My last post here and apology for my previous one...

In my previous post about a COINage article on counterfeit verification I hadn't considered the possibility of copyright infringement.

I actually reported it myself after Conder101 pointed it out and apparently the admins agreed as it was removed. I suppose that posting on my own published articles could be viewed in a similar manner and will not post here again in the future.

Best, Jack.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Can't you post anything at all as long as you have permission?

 

Even if you stop posting articles, please still bless us with your presence and knowledge!

 

Oh… no, no, no…. We need your knowledge here, Jack. I have no earthly idea what may have transpired but please don’t stop sharing your knowledge with us.

 

Can't you just say 50 Ave Dougs and be forgiven

 

Jack, I don't think you understand just how much your posts mean to us. Please continue to grace us with your presence.

 

Jack,
I came by for a visit today to see if this site has become more user friendly.
I see from multiple posts and now this that it has not.
I would like to invite you to not give up all together
There are other forums that may fit you better and after enough people leave I bet someone who matters will notice and this forum could change.

 

Huh?

 

I have always appreciated your articles Jack.

 

@Jack D. Young. I was advised by a moderator that posting the article is a no-no but a link to the article was allowed. Hope you will continue providing us with such valuable information re counterfeits.

 

Not sure what you mean by that. There are lots of great guys and gals on here. Very generous and helpful individuals. Just look at the contest forum or the thank you posts. Why just today, @potty dollar 1878 was given some coins from @CoinJockey73

And this is the most user friendly coin forum I've seen so far. Most others are all over the place and hard to read text.

 

Sadly, there are cutthroat lawyers out there who spend their careers looking to sue and collect money for piddly and otherwise harmless copyright infringement. They use scanning software to scan the internet looking for text/images they feel are being infringed upon so they can serve infringement notices and demand restitution (which typically ranges from $300 - $900) in exchange for being left alone.

It is literal legalized extortion and is emblematic of a system in desperate need of reform. I have a friend who went through this earlier in the year and has since settled. She unwittingly used an image of a horse she found on the internet on her website. This is what moderators and astute users are concerned about when it comes to posting more than just a link or brief verbatim summary from an article.

 

I'm a lawyer and I'm here to help...
The second scariest thing... after Government.

 

Your posts about counterfeits are vital to keeping the hobby viable. Please don’t stop posting! There must be ways that you can post pictures of counterfeits and not infringe in their copyrights.

I would say shame on any hobby publication that objects to your posts about counterfeits. Exercising their copyright clauses are penny-wise and pound foolish. The future of the hobby and their publications are riding on the work that you and others do in combating the counterfeit menace.

 

Though I know nothing of what transpired, I'm interpreting the line above as "I'm done here, thanks for the memories." If true, that's a great loss for this forum. Very sad.

 

I appreciate the honorable intent, but somehow posting your own submission just shouldn't be a problem, particularly after giving both the article and free publicity.

But I ran into that when purchasing a coin and posting the seller's photos of my new coin. I think they are limiting FAIR USE to the point of ignoring it's existence.

But they do that with patent extensions as well, preventing generics from competing far beyond the intended patent protection time. And also my genealogy which I submitted and allowed them to use is now restricted from me unless I pay a fee.

Something is terribly wrong with the way things now operate in reference to intellectual property rights, patent and copy-write laws.

 

Copyright is statutory. At least, here, it is. Only if the permission is in writing in the form of a waiver or assignment of copyright can it be reproduced. There's your legal answer. Practically-speaking, nobody is going to enforce it, unless there's money on the line.

 

Just as carts don't come before horses, attorneys don't come before clients. You omit the client in this overzealous condemnation. Put the client in, first, then add two and two and see if you get five, like you just did.

 

I know about the legal arguments. My problem is with the abuse of the legal statutes inhibiting intellectual rights from making it into the public domain in a timely manner.

THAT is the point in which the society receives the greatest benefit.

Perhaps replace the right of exclusion with a fixed royalty on income producing use rather than a simple extension of exclusive licensing and use. Also revisit time limits on types of intellectual property in the modern environment. These are just off the top of my head, but the system seems broken to me.