Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Maintenance Bay' started by Tom-D, Apr 14, 2018.
Actually they were pictures from another web page, and some one is upset that I used them.
Is that the 0-300 you were doing?
If it passed the tests it must be making full power. I read it on the internet!
Lots of folks do forget this is the internet.
Tom, I missed the original post before you had to edit it. When you mention the fancy gauges, are you referencing engine monitors?
You didn't miss much. no not engine monitors.
They were probably under some sort of copyright so it may not have been an unreasonable request to have them removed them from here. Yeah, people "use" pictures everyday that aren't theirs on web sites, but the copyright owners can request removal too. Copyright law probably wasn't the context for the removal, but that is what can be used to force removal.
No copy rites, they were off Facebook.
so, what happened to that engine? what was the compression reading?
Tom, I'm sorry, but stuff on Facebook may be copyrighted as well. Videos, pictures, poems, etc.
See here: https://www.facebook.com/terms.php
Agreement to those terms gives Facebook the rights to display it (the same as Flickr.com or PoA). It doesn't allow others to use the photo.
Copyright begins when the work is made- it doesn't need to be registered. See here: https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork
Sharing Your Content and Information
You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:
FYI: only provided you actually took those photos. But if you got paid for a job that included taking those photos then they could be a work product and any ownership/rights would go to the person who paid you.
Tom, you only read part of the information provided by Facebook. Please see here: https://www.facebook.com/help/308895412492789?helpref=search&sr=12&query=copyright
If the owner of a copyright catches a violation and reports it to Facebook, it can be removed by them: https://www.facebook.com/help/365111110185763?helpref=search&sr=17&query=copyright
People get away with copyright violation mainly due to the "big internet" theory- there's just too much to sift through.
I think that @SCCutler might explain it better as an attorney.
That's all about posting to FB, not using material taken from an open forum.
This reminds me of Congress quizzing Zuckerberg last week.
I'm surprised that he didn't tell them to stuff it, they are a private company.
Well, your replies did quote Facebook so one would assume that was the the discussion point.
As for an "open forum", copyright laws apply there too, just like on Facebook. If I re-post one of your pictures (that you pressed the shutter on the camera) from another forum here, you can ask PoA to take it down. If I re-post it on flickr.com, you can ask them to take it down. If I quote a post of yours on PoA, which includes a picture you took, I'm within the rules, but not if I re-post it outside.
Your assumption, is trying to make mountain out of a mole hill, When you don't want your pictures shared, don't put them in an open forum. After all, Facebook is a social medium where we share stuff.
One interpretation of your statement above is that "someone posted it on the web where others can then use the image however they please without regard to copyright". If you meant something else, please clarify your statement. It almost reads as if "it is ok to take their image just because it was posted on facebook"
Just because it is posted on Facebook, or any other forum, doesn't mean anyone gives up their copyright. The better way to use the image is to send a PM to whoever posted the picture asking if you may share the image- you may then re-post the image if they give permission. Please show me where I'm wrong.
A mechanic and a chemist arguing over copyright law. Gotta love this place.
Come join in...is it OK to take copyrighted material off a web site just because it is posted?
That isn't how intellectual property protection works.
If you leave your toolbox by a plane and go to the bathroom, by your logic I can load it up in my truck and take it. If you don't want your tools shared, don't put them in an open area. After all, if you didn't want to share them, you should be sitting on the box with a gun protecting them.
Tom doesn't seem to understand the difference between the owner sharing his toys and someone else sharing the owners toys.
Is it ok to possess stolen property if you didn’t steal it?
If I leave the keys in my car, is it okay for another person to drive it?
What about a monkey?
or.. a robot, with a human brain!?!?
I really have no idea what the laws are. Just wondering about those questions in particular.
What if the property just "fell off the back" of a truck?
I don't believe your illusion applies.
If I placed my tool box where items were known to be placed where free stuff usually is. I'd expect it to be taken.
There is also such thing as fair use of copyrighted material: ... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
not a lawyer, but using pictures from the web to make your point is probably a fair use. of course, if the owner objects, it makes a difference...
Without giving credit to the source, no, there's not going to be any case where that's ok.
1) What illusion?
2) Your idea that an open forum is "where free stuff usually is" is probably the root of your misunderstanding. An open forum is not a "free stuff" zone. Criminals probably also think things sitting around without anybody around are in a "free stuff" zone.
His allusion does apply (illustration would be a better word). Just because it is on the web does not mean it is "free stuff". There are web sites where one can download free clip art, but those are usually marked as such.
I generally agree with this, but lets start with the basics- not everything on the web is free for someone to take and use as @Tom-D seems to be suggesting. Most of it really isn't.
Event the teaching example has limits- I can't download and reprint a textbook under copyright to use for my chemistry class. Likewise, in scholarship and research, we ask permission before using someone else's graphs, charts, etc. You'll generally see "reprinted with permission of XXX" or "reproduced with permission of XXX" in journal articles. for the time being, I'm trying to keep it simple; downloading and sharing content from servers located elsewhere gets a bit more complex.
Some of you mutherscratchers would argue with a stop sign.
The one you labor under when you believe you can post some thing in open forum on a social media and no one will copy.
So because someone CAN copy copyrighted material, it is OK to do so?
true, to be 100% legal it should have included the source. again, i'm not a lawyer, but i believe that the pictures like that may not be copyrightable
at all. as far as i remember, one of the well know copyright cases was when a publishing company attempted to enforce a copyright on a phone
directory they published. The court ruled that the phone directory is not an original work regardless of how much effort was put to make it. I would
be interesting to see if the same logic would apply to a picture of a broken bolt or something similar.
If you leave it in a car sharing lot, probably.
The phone book thing is a different matter. As for giving credit to the source, that may not be enough to obtain a license to use the work (picture, music, etc). Some people want payment for their work.
But let's start with this basic and simple fact: It is not free to use simply because it was posted someplace on the internet.
The internet is not like a car sharing lot.
My understanding of the law that It is FREE if it's a fair use.