Posted on 09/07/2011 9:13:46 AM PDT by BearCreek
Sorry, but snark is no replacement for reason.
FR's policies essentially amount to stealing, or at least extortion of copyrighted material. The law is plain on what is and isn't copyrighted - regardless of whether you like it or not.
Sorry, but I don't buy into the jazz about bloggers just wanting to "use FR as a free resource," especially when you're arguing that FR should basically do the same to them.
Sure, there may be some blog pimps out there who are indeed trying to use FR to pimp a blog that doesn't deserve to be read. Ban them, would be my solution.
There are also a lot of bloggers who have intelligent and insightful contributions to make to our knowledge base. It's not alright to steal content from them, sorry. Frankly, posting up some blog materials that are out there are a stronger contribution to FR than a lot of the drek that gets posted up from "legitimate" news outlets.
And reason is exactly what you lack.
No one here said bloggers couldn’t post, we give them the parameters.
Conflating two issues for one isn’t a very winning strategy. You dilute your point as the two subjects are very different.
If you believe FR policies amount to stealing then go to work for Righthaven, LLC and make your case.
We excerpt articles under fair use. JR and the community have decided that bloggers need to post their content in their entirety.
Don’t like the rules? Then Pound Sand.
Forgot to add IBTZ.
Sure, if a blogger doesn't want his (or her) material posted, then *he* shouldn't post it here.
However, per FR's policies, if *somebody else* posts it up, and has to do so in toto, then yes, that is stealing copyrighted content. I've had people post up entire chapters of my book about Islam on FR. The reasons I haven't said anything about it are because, 1) I like you and FR enough to not raise cain about it, and 2) I'm just happy the info gets out - I don't make a single red cent from anybody viewing my book onlike. Hence, I'm willing to tolerate FReepers stealing my copyrighted content - as a grace, not because I have to.
Look, apparently you're too stupid to understand things at an adult level, so I'll say it more slowly for you.
When. you post. a. blogger's. material. without. their. consent. in. full. which. is. specifically. what. Free. Republic's. rules. about. posting. from. blogs. says. you. have. to. do. then. you. are. using. copyrighted. material. beyond. any. reasonable. definition. of. fair. use. and. are. therefore. stealing. copyrighted. material. That's. what. the. law. says. like. it. or. not.
Likewise. when. you. force. bloggers. to. post. their. material. you. are. extorting. them. of. their. copyrights. Might. as. well. simply. not. let. them. post. blog. material. at. all.
If you believe FR policies amount to stealing then go to work for Righthaven, LLC and make your case.
Are you seriously too dumb to understand the difference here? I mean, really, are you that unable to think this issue through?
Let me essplain it for you, then.
Righthaven was suing FR and other sites for posting portions of news articles that, realistically, would be fair game under fair use rules, as they are currently applied by the courts. Righthaven's major malfunction was in trying to twist the law so that ANY use of copyrighted material, even one sentence, was "infringement," which is clearly not the case.
However, FR's policies stipulate that FReepers have to post the ENTIRE article from blogs - no exceptions. That is a very different matter from the Righthaven issue. Whole article vs. one sentence or paragraph. It's not hard to understand, I'm sure you could, if you applied yourself.
We excerpt articles under fair use.
You know why? Because JR and FR would get their pants sued off if they didn't. The difference is that your average joe schmoe blogger probably doesn't have the resources to mount a legal challenge against FR, and is therefore fair game.
JR and the community have decided that bloggers need to post their content in their entirety.
The law's the law, bubba. JR and the community can vote against the law of gravity and they'd still be stuck to their seats. Likewise, JR and the community aren't free to overrule federal copyright law. Sorry, but they're not.
Don’t like the rules? Then Pound Sand.
So I have to leave because I disagree with the policy? And you're a "conservative"?
You are seriously using a digger where there ain’t no dirt.
Fine. I’ll add your blog to the deny posting list.
So, from your arguments that the blog is yours?
Thanks, Vendome. I appreciate your patience. I’ll try and get the hang of it. By the way, I had to smile at your observation about the “lucrative career” since my decision to go into pro-life ministry 30 years ago pretty much nixed that possibility. :) Again, thanks for you help — and for all the others that chimed in too.
I’m gonna read your article and then I’ll give my comment.
I don’t have a blog, at least not one that has been active within the past year, and even that one is not political. I’m not arguing the way I am because I want to post up blog materials of my own. I’m just taking a stand on principle as I understand it. Honestly, I’m not intending to insult or offend you. I’m just the type of person who doesn’t back down, regardless, and who especially doesn’t back down in the face of implied threats such as Vendome has been using. That just makes me MORe vigourous.
No, I don’t have a blog.
What can I say, I'm a fighter, not a lover.
And technology is what sealed my opinion on abortion.
Years ago there was book published about babies in the womb.
A fiber optic camera, in full color, was used.
At every stage of the development, the unborn is unmistakably a baby. Lovely, experimenting, curious and defenseless.
Their lives are important precisely because they exist and it is our duty to protect them as humans, as Christians.
“Dave Weinbaum, Jeff Head and few others come to mind. They thrive because they respected us and didn’t abuse the community or insult its senses.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeff Head rocks!!!!!
So, if JimRob banned anything written by Tim Dunkin, you would say...
I think your experience is a common one. For my generation, it was those Lennart Nilsson photographs in Life Magazine. But technology in this field (as in so many others) has exploded — 4D ultrasound, fetal surgery, commercials on TV depicting preborn kids! The techniques by which we SEE the development of prenatal life is amazing.
But then, it’s still not as amazing at what’s happening inside that womb.
For a culture that is increasingly visual, these “windows” are critically important to the pro-life movement.
Thanks for your comments. And thanks for trying to help me through the procedures here at FR.
LOL
OMG
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.