I've gotten a couple of those. I think it's a warning shot over the head and not a full blown infraction.
This hits the nail on the head, and illustrates why Kurt's threat was so ludicrous. It ain't called the World Wide Web for nothing. When any of us post a photo on a public site we're freely and willingly sharing it with the whole world, and thereby implying the photo has no commercial value . . . especially if doesn't contain a copyright mark and include verbiage to the effect of "this photo may not be reproduced without express written permission blah blah blah." And if you can't prove the photo has value, then no court is likely to recognize copyright infringement. It's a no harm, no foul situation.
totally depends upon the forum and their rules. I also belong to a Photography Forum. Basically, if you, yourself do not own the photo being posted it is taken down. Period, no matter what. You can provide a link to a photo/website for comparison/question or what not, but you cannot post a photo of any type unless you own the rights to it. Or you are in the hidden subscribers forum where we joke around with stuff.
Not surprised. But I'd wager that a photography forum is one of the few places, if not the only place, where issues of image authorship are of much concern to the members.
The line about posting photos is a bit blurred IMO. I post pictures from CoinFacts every once in awhile. I obviously state that the photo came from CoinFacts which I think is ok as long as Im not using the photo to make money with but rather for educational purposes. I can make my point easier to explain and PCGS gets a little free advertisment. An individual's own photo on the other hand, I would definitely ask for permission to use on the basis of giving credit where credit is due. Obviously, Kurt should have been mad about his picture being used in such a way, but I dont see it as a sue-able offense. I was there when it was going on and I dont think he gave the mods enough time to even look over the thread and react before his threat was made. JMHO. Then again maybe I dont know the full story like I thought.
The forum does not have many individuals that are mods, so unfortunately they can not always respond immediately, especially if there is a large time differential. Most if not all have jobs or other responsibilities at various times. There is no salary, few nice remarks of the efforts put into it and no benefits. Why do I do it? Because I want a forum that has rules I agree with and when applied, make it appropriate for all age groups and a wide variety of interest. If you personally owned a meeting hall , and you placed a set of rules on the door, saying no smoking, no cursing, no open bottles of booze, and some came in and insisted on doing one or more of those things....would you ignore it? We are all guests here, you , me, and all, except the owner are guests, and the rules are posted. If you are the owner who made them do you allow them to use the facility as if they wish ? I seriously doubt it. Most employers who set their rules and have violators of them do not let them continue in their position. IMO, Jim
Thank you for your efforts. Taking on this role will always be questioned by those who whine about how the rules are enforced, when clearly all their complaints are about is simply bemoaning the enforcement of the rules on themselves and on other posters who share the same thinking about coins and most other things, but at the same time they never have any problem with the enforcement of the rules on those whose opinions they don't like. I find the mods here as fair as can be expected for flawed human beings. I believe that some complainers are only upset that THEY don't have dictatorial powers to remove posts and ban members they want removed! I have had posts removed and have completely disagreed with the removals, and I have seen posts from others that I thought should be removed. A mod has always patiently explained the rules to me. That's how I know CT moderation is as fair as can be reasonably expected for an online forum. I'm not a utopian. So I know perfection is not possible.
Really, care to mention the other members who have threatened legal action against the forum and are still around?
In my 10+ years on this site, I have never seen anyone get banned without good reason. This site is more than fair. You get warnings. I received one years ago and I was thankful that I was not banned. Go to CU and break a rule. You get no warnings there. They just give you the boot. We have a great group of mods here that really care for the site.
For both of you, as I said above, IF you receive points, you are TOLD that you received them and how many, and when they expire. Conversely, if you receive the message and you are NOT told you received points, then you didn't. Ahhhh - the old, tried, true, reliable, claims of - "I'm being picked on". Such as in, the guy who was speeding gets pulled over and he looks at the cop and says - "why'd you stop me, all those other guys were speeding too". The cops answer, "because you're the one that got caught". In other words, if the cop doesn't see the "other guys", but he does see you, then they got away and you didn't. (doesn't mean they weren't guilty too though) But the guy will go to his deathbed claiming than "he" was being picked on because it was him ! And then there's another analogy. We have two guys who break the same law, both get caught. But the one guy, it's his 1st offense, so he get's off easy. But the other guy, he's got a rap sheet that's pages and pages long - he is punished harshly for the very same offense. And there are those who will say - that's selective enforcement. And ya know what ? You're damn right it is. And it should be selective enforcement. Break the rules over and over again and you're going to be treated differently than the guy who's only broken them once, or who very seldom does so. There's a term for this - it's called justice. But there is also another aspect of this. The guy who repeatedly and consistently breaks the rules over a long period of time and is punished harshly - he gets noticed because he does it so often. But the guy who has only ever done it once - nobody ever notices him, let alone that he was punished, they aren't even aware that he ever did break the rules.
Forgot to speak about this the last time. No matter what, there are always going to be those who have different opinions as to what does or what does not break the forum rules. But here's the thing, the only ones who get to decide are the mods. And over long periods of time the mods are instructed and trained on how to decide such things by me. With a very strong emphasis on fairness, equality, and making just decisions. And I review their actions, as well as their lack of action. Is everybody going to agree with those decisions ? Of course not, some will and some won't. There is nothing in this world that everybody agrees on. When it comes to what is right and what is wrong, there is never going to be 100% agreement.
Okay I’ll concede, Kurt’s not coming back. But the site is going to be a lot less entertaining without him. I’ve noticed it already. I was away from the site for some months and just came back this week. I’ve noticed the difference in this short time back and that is a shame, it’s just not the same ☹️ Reed
For someone who's not a lawyer, I have a very solid understanding of copyright law gained from real life situations. I've had to deal with it on a regular basis throughout a 40-year career.
Yet you seem to not know that most of what you said is simply not true. "When any of us post a photo on a public site we're freely and willingly sharing it with the whole world" ...TRUE "and thereby implying the photo has no commercial value" ...FALSE "especially if doesn't contain a copyright mark and include verbiage to the effect of "this photo may not be reproduced without express written permission blah blah blah.""...FALSE "And if you can't prove the photo has value, then no court is likely to recognize copyright infringement. It's a no harm, no foul situation."...FALSE
