Board index › Administration › WrongPlanet.net discussion

Question about copyright link

Page 1 of 2 [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Jayzz
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Age: 68
Gender: Female
Posts: 3

06 Jan 2012, 10:19 pm

My daughter is thinking about registering for Wrong Planet, but cannot open the "forums ©" link at the bottom of each forum. She gets a blank white popup every time she tries (so do I). Is it anything that might apply to her posts? If so, what is the popup supposed to say? Thank you.



Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

06 Jan 2012, 10:22 pm

I'm quite sure that's just meant to show copyright information relating to the software used on the website. Nothing that would effect you.



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

06 Jan 2012, 11:37 pm

If the ToS is anything to go by, apparently anything posted on WP is copyrighted to the owners:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/tos.txt

Quote:
Rights
----------------------
WrongPlanet.net reserves full rights to information and content posted anywhere within the
wrongplanet.net domain by any of its visitors, members, and staff.

By posting to the forums, or any other sections of this site, you signify agreement that you
are giving WrongPlanet permission to use, modify, and reproduce your submission, in part or
in whole, in any way, shape, form, or method in which we decide to do so, at any point in
the present or future at our discretion.

Any and all information posted on WrongPlanet.net] may not be copied or used elsewhere, in
any way, shape, or form, either on the Internet or in print without express written consent
of an owner of WrongPlanet.net.


So yeah, be careful on what you post here. The ambiguity on how that first and last part is written could be interpreted to mean, "Wrongplanet.net inherits the copyright of all posts made on any part of its site"


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

07 Jan 2012, 11:07 am

That same term is on almost every website which allows users to post things, BTW.



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 11:28 am

Asp-Z wrote:
That same term is on almost every website which allows users to post things, BTW.


Actually not quite and for good legal reason as to claim copyright over user content, inherits the liabilities of said content too, regardless of this:

Quote:
Responsibilities
----------------------
As a registered member, you are held solely and personally responsible for any libelous,
defamatory, or slanderous remarks about a person or company made in your posts.


It also render the responsibilities part of the ToS null and void because you can't hold responsibility for content that's no longer legally yours to own.

Usually most ToS statement usually are more explicit on issues like that. Look at this part of Youtube's ToS regarding ownership rights:

Quote:
C. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, publish, adapt, make available online or electronically transmit... blah blah blah.


A lot smarter way of ensuring their ass is covered from direct lawsuits and public outrage while still allowing themselves to use your content as they please.


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

07 Jan 2012, 11:31 am

Huh, didn't know that. Interesting.

I have read a lot of things about how Twitter, Facebook, and lots of image hosting sites own your tweets/status updates/photos though.



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 11:39 am

Asp-Z wrote:
Huh, didn't know that. Interesting.

I have read a lot of things about how Twitter, Facebook, and lots of image hosting sites own your tweets/status updates/photos though.


Heh, speaking of Twitter, it seems they took the same page from the book of ToS Writing:

Quote:
Your Rights

You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).


But you see what I mean now? None of them would dare risk claiming copyright/ownership of user generated content as it passes the issues of liabilities to them. Like I said, you can't be held responsible for something you no longer own, in a court of law sense. ;)


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

07 Jan 2012, 11:41 am

Must have just been the photos they own rights to then. Thanks for correcting me there :P

Are you a lawyer? :P



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 11:50 am

Asp-Z wrote:
Must have just been the photos they own rights to then. Thanks for correcting me there :P

Are you a lawyer? :P


Not really, just very observant. But still, there's of course obfuscation at play with ToS statements, but at least they acknowledge ownership as yours. By doing so, they can't threaten or sue you for let's say, re-quoting your own twitter status elsewhere. WP ToS on the other, could file lawsuits against you for re-posting your own content elsewhere with how it's written.

However ToS's are usually written in a way where you can't object to how they use your content and that's the trickery right there. So if they capitalize on it, you're still screwed unfortunately but hey, at least you still "own" it and should it cause a legal s***storm, guess which direction that said storm is heading? :P

It's not much better, but still there's a significant difference.


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

07 Jan 2012, 11:53 am

So basically all they're doing in real terms is covering their own asses? :P



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 11:58 am

Asp-Z wrote:
So basically all they're doing in real terms is covering their own asses? :P


Of course, and making it sound better too. :P

But as a bonus, they can't sue you for re-posting your contents elsewhere as you still own it. If they try, you can argue that as part of your defence in court.


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


Asp-Z
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Dec 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,018

07 Jan 2012, 11:59 am

Well that's good at least :P



sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

07 Jan 2012, 1:09 pm

Copyrights != Ownership

Even if a site assumes copyright status over a work, they don't necessarily assume liability for what's posted. 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) indemnifies website owners, ISPs, etc. from content posted by users of that website/service/etc.



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 7:59 pm

Sounds a bit flimsy though. Most other websites ensure that you at least 'own' your content but are allowed to use it as they see fit.

But according to this provision, WP has full rights, which would naturally include right of ownership:

Quote:
WrongPlanet.net reserves full rights to information and content posted anywhere within the
wrongplanet.net domain by any of its visitors, members, and staff.


In layman's term, this means that not only have copyright over the content, but they own it too.

Also 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(2) would come into force then in a technicality that the user is not the intellectual property owner but WP is:

Quote:
(2) No effect on intellectual property law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property.


I guess it boils down to defining what, "Full rights" means in WP's ToS. If it only means copyrights, then 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) protects it definitely, but if it claims ownership, then it does not as 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) will conflict with IP law and 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(2) declares that IP law will not be effected by it. That ambiguty would have to be resolved, otherwise the ToS has a loophole.


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales


sliqua-jcooter
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,488
Location: Burke, Virginia, USA

07 Jan 2012, 8:26 pm

Nexus wrote:
Sounds a bit flimsy though. Most other websites ensure that you at least 'own' your content but are allowed to use it as they see fit.

But according to this provision, WP has full rights, which would naturally include right of ownership:

Quote:
WrongPlanet.net reserves full rights to information and content posted anywhere within the
wrongplanet.net domain by any of its visitors, members, and staff.


In layman's term, this means that not only have copyright over the content, but they own it too.

Also 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(2) would come into force then in a technicality that the user is not the intellectual property owner but WP is:

Quote:
(2) No effect on intellectual property law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property.


I guess it boils down to defining what, "Full rights" means in WP's ToS. If it only means copyrights, then 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) protects it definitely, but if it claims ownership, then it does not as 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1) will conflict with IP law and 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(2) declares that IP law will not be effected by it. That ambiguty would have to be resolved, otherwise the ToS has a loophole.


230(e)(2) places limits on the kinds of disputes that are not covered, meaning a dispute over the intellectual property of a post would leave WP viable (which is where the DMCA starts to come into play) - but any other kind of dispute is irrelevant. Meaning, for example, you can't sue WP for something someone posted about you (defamation of character). Ownership is generally a separate issue from "rights" in US law. Whereas generally ownership is almost always retained by the person who authored the piece, rights can and are frequently assigned away.



Nexus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 833
Location: On I2

07 Jan 2012, 9:13 pm

There's still one detail that concerns me though and that is this:

Quote:
Any and all information posted on WrongPlanet.net may not be copied or used elsewhere, in
any way, shape, or form, either on the Internet or in print without express written consent
of an owner of WrongPlanet.net.


And this:

Quote:
Enforcement of Copyright
----------------------
WrongPlanet will enforce its copyright. If we become aware of a user's violation of the
copyright, a note will be sent to that user requesting the user to remove the infringement
from that individual's or company's website or other place of publication. If the user or
organization does not comply with this request, access to WrongPlanet may be revoked and
WrongPlanet may send the infringing individual or organization a desist letter. If the
individual or organization does not comply with the cease and desist letter, we will
consider taking legal action.


Is this basically saying that if I re-post my own post elsewhere, I could be threatened with a cease-and-desist by WP or at least be banned for ToS violation; or is this provision null and void for user content and only applies to administrative content made by the site owners?


_________________
"Have a nice apocalypse" - Southland Tales