Copyright on Forum posts

7k · February 10, 2011

Agreed, I didn't specify who was taking them. Does the same apply to the forum posts? I haven't checked.

No those were posted by other people, hence the discussion here.

1.8k · February 10, 2011

Most of their listed caches were taken from GC

The listings were crossposted by their respective owners, who have every right to do so.

I think at least a couple of people cross-posted a listing or two that they didn't own. But they were very isolated cases; I don't think it was anything close to wide-spread. I think should it happen it's pretty easy to get it cleared up by contacting OC.com, although there are those who might not on principle.

4.2k · February 10, 2011

Do the words "victimless crime" ring a bell?

I think that's what I'm gonna tell the police officer the next time he stops me for speeding in the middle of the night.

Speeding laws exist to protect property damage, your own life and the lives of others. Unless you're speeding in the vacuum of space surrounded by Nerf pillows your analogy is broken.

Nice forum avatar, I assume you own the copyright on that?

4.2k · February 10, 2011

Most of their listed caches were taken from GC

The listings were crossposted by their respective owners, who have every right to do so.

I know of one that wasn't.

7k · February 10, 2011

Speeding laws exist to protect property damage, your own life and the lives of others. Unless you're speeding in the vacuum of space surrounded by Nerf pillows your analogy is broken.

And copyright laws exist to protect the intellectual property of those who created something new. What's your point?

4.2k · February 10, 2011

Speeding laws exist to protect property damage, your own life and the lives of others. Unless you're speeding in the vacuum of space surrounded by Nerf pillows your analogy is broken.

And copyright laws exist to protect the intellectual property of those who created something new. What's your point?

Forum posts? Seriously? You're going to equate forum posts with creative works? I'm debating the "right" and "wrong" of it. It would be pretty scummy of me to start posting everything you typed in this forum on a blog as my own words. I'm talking about the "the court awards you damages in the amount of" legal question. We could go back and forth on the moral implications, I think the OP was concerned with the legal aspect.

Again, do you own the copyright on your forum avatar?

7k · February 10, 2011

Forum posts? Seriously? You're going to equate forum posts with creative works? I'm debating the "right" and "wrong" of it. It would be pretty scummy of me to start posting everything you typed in this forum on a blog as my own words. I'm talking about the "the court awards you damages in the amount of" legal question. We could go back and forth on the moral implications, I think the OP was concerned with the legal aspect.

Exactly, and legally you can't do it. There might not be any monetary damage done, but that doesn't make it legal. In the same sense I can go 200 km/h on the highway and arrive home safely, but it was still a crime to do that.

Again, do you own the copyright on your forum avatar?

I don't, which means I can't give you permission to copy it, and I also don't have any claims if you do it anyway. Sorry but that's all it means. Really off-topic though.

6.5k · February 10, 2011

OK I'm very confused. Would someone please explain what is meant by "over there"? Over where? or is it Under where? :unsure:

4.2k · February 10, 2011

Again, do you own the copyright on your forum avatar?

I don't, which means I can't give you permission to copy it, and I also don't have any claims if you do it anyway. Sorry but that's all it means. Really off-topic though.

No, I think it's right on-topic. To paraphrase, being off-topic doesn't mean it's not wrongdoing.

You might not end up in court for it, but I'd like to see you explain the difference between using it here and and copy and pasting some piece of text from this post into another forum elsewhere. Are you claiming that it's a victimless crime perhaps? Somebody once told me "There might not be any monetary damage done, but that doesn't make it legal" but I don't remember who that was.

4.2k · February 10, 2011

OK I'm very confused. Would someone please explain what is meant by "over there"? Over where? or is it Under where?

That other website where they list cross-posted caches from this site and don't have any reviewers. There's a thread about it and their new mascot on these forums that's on page 1 million or so.

7k · February 10, 2011

You might not end up in court for it, but I'd like to see you explain the difference between using it here and and copy and pasting some piece of text from this post into another forum elsewhere. Are you claiming that it's a victimless crime perhaps? Somebody once told me "There might not be any monetary damage done, but that doesn't make it legal" but I don't remember who that was.

There is no difference. Making a copy of a copyrighted work without license or permission is a crime. You don't know where I got the avatar from, who owns the copyright on it or if I have permission to use it, so you can't make any comments about how I use it. Even if you did know any details about it, it'd still be none of your business, because you have no rights on it, no copyright, no license, nothing. Unless you actually do, in which case we can talk about it.

The same applies to forum posts: unless the original author gave permission to use and copy his post, doing so is a crime. Of course the author can end up saying that he doesn't care, which implies permission, but he would have every right to have the unauthorized copy removed if he wanted to. And as long as the author doesn't know that his post was copied, there is no permission, which makes it a crime.

Copyright law actually makes a lot of sense (ignoring certain nonsense aspects like the DMCA), but if you want to understand it, you need to 1) actually read it, and 2) think about it a bit. No guarantees though. :rolleyes:

Edited February 10, 2011 by dfx

1.8k · February 10, 2011

There is no difference. Making a copy of a copyrighted work without license or permission is a crime

To be fair, there is the issue of fair use. I am no expert on when may be invoked / when it is a legitimate claim, but it's not clear to me that it's always a crime to copy copyrighted work without permission.

7k · February 10, 2011

There is no difference. Making a copy of a copyrighted work without license or permission is a crime

To be fair, there is the issue of fair use. I am no expert on when may be invoked / when it is a legitimate claim, but it's not clear to me that it's always a crime to copy copyrighted work without permission.

Absolutely right, but I've already addressed the fair use case above. The one copied post I looked at didn't have any references to the original though, so I have to assume fair use doesn't apply. Copying something under fair use is perfectly legal though.

Or it's always possible that the author actually gave explicit permission to have his post copied. Who are we to know?

Edited February 10, 2011 by dfx

1.7k · February 10, 2011

Agreed, I didn't specify who was taking them. Does the same apply to the forum posts? I haven't checked.

No those were posted by other people, hence the discussion here.

....

oh, never mind.

Edited February 10, 2011 by Sioneva

1.5k · February 10, 2011

[Or it's always possible that the author actually gave explicit permission to have his post copied. Who are we to know?

In the case of my post, I did not give explicit permission, not that I really care.

Fair use might cover it and if the content is copied for editorial purposes there are some broader allowances (but might not apply in this circumstance).

7k · February 10, 2011

In the case of my post, I did not give explicit permission, not that I really care.

There we go, permission granted, thread can be closed :lol:

10.2k · February 10, 2011

In the case of my post, I did not give explicit permission, not that I really care.

There we go, permission granted, thread can be closed

+1. Close it. It's so much more fun to read over there, anyways. I'd post there too, but apparently just logging into their forums with my Garmin account is too much trouble for their "Beta" site over there.

February 10, 2011

There is no copyright. At all. What-so-ever. There's nothing to be owned by you or Groundspeak.

Not true. Anything that I write, I can be presumed to own the copyright on. My question is, is there something in the TOS on this site that transfers that copyright to Groundspeak, or is it retained by me?

From the US Copyright Office FAQ:

What is copyright?

Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.

What I write here is an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. When I hit "post," it becomes a published work.

But I'm reading your post in New Zealand. Does US copyright law apply to me?

If I steal your "published work" and post it on a server located in Dagitstan what laws are being broken?

7k · February 10, 2011

But I'm reading your post in New Zealand. Does US copyright law apply to me?

If I steal your "published work" and post it on a server located in Dagitstan what laws are being broken?

Most aspects of copyright law are pretty much international and apply equally in almost all countries. Certain details may vary from country to country, but the core principles are the same.

Aside of that, it doesn't matter where the server/content is located physically. It depends on where the involved people live. Of course getting the hoster to take the content down in such a case is a different story.

Edited February 10, 2011 by dfx

19k · February 10, 2011

But I'm reading your post in New Zealand. Does US copyright law apply to me?

If I steal your "published work" and post it on a server located in Dagitstan what laws are being broken?

As someone who has had copyrighted work used by a U.K. magazine several times, I can say "yes" with some authority, but also will add that it can only be enforced at great expense, and generally would not be worth it.

As to the more general question here on forum copyrights, I found a very similar thread on an Intellectual Property forum:

http://www.intelproplaw.com/ip_forum/index.php/topic,14142.0.html

Hi, I've searched the archives and found many answers to the specific question of who owns the posts on forums.. but this question has a twist...

(I guess I won't copy/paste the entire contents here)

That is only the first of several hits that I found on a search. I don't care enough about this to dig through all of the results, but if someone has a mind to, here's the search results: http://www.intelproplaw.com/ip_forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=vnmk1ve3ns0bq6agtfn4j6sr22&action=search2

5.7k · February 11, 2011

Again, do you own the copyright on your forum avatar?

Well, as a matter of fact I do own the copyright to my forum avatar. It is my personal pathtag and it's image is copyrighted. :anibad:

2.4k · February 11, 2011

Most of their listed caches were taken from GC

The listings were crossposted by their respective owners, who have every right to do so.

I've heard people complain about their caches being listed on "that" website without their knowledge or permission.

Just what I hear....

Personally, I think this is a bigger issue than forum posts making it over there.

I don't care as much if they copy my words, then if they were were to list my caches on their site without my knowledge. I know they're hard up for caches, but hey, I thought we "owned" our caches and Groundspeak was just a listing service?

While this means I could list it anywhere I want, I wonder what it means as far as others listing my cache elsewhere?

And are they going to help out with maintenance??

Edited February 11, 2011 by Sol seaker

5.7k · February 11, 2011

Most of their listed caches were taken from GC

The listings were crossposted by their respective owners, who have every right to do so.

I've heard people complain about their caches being listed on "that" website without their knowledge or permission.

Just what I hear....

Personally, I think this is a bigger issue than forum posts making it over there.

I don't care as much if they copy my words, then if they were were to list my caches on their site without my knowledge. I know they're hard up for caches, but hey, I thought we "owned" our caches and Groundspeak was just a listing service?

While this means I could list it anywhere I want, I wonder what it means as far as others listing my cache elsewhere?

And are they going to help out with maintenance??

I have heard of such issues in the forums on this site with users that might list caches on another site that do not belong to them. That would be just plain wrong to do so. If that were to happen I hope that it would be reported. So far it just seems to be talk.

4.2k · February 11, 2011

You might not end up in court for it, but I'd like to see you explain the difference between using it here and and copy and pasting some piece of text from this post into another forum elsewhere. Are you claiming that it's a victimless crime perhaps? Somebody once told me "There might not be any monetary damage done, but that doesn't make it legal" but I don't remember who that was.

There is no difference. Making a copy of a copyrighted work without license or permission is a crime. You don't know where I got the avatar from, who owns the copyright on it or if I have permission to use it, so you can't make any comments about how I use it. Even if you did know any details about it, it'd still be none of your business, because you have no rights on it, no copyright, no license, nothing. Unless you actually do, in which case we can talk about it.

The same applies to forum posts: unless the original author gave permission to use and copy his post, doing so is a crime. Of course the author can end up saying that he doesn't care, which implies permission, but he would have every right to have the unauthorized copy removed if he wanted to. And as long as the author doesn't know that his post was copied, there is no permission, which makes it a crime.

Copyright law actually makes a lot of sense (ignoring certain nonsense aspects like the DMCA), but if you want to understand it, you need to 1) actually read it, and 2) think about it a bit. No guarantees though.

Oh, gotcha. It might still be legally a crime to use that avatar because it's not yours to use but because it's none of my business that makes it okay.

But if it's a person's post on an internet forum and the original poster doesn't know that his "work" is being pasted elsewhere it's still a crime and that's a bad thing.

That makes perfect sense. Thanks for spelling that out for me.

I don't care whose artwork you're using as your avatar. I also don't care who's copy and pasting something I said in a public forum to another forum. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding a judge that would care either.

10.2k · February 11, 2011

You might not end up in court for it, but I'd like to see you explain the difference between using it here and and copy and pasting some piece of text from this post into another forum elsewhere. Are you claiming that it's a victimless crime perhaps? Somebody once told me "There might not be any monetary damage done, but that doesn't make it legal" but I don't remember who that was.

There is no difference. Making a copy of a copyrighted work without license or permission is a crime. You don't know where I got the avatar from, who owns the copyright on it or if I have permission to use it, so you can't make any comments about how I use it. Even if you did know any details about it, it'd still be none of your business, because you have no rights on it, no copyright, no license, nothing. Unless you actually do, in which case we can talk about it.

The same applies to forum posts: unless the original author gave permission to use and copy his post, doing so is a crime. Of course the author can end up saying that he doesn't care, which implies permission, but he would have every right to have the unauthorized copy removed if he wanted to. And as long as the author doesn't know that his post was copied, there is no permission, which makes it a crime.

Copyright law actually makes a lot of sense (ignoring certain nonsense aspects like the DMCA), but if you want to understand it, you need to 1) actually read it, and 2) think about it a bit. No guarantees though.

Oh, gotcha. It might still be legally a crime to use that avatar because it's not yours to use but because it's none of my business that makes it okay.

But if it's a person's post on an internet forum and the original poster doesn't know that his "work" is being pasted elsewhere it's still a crime and that's a bad thing.

That makes perfect sense. Thanks for spelling that out for me.

I don't care whose artwork you're using as your avatar. I also don't care who's copy and pasting something I said in a public forum to another forum. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding a judge that would care either.

Does this mean Sexual Harassemnt Panda from South Park is a bad idea? :unsure:

2.1k · February 11, 2011

There is no copyright. At all. What-so-ever. There's nothing to be owned by you or Groundspeak.

Not true. Anything that I write, I can be presumed to own the copyright on. My question is, is there something in the TOS on this site that transfers that copyright to Groundspeak, or is it retained by me?

From the US Copyright Office FAQ:

What is copyright?

Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright covers both published and unpublished works.

What I write here is an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. When I hit "post," it becomes a published work.

But I'm reading your post in New Zealand. Does US copyright law apply to me?

If I steal your "published work" and post it on a server located in Dagitstan what laws are being broken?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_international_copyright_agreements

2.1k · February 11, 2011

I don't care whose artwork you're using as your avatar. I also don't care who's copy and pasting something I said in a public forum to another forum. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding a judge that would care either.

If you should run into an owner of intellectual property who cares enough to file the appropriate papers in Federal Court, you will meet a judge who cares. Or at least, one who has enough respect for the law to pretend to care.

4.2k · February 11, 2011

I don't care whose artwork you're using as your avatar. I also don't care who's copy and pasting something I said in a public forum to another forum. I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding a judge that would care either.

If you should run into an owner of intellectual property who cares enough to file the appropriate papers in Federal Court, you will meet a judge who cares. Or at least, one who has enough respect for the law to pretend to care.

Now on this point I somewhat agree. But as I'm not using the above mentioned avatar and as I didn't create the image I personally don't care.

I spent a little time trying to find a case where an IP was used without permission, specifically in an internet forum, and it went to case without some claim of damages. I can only find any cases where the person using the IP was trying to do so for profit. I can't find any cases where Bob sued Billy just because Bob didn't want Billy copy and pasting his words and the judge said "bad Billy, you're wrong don't ever do it again. Oh and also... pay Bob a million bucks just because."

Usually, the worst that happens when somebody uses an image on a website without permission is that the IP owner's lawyer (or the IP owner using The Big Book of Scary Legal Language) sends the offender an email or letter that says basically "stop using this image on your site or we will escalate to The Next Step." The Next Step is usually contacting the host service that owns the machines the website is stored on. Usually either the person running the website or the host will pull the image and it never goes to court.

But that's artwork- images. I can't find anything like this as it relates to actual typed words in a forum.

So if somebody can find legal precedent where words typed in a forum were re-posted in another forum (not a book sold for profit) and somebody went to court to make them stop then I'd love to read about it.

3.1k · February 11, 2011

Most of their listed caches were taken from GC

The listings were crossposted by their respective owners, who have every right to do so.

I've heard people complain about their caches being listed on "that" website without their knowledge or permission.

Perhaps they should direct their complaints to someone who can do something about it. I'd suggest starting with the agent mentioned in "their" Terms of Use Agreement:

Our Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Copyright Infringement can be reached as follows:

By Email:

copyright@garmin.com

By Mail:

DMCA Designated Agent

Attn: Legal Department

Garmin International, Inc.

1200 East 151st Street

Olathe, KS 66062

I know they're hard up for caches, but hey, I thought we "owned" our caches and Groundspeak was just a listing service?

While this means I could list it anywhere I want, I wonder what it means as far as others listing my cache elsewhere?

Yes, you own the caches that you've placed. You also own the copyright to the cache descriptions that you wrote and Groundspeak published. Yes, you can submit those same cache descriptions to be published on other web sites, if you like. No, others cannot submit your listings for publication; if they do, then notify the appropriate agent with your claim of copyright infringement.

4.2k · February 11, 2011

Yes, you own the caches that you've placed. You also own the copyright to the cache descriptions that you wrote and Groundspeak published. Yes, you can submit those same cache descriptions to be published on other web sites, if you like. No, others cannot submit your listings for publication; if they do, then notify the appropriate agent with your claim of copyright infringement.

I agree with you, but... The real issue here is that there are no stop-gaps in place to prevent this from happening up front. I don't like it one bit, but due to the incredible lack of participation in my area (indeed, the world) I've chosen not to be too upset about it- personally, in regards to my own caches. I do think that cachers that know it's happened to them should pursue getting them removed from that site if they want to, but I think it's sad that they even have to.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Castle Mischief

3.1k · February 11, 2011

Yes, you own the caches that you've placed. You also own the copyright to the cache descriptions that you wrote and Groundspeak published. Yes, you can submit those same cache descriptions to be published on other web sites, if you like. No, others cannot submit your listings for publication; if they do, then notify the appropriate agent with your claim of copyright infringement.

I agree with you, but... The real issue here is that there are no stop-gaps in place to prevent this from happening up front. I don't like it one bit, but due to the incredible lack of participation in my area (indeed, the world) I've chosen not to be too upset about it- personally, in regards to my own caches. I do think that cachers that know it's happened to them should pursue getting them removed from that site if they want to, but I think it's sad that they even have to.

I agree with you that it's sad when things like this happen, just like it's sad when vandalism occurs. At least in the case of copyright infringement over "there", a relatively easy solution seems to exist.

It would be nice if "they" were more proactive in preventing copyright infringement from occurring. On the other hand, I doubt Groundspeak is any more proactive. (It should be noted that Groundspeak also has a Copyright Agent who can be contacted regarding infringement claims.)

19k · February 11, 2011

That is only the first of several hits that I found on a search. I don't care enough about this to dig through all of the results, but if someone has a mind to, here's the search results: http://www.intelprop...&action=search2

I posted the above link to a website that appers to be a much better authority than our own opinions and guesses. Has anybody yet taken the time to read what they say, instead of speculating?

6.7k · February 11, 2011

Yes, you own the caches that you've placed. You also own the copyright to the cache descriptions that you wrote and Groundspeak published. Yes, you can submit those same cache descriptions to be published on other web sites, if you like. No, others cannot submit your listings for publication; if they do, then notify the appropriate agent with your claim of copyright infringement.

I agree with you, but... The real issue here is that there are no stop-gaps in place to prevent this from happening up front. I don't like it one bit, but due to the incredible lack of participation in my area (indeed, the world) I've chosen not to be too upset about it- personally, in regards to my own caches. I do think that cachers that know it's happened to them should pursue getting them removed from that site if they want to, but I think it's sad that they even have to.

I agree with you that it's sad when things like this happen, just like it's sad when vandalism occurs. At least in the case of copyright infringement over "there", a relatively easy solution seems to exist.

It would be nice if "they" were more proactive in preventing copyright infringement from occurring. On the other hand, I doubt Groundspeak is any more proactive. (It should be noted that Groundspeak also has a Copyright Agent who can be contacted regarding infringement claims.)

How are they to go about preventing this from happening?

3.1k · February 11, 2011

It would be nice if "they" were more proactive in preventing copyright infringement from occurring.

How are they to go about preventing this from happening?

While it's unlikely one can completely prevent this from happening, one could be more proactive. For example, before putting a cache out for peer review, one first could use the coordinates to determine if another cache with the same description appears on another web site. If it does, they could send a note to the cache owner seeking confirmation that permission was granted to use the cache description. I'm not holding my breath for this to happen, though.

6.7k · February 11, 2011

Seems like you just want to complicate things to the point that they will not work. Who is going to check on these things? If they are going to review every cache before they list it why would they use a peer review system? On this end don't the reviewers have enough to do without searching other sites?

1.8k · February 11, 2011

On this end don't the reviewers have enough to do without searching other sites?

Yes. I think if someone were to start a thread here suggesting that Groundspeak reviewers check other sites to make sure that the caches weren't already listed there / owned by someone else, the response would not be favorable.

The system of allowing people to report problems seems to work. I'm not aware of any cache listings misappropriated on the other site that weren't cleared up quickly after contact with OC.com (assuming that people made contact; it may not have gone as quickly if people refused to make contact on principle).

7k · February 11, 2011

But that's artwork- images. I can't find anything like this as it relates to actual typed words in a forum.

Maybe you should look a bit further than forum posts then. It doesn't matter what it is, text, images, music, sounds, it's all equally protected by copyright law, no matter who made it or where it was posted or published, as long as it qualifies as a creative work. Obviously short posts ("me too") won't qualify, but any one of the more extensive posts here (toz? :lol: ) easily does.

So if somebody can find legal precedent where words typed in a forum were re-posted in another forum (not a book sold for profit) and somebody went to court to make them stop then I'd love to read about it.

There's no need for a precedent, it already is protected by law. Just because nobody ever bothered to take it to a serious level (or maybe somebody did, who knows) doesn't make it ok. You created it, it's yours and nobody may copy it without your permission.

Edited February 11, 2011 by dfx

6.7k · February 11, 2011

But that's artwork- images. I can't find anything like this as it relates to actual typed words in a forum.

Maybe you should look a bit further than forum posts then. It doesn't matter what it is, text, images, music, sounds, it's all equally protected by copyright law, no matter who made it or where it was posted or published, as long as it qualifies as a creative work. Obviously short posts ("me too") won't qualify, but any one of the more extensive posts here (toz? ) easily does.

So if somebody can find legal precedent where words typed in a forum were re-posted in another forum (not a book sold for profit) and somebody went to court to make them stop then I'd love to read about it.

There's no need for a precedent, it already is protected by law. Just because nobody ever bothered to take it to a serious level (or maybe somebody did, who knows) doesn't make it ok. You created it, it's yours and nobody may copy it without your permission.

How about quoting? If I go to that other site and quote something said here, including the source, is there any legal issue?

3.1k · February 11, 2011

Seems like you just want to complicate things to the point that they will not work. Who is going to check on these things? If they are going to review every cache before they list it why would they use a peer review system? On this end don't the reviewers have enough to do without searching other sites?

It might seem that way to you, but it's not what I was suggesting. You asked how this type of thing could be prevented, and I gave you an example of how web sites could be more proactive if they wanted to be.

While it would be nice if my local streets were cleared of snow more quickly, I don't expect them to be. While it would be nice if web sites were more proactive about copyright infringements, I don't expect them to be.

I pointed out that both "they" and Groundspeak have people you can contact regarding copyright infringements. I'm satisfied with this arrangement.

1.8k · February 11, 2011

How about quoting? If I go to that other site and quote something said here, including the source, is there any legal issue?

IANAL but I suspect that would qualify as Fair Use. It might be interpreted differently if you were obscuring the source, profiting in a more direct way, or mass-producing the effort.

To knowschad, I tried to use the link you listed but wasn't able to put together an effective search. (Turns out searching a forum for the word 'forums' results in a tidal wave of false positives).

6.7k · February 11, 2011

How about quoting? If I go to that other site and quote something said here, including the source, is there any legal issue?

IANAL but I suspect that would qualify as Fair Use. It might be interpreted differently if you were obscuring the source, profiting in a more direct way, or mass-producing the effort.

To knowschad, I tried to use the link you listed but wasn't able to put together an effective search. (Turns out searching a forum for the word 'forums' results in a tidal wave of false positives).

And that is my understanding. But like you I am no lawyer. However, I think it pretty much sums up what GeoGeeBee was looking for.

Thank you all for the helpful answers.

The reason I'm asking is that I just now, for the first time, took a look at the forum on a certain other website which shall remain nameless. It appears that they not only import geocache listings from this site (presumably with the permission of the owners), they also are cutting and pasting entire forum posts from this site for discussion over there.

I was pretty sure that such use violated the TOS here.

So the question is, did they site the source of the copied material?

1.8k · February 11, 2011

So the question is, did they site the source of the copied material?

I am positive I didn't see all of them. But in a couple of threads I clicked around in, I saw two. In both cases the material was presented in a quote box, and both sourced the quote with the gc.com username from the original post. Also in both cases reference was made to the post originally appearing on these forums (not addressing Groundspeak by name but referenced as 'the other site', which seems to be common in both places when referring to the other in a neutral tone).

Like I said, I'm sure I didn't see every relevant post. But the two I saw didn't seem to be a problem.

February 11, 2011

"Not true. Anything that I write, I can be presumed to own the copyright on. My question is, is there something in the TOS on this site that transfers that copyright to Groundspeak, or is it retained by me?"

Copyright © 2011 by bflentje

I know you're joking, but I still want to point out that this is not how it works. Copyright is a "natural" law, there's no need to declare anything as being copyrighted or to protect it. Whoever creates something new automatically owns the copyright.

The hard part is proving that something is new. Just because you type it and hit doesn't mean it is your intellectual property. If your buddy told you something last night and you post it today, who owns the copyright?

7k · February 11, 2011

The hard part is proving that something is new. Just because you type it and hit doesn't mean it is your intellectual property. If your buddy told you something last night and you post it today, who owns the copyright?

Very valid point when it comes to defending IP. In your example, provided what was said was extensive enough to qualify as a creative work (which probably never happens in a regular conversation) and you reproduced it mostly verbatim (as opposed to just paraphrasing it), then technically your friend owns the copyright. He'd have no way of proving that though.

2.1k · February 11, 2011

The hard part is proving that something is new. Just because you type it and hit doesn't mean it is your intellectual property. If your buddy told you something last night and you post it today, who owns the copyright?

Very valid point when it comes to defending IP. In your example, provided what was said was extensive enough to qualify as a creative work (which probably never happens in a regular conversation) and you reproduced it mostly verbatim (as opposed to just paraphrasing it), then technically your friend owns the copyright. He'd have no way of proving that though.

No, I think you are wrong. A copyright exists when a work is created in a fixed form. Your friend tells you a story in a bar -- if there is no one taping it, that is not a fixed form. No copyright. You write it down. Now it is in a fixed form, there is a copyright.

7k · February 11, 2011

No, I think you are wrong. A copyright exists when a work is created in a fixed form. Your friend tells you a story in a bar -- if there is no one taping it, that is not a fixed form. No copyright. You write it down. Now it is in a fixed form, there is a copyright.

You may be right - I can't say I've ever investigated into this aspect of it.

4.2k · February 11, 2011

No, I think you are wrong. A copyright exists when a work is created in a fixed form. Your friend tells you a story in a bar -- if there is no one taping it, that is not a fixed form. No copyright. You write it down. Now it is in a fixed form, there is a copyright.

You may be right - I can't say I've ever investigated into this aspect of it.

I suppose that if the bartender overheard the conversation, which included you telling your friend that it was a great story. And you took that story and sold it to a film company for a substantial amount of money, there might be an IP issue. Or your friend might no longer be a friend.

And I suppose that if I posted a great geocaching story on this forum about going to Bolivia and using the Groundspeak submarine and helicopter armada to track down a cache that had never been found and somebody took the story and made a motion picture out of it that broke open the market (Splinterheads not withstanding) I might have an interesting case.

But all I know is that when somebody copied and pasted entire sections from a website I used to own, and used them verbatim without any attribution, it took a lot of effort to work things out.

7.9k · February 12, 2011

My first thought was...'Who flippin' cares!'

If you are considering posting something that could be considered secret proprietary information...

JUST DON'T DO IT!

I really don't see how a bunch of goofballs arguing about the esoteric intricacies of some online game should even be worthy of such a question.

4.2k · February 12, 2011

But that's artwork- images. I can't find anything like this as it relates to actual typed words in a forum.

Maybe you should look a bit further than forum posts then.

Um. No. Because the thread was about forum posts, the discussion was about forum posts. Find me a case about forum posts.

There's no need for a precedent, it already is protected by law. Just because nobody ever bothered to take it to a serious level (or maybe somebody did, who knows) doesn't make it ok. You created it, it's yours and nobody may copy it without your permission.

Here we go again. Are we talking about legal or are we talking about "ok"? If I take every word you've typed and re-post to my Facebook profile is that "ok"? Maybe not. Is it going to win you a settlement in a court. Don't bet on it? Will it land me in the big boy prison? Not likely.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Castle Mischief

1.4k · February 12, 2011

Here we go again. Are we talking about legal or are we talking about "ok"? If I take every word you've typed and re-post to my Facebook profile is that "ok"? Maybe not. Is it going to win you a settlement in a court. Don't bet on it? Will it land me in the big boy prison? Not likely.

We're talking legal here. He can get Facebook to remove his content and if they receive enough complaints about you they may just close your Facebook account.

Copyright on Forum posts

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation