[Sca-cooks] OT OOP - Copyright infringement thread

[Terry Decker]

1.  Cooks Source has advertisers, that makes it a for profit venture.

2.  Cooks Source has used various writings in it's for profit venture 
without permission or attribution to an extent that make any fair use claim 
questionable.

3.  Cooks Source is responsible for vetting copyrights.  An overworked, 
underpaid staff is not an excuse.  If anyone thinks it is, ask Mary Denise 
Smith.

4.  A Facebook hack is a possibility.  It also makes a great excuse. 
Without a serious examination of the servers, there is no way to make a 
determination of fact.

5.  Digitization and the Internet make it easy to steal any intellectual 
property on the net, or to be sloppy with copyrights.  It also makes it easy 
for irrate parties to retaliate.  Both behaviors are abusive, but are less 
expensive to the perpetrators than the legal alternatives.  The actions 
against Cooks Source appear to represent a community redress of a perceived 
crime.  Ugly, harsh, excessive, probably not lawful, and possibly effective. 
Cooks Source has been punished.  If the punishers stop because the message 
has been delivered, then I don't think it reachs the level of witch hunt.  I 
would not classify this as an Inquisition, which is performed under color of 
authority.  Please note that my personal choice is legal action rather than 
vigilantism.

6.  Our copy and paste activities are not in support of any commercial 
venture and may fall under fair use.  Since only a court can determine 
whether a usage is fair use or not, we would need to be sued singularly or 
collectively to make the determination.  Our type and level of copying is 
generally accepted by the online community in that we are not seen to be 
taking advantage.  Most of us are also quite willing to share our work if 
asked.  Cooks Source didn't ask and took advantage.

7.  The other side did get a chance to be heard and their (presumed) 
response was less than satisfactory.  They have restated their case (sorry, 
we goofed, we are providing compensation for our error, we are denying all 
criminal responsibility and we deny that the first reply was ours) and are 
making a (sort of) public apology.  Perhaps the apology and the excuses will 
be accepted.

While I don't disagree that the (reported) retaliation Cooks Source is 
excessive, it is interesting to note that it is in defense of a copyright, 
rather than to support the idea that information wants to be free.  It will 
be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years.

Bear



> << http://www.cookssource.com/
> They seem to be blaming those unpaid writers for all the infringements.
> Otherwise it looks like full steam ahead minus the Facebook page.
> Nothing about the editorial mistake at the top that everything on the 
> internet
> was in the public domain. >>
>
> It is not easy to get a proper understanding of what is happening here on 
> both
> sides.
>
>
> Certainly the people using online stuff should have asked for permission 
> and
> should have practised proper attribution. This is granted.
>
>
> But what happened afterwards seems to me to show certain traits of witch 
> hunting
> and an inquisition-type dynamics in my eyes. I may be wrong.
>
>
> Think about your own copy-and-paste behavior during the last five years. 
> What if
> some blogger would chose to make YOU the next target.
>
>
>
> << that everything on the internet was in the public domain. >>
>
> O.k., strictly speaking, this is not true. But I have seen many many cases 
> where
> material was used without proper attribution, without permission etc. And 
> there
> are cases where you do not even know whom to prosecute ...
>
>
> Is there any contribution trying to check what they say about their kind 
> of
> production ("overworked", "small business")?
>
>
>
> There is an ancient legal principle saying that "the other part" should be 
> heard
> also (et altera pars audiatur).
>
>
>
> Just in case it is / it were true what they say on their website, then the 
> whole
> inquistion-type prosecution is way oversized und unjust because many 
> other,
> maybe somewhat less important cases would have to be prosecuted in the 
> same way.
>
>
> E.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sca-cooks mailing list
> Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/sca-cooks-ansteorra.org
>