Linda_K
|
posted on September 20, 2001 10:59:44 AM new
LOL uaru - AW would be RICH!!
|
gravid
|
posted on September 20, 2001 11:27:48 AM new
I like uaru's idea. It could be like a court imposes. $500 or 90 days.
But here it would be $1 or an hour $5 or 6 hours - $10 or a day - $20 or 30 days. Also 25¢ to post a new thread 5¢ to reply and 10¢ to make more than one reply. BUT the author of a thread gets half of anything over $5 generated by the thread.
Payable by PayPal. Then if someone felt sympathy you could send them a buck to help - or if the volume would threaten the wealth of Bill Gates we could all chip in. They should make enough from krs alone to hire two people back, and I would chip in to keep hearing different points of view.
[ edited by gravid on Sep 20, 2001 11:38 AM ]
|
Microbes
|
posted on September 20, 2001 12:44:29 PM new
BUT the author of a thread gets half of anything over $5 generated by the thread.
Their are a few that could show a profit. 
|
uaru
|
posted on September 20, 2001 01:09:28 PM new
BUT the author of a thread gets half of anything over $5 generated by the thread.
hmmmmm... good idea, but that might encourage threads like:
President Bush Shot
President Bush received a tetnus shot Thursday. You would think they'd know to keep him away from sharp objects...
Not that anyone here would do or has done such a thing.
--------
edited to change tenus to tetnus
[ edited by uaru on Sep 20, 2001 02:12 PM ]
|
plsmith
|
posted on September 20, 2001 01:24:33 PM new
What the hell is a tenus shot?
|
saabsister
|
posted on September 20, 2001 01:34:45 PM new
I think it's when you fire one of those fuzzy white balls into the opponent's corner.
|
plsmith
|
posted on September 20, 2001 01:39:38 PM new
Oh. I don't think President Bush needs any more fuzzy white balls, do you?
|
vidpro2
|
posted on September 20, 2001 03:17:56 PM new
[quote]The article posted in eBay Outlook reads (name of other place omitted):
****** has learned that AuctionWatch, an eBay Preferred Provider of auction management services, has made substantial layoffs within the past 72 hours. AuctionWatch President Rodrigo Sales confirmed the layoffs, putting the number at "fewer than 50%". [/quote]
If copyrighted material is posted to a forum, it should be attributed (and I'm not blaming you, Spazmodeus) - in this case the story was released by AuctionBytes http://www.auctionbytes.com/Email_Newsletter/newsflash/newsflash.html.
vidpro2
http://www.auctionbytes.com
[ edited by vidpro2 on Sep 20, 2001 03:18 PM ]
|
krs
|
posted on September 20, 2001 03:46:53 PM new
Nonsense vidpro. It's fact, reported as news.
a fact is not an original work of authorship. Facts owe their origin to the thing or person that makes them happen. For example, if a reporter wrote a newspaper article about a building fire, she could not copyright the facts about the fire because those facts do not owe their origin to her.
|
vidpro2
|
posted on September 20, 2001 04:02:21 PM new
krs I beg to differ. That's why copyrights exist. If a quote is extracted from a story, that is one thing, but to have a story posted verbatim and in its entirety without attribution is quite another.
If you go to the USAToday site, look at the bottom of any AP story and you'll see:
Copyright 2001 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
vidpro2
|
krs
|
posted on September 20, 2001 05:28:30 PM new
Nope. It depends on the use to which it is put. If it's copied, blah-blah for commercial gain then it might be protected but if it's use is for general information or education not for gain then it's news and the use is fair.
You might find out what "fair use" entails.
Also, where'd it come from to you? It's certainly not original works since the changes at AW were their works.
|
stusi
|
posted on September 20, 2001 05:31:34 PM new
I believe it is not the fact that has copyright protection but the exact wording of the article. That is the creation of the reporter and has protection. So if you quote an article verbatim without credit, you have technically violated the copyright regardless of whether or not there is a copyright statement at the end or not.
|
twinsoft
|
posted on September 20, 2001 05:45:09 PM new
Facts are facts but republishing an article without permission is a violation. It is not "fair use."
|
snowyegret
|
posted on September 20, 2001 06:27:23 PM new
Tetanus
|
joice
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:10:51 PM new
Can we go back to the charges?
We are watching the boards and will recommend charges as suggested by the membership. We feel your first exit manifesto should be on the house, diatrabs are under discussion, but we are looking at 3 for the price of 2 specials. Keep the ideas coming.
How much for an argument about copyrights in a thread about lay-offs?
Joice
[email protected]
|
hepburn
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:19:38 PM new
Joice, you might be wanting to touch on YOUR fees. As in R.A.I.S.E?
|
uaru
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:21:43 PM new
Joice We feel your first exit manifesto should be on the house
Would 2nd, 3rd, and 4th manifestos all be the same price or would it be on a increase per manifesto pricing structure?
I also would like to know if I claim my password was stolen would I still be charged for a manifesto?
|
joice
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:31:12 PM new
I'm sorry, I can't answer any questions, but I can take your input and pass it on.
Joice
[email protected]
|
uaru
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:37:07 PM new
Joice I'm sorry, I can't answer any questions, but I can take your input and pass it on.
Practicing on running for public office I see.
|
snowyegret
|
posted on September 20, 2001 07:38:09 PM new
Penalty fee for missspellings.
Double for loose instead of lose. 
Rants, raves,and posting amok fees
|
