts then specify that the license grant is irrevocable, as used by Adobe in their terms of service (section 8 is the relevant part).
01 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 28th comment:
Orrin said:
You should use a professional terms of service which someone else kindly hired lawyers to write for them so you don't have to, and adapt it as necessary. If you don't want posters being able to insist on removal of their forum posts then specify that the license grant is irrevocable, as used by Adobe in their terms of service (section 8 is the relevant part).
kiasyn said:
David, if you're willing to find us some lines we can put in our ToS to state that all posts yadi-ya then that would be great.
You should use a professional terms of service which someone else kindly hired lawyers to write for them so you don't have to, and adapt it as necessary. If you don't want posters being able to insist on removal of their forum posts then specify that the license grant is irrevocable, as used by Adobe in their terms of service (section 8 is the relevant part).
Yes, it would be better to see what other people do.
The relevant section from the link Orrin posted is:
Quote
By submitting Content to Automattic for inclusion on your Website, you grant Automattic a world-wide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, modify, adapt and publish the Content solely for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting your blog. If you delete Content, Automattic will use reasonable efforts to remove it from the Website, but you acknowledge that caching or references to the Content may not be made immediately unavailable.
Except that, against as Orrin pointed out, you also want this license to be irrevocable.
What Dean posted should be sufficient if you just add in 'irrevocable'. Something like:
"Upon posting any content to the MudBytes Forums, you grant MudBytes the non-exclusive, non-transferrable and irrevocable right to publish, modify and use such content for the sole purpose of displaying such content."
It's worth noting that whatever change is made will not cover existing content. I think it's probably ok to go with the existing gentleman's (and gentlewoman's) agreement that we'll just be reasonable about it. If you wanted to be paranoid about it you could force everybody to agree to the new ToS again, without which their account is put on hold, but this is probably unnecessary…
01 Jun, 2010, Tyche wrote in the 29th comment:
There do exist complete dumps of MudBytes, TMC, TMS, partial MudMagic, and many other lists' message databases.
Very much like those that exist in the repository here as [link=file]896[/link], [link=file]2743[/link], etc.
So it'd be helpful to know just who or what MudBytes is, and what they claim ownership on?
I'd recommend a community license like Wikipedia.
Very much like those that exist in the repository here as [link=file]896[/link], [link=file]2743[/link], etc.
So it'd be helpful to know just who or what MudBytes is, and what they claim ownership on?
I'd recommend a community license like Wikipedia.
01 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 30th comment:
Tyche said:
There do exist complete dumps of MudBytes
Where?
01 Jun, 2010, Orrin wrote in the 31st comment:
Tyche said:
I'd recommend a community license like Wikipedia.
Interestingly the CC-BY-SA license used by wikimedia has a specific provision allowing authors to have their name removed from any derivatives or collections of their work.
Quote
If you do not like the way that a person has made a derivative work or incorporated your work into a collective work, under the Creative Commons licenses, you may request removal of your name from the derivative work or the collective work.
01 Jun, 2010, Tyche wrote in the 32nd comment:
Orrin said:
Interestingly the CC-BY-SA license used by wikimedia has a specific provision allowing authors to have their name removed from any derivatives or collections of their work.
Tyche said:
I'd recommend a community license like Wikipedia.
Interestingly the CC-BY-SA license used by wikimedia has a specific provision allowing authors to have their name removed from any derivatives or collections of their work.
Quote
If you do not like the way that a person has made a derivative work or incorporated your work into a collective work, under the Creative Commons licenses, you may request removal of your name from the derivative work or the collective work.
Yes. The most recent examples of an author invoking moral rights is J.K. Rawlings shutting down sites that use Harry Potter material in a pornographic context.
02 Jun, 2010, quixadhal wrote in the 33rd comment:
Tyche said:
Yes. The most recent examples of an author invoking moral rights is J.K. Rawlings shutting down sites that use Harry Potter material in a pornographic context.
So, you're saying I shouldn't bother trying to write "Harry Potter and the Gobblin' Goblin"? :devil:
02 Jun, 2010, kiasyn wrote in the 34th comment:
I would like something that rather than releasing it to us, is released to public domain or some such
02 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 35th comment:
I would definitely not be willing to release everything I post to the public domain… I would he completely happy to give MB the rights as discussed above, but not to the entire world without restriction.
02 Jun, 2010, Davion wrote in the 36th comment:
We own the source code to the website.
02 Jun, 2010, kiasyn wrote in the 37th comment:
David Haley said:
I would definitely not be willing to release everything I post to the public domain… I would he completely happy to give MB the rights as discussed above, but not to the entire world without restriction.
the thing is, when MB eventually dies (it will, it happens to everyone eventually), i want to be able to provide the content to whoever wants it.
02 Jun, 2010, Chris Bailey wrote in the 38th comment:
quixadhal said:
So, you're saying I shouldn't bother trying to write "Harry Potter and the Gobblin' Goblin"? :devil:
And I've wasted all this time working on "Harry Twatter and the Sorcerers Bone". I have the worst luck implementing my ideas.
EDIT: I thought I had come up with something funny but a quick google showed me that the name has already been used in a porno. !!!
02 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 39th comment:
kiasyn said:
the thing is, when MB eventually dies (it will, it happens to everyone eventually), i want to be able to provide the content to whoever wants it.
Well, you might be able to find a way to word this without making it public domain in order to achieve your goal (which I agree is reasonable enough). But for the record, my posts here are not entered into the public domain and will not be.
02 Jun, 2010, flumpy wrote in the 40th comment:
What are you hidin hailey?
Random Picks
