Message Board Content Transfer

[Tom McIntyre]

Because the new message board will be operating under a different set of rules than this message board, provision will be made to remove material from the new message board at the request of authors.

Within 5 days after the new message board goes live all material that authors request to be deleted will be replaced with the notation "REMOVED." The user names will be edited to protect the identity of the person requesting removal. As time permits, all posts with the content "REMOVED" that are not also topic starters, will be deleted.

 

[Wes]

If the new message board rules are going to be what they are now (owned by NAWCC not the authors), please REMOVE any and all of my existing posts.

 

[zepernick]

Morning Tom --
Could you please indicate by when such a request is to be made and to whom?
Regards,
Duck

 

[harold bain]

Tom, I may be a little thick here, but is there no room for compromise on this copywrite problem, before we start shredding the archived material in the old forum
Is there any difference between being published in the bulletin, and being "published" in the message board? Are the rules not the same, and if not why not
As I said, I may be a little thick here
Harold

 

[Guest]

We are currently looking into revising the copyright rule. It is not our intent to take anyones intellectual property.

If after the new rules are published and you still wish all your information wiped from the message board you will need to contact me. Please remember the process will not be reversible. Once we delete all of your post they are gone for good.

 

[Wes]

These new rules are so drastic that it might be better - from a legal standpoint - to opt in instead of having to opt out of giving the copyrights and intellectual property away.
For exapmple, there are folks that have passed away since this board's inception. You would then have to notify the next of kin of this new rule to take ownership of their diseased loved ones intellectual property.
Same goes for the people who no longer post on this board, whose email adress they used to register are no longer valid.
This is much like any other web site or organization that changes the rules. When they do so , it is NOT retroactive, like this board is.
The way the rules are written now, it seems like just the legal expense could snowball the organization and its officers into bankruptcy. This is a very dangerous path when you think about it and realize the thousands of people who have posted here are all invlolved and all have rights to their intellectual property.

 

[Tom McIntyre]

Just my opinion as an individual contributor who might want to use some of the material found on this message board.

The great bulk of what appears here is not copyrightable. You cannot copyright facts for example. The description of a watch or clock including serial numbers and decorations is not subject to copyright.

A theory about the organization of information i.e. patterns of serial numbers is also not copyrightable. It is an idea and ideas cannot be copyrighted.

In all the language content of the board, only the actual language can be copyrighted. Your clever phrases are copyrightable, but not the meaning of what you said.

The big item is images or photographs. Those can be and should be copyrighted by any owners who want to protect them. As has been pointed out, there are no images here at this time.

Many owners will be willing to donate images. I have had hundreds of images donated as support for the Waltham Database for example.

I personally have given a free non-commericial use license to all of my photographs to the public. It does annoy me when they are taken without credit. I also have a number of PowerPoint presentations on my web site and those may be freely copied as well by anyone who wants to use them in a non-commercial way. I don't know of anyone who has used them that way.

If you invent a new technique for repairing something, that descrption should be copyrighted. It is unlikely it can be patented, but that would be appropriate if viable.

These are my thoughts on the issue. They do not reflect any official position of the NAWCC.

I am sure we can work out some language that is viable for most of us. However, I feel and I think most people would feel that the issue is credit for ones work and ideas, not profit or income. Copyright only protects income. Strictures against plagiarism protect your right to be credited for your work.

 

[harold bain]

Tom, I suppose that anyone worried about posting photos can simply post a link to their own website, as this link will not make the website property of the NAWCC. Many do that now, rather than directly posting photos.
I would really hate to lose the contributions of many of our members over this.
Can you explain to me how the message board differs from the bulletin? If I submit an article to the bulletin, that is part of a book that I am in the process of writing, or have written, I would still have copyrights on it. I have allowed the club to use it without giving up any of my own rights to its use. Or am I wrong
Harold

 

[kirklox]

Tom: I do not disagree with the intent of what Jeff Hamilton was trying to do. His intent was to prevent members of this MB from taking threads to other sites for discussion. That is already being done by SEs and they are being indexed on other sites. There are also WayBack sites that also do the same thing.

So, in conclusion, it is only a minor difficulty in getting the Copyright rules corrected and to Smooth out the Rules. Let's quit making such a BIG deal about it.

 

[Tom McIntyre]

Harold,

I think it was John Hubby that pointed out that the Bulletin now requests authors to grant a license to reuse their work for the NAWCC. I have not looked at the agreement recently and don't have a copy handy.

The Bulletin is copyrighted by the NAWCC. You cannot take the entire work and reuse it. I think that is similar to taking a thread from here and using it.

I agree in this instance (surpise ) with Sam. I am sure this can be worked out to everyone's satisfaction. We should just wait to see what comes forth.

 

[kirklox]

The Bulletin is copyrighted by the NAWCC. You cannot take the entire work and reuse it. I think that is similar to taking a thread from here and using it.

Not quite the same thing. A thread is made up by multiple Authors just like the entire Bulletin is by Multiple Authors.

With a Dual Ownership Copyright you have the best of both worlds. The NAWCC can protect all Authors from Infringement and the Authors can reuse their WORKS.

You still have the problem with SEs, but that is the NAWCCs problem not mine. I just let the Authors take care of their problem with Copyright Infringement.