In the "FWIW" department, RA/PR/S-B has been very friendly with
railroad Historical Societies. What I would do if I were part of the
BRHS is to send them a nice letter, asking them if they (BRHS) could
publish reprints of articles and photographs - though nothing
specific is in the works, we'd like to be able to lay the groundwork
for using such as the need arises. What happened in our case was a
letter (similar to that to which Randy alludes) that provided us
permission plus the correct citation when used. It's not a
get-out-of-jail-free card, but in the case of RA articles, it is nice
to have, and for all I know, given some of the use, the BRHS already has such.
Having said that, I recognize that this list (and the files therein)
do not reflect the BRHS & vice-versa. I would hate *their* (RA)
"good deeds" to end up being punished by indiscriminate use. OTOH, I
can't say I am not interested in the article and it's content. Often
times, a nicely worded letter actually works wonders with such
companies. And, they are happy to have the opportunity to help
(without real cost) and provide a free (via the citation) "ad" that
reconfirms the viability of the company long after many think it's
long gone. A mistake/unintended transgression in the right spirit
(esp. given the no financial gain or loss) likely won't be prosecuted
/ "punished". But, given the warnings and such, were it to happen
again, the issue would be much different, as it would be done
knowingly. And that isn't as easily forgiven.
At 12:07 PM 6/8/2009, you wrote:
>I didn't post the copyright information to start a war or make a
>personal attack on anyone.
>
>10 minutes of research on the internet and then believing what you
>read is legal regarding copyright usage will sooner or later get you
>inextricably mired down with copyright attorneys. I'm not a
>copyright attorney. But I employ one to handle our needs.
>
>Internet usage is a slippery slope. Fair Use most commonly pertains
>to certain, limited parts of an article reprinted in a review, not
>the entire article being reproduced. That is not Fair Use.
>
>The only people Railway Age might pursue would be Mark and Dave.
>Everyone else skates away.
>
>I only posted the information to illuminate the popular
>misconceptions about fair use and public domain. I did that because
>Railway Age/Progressive Railroading are very protective of their
>copyrighted material. The material they published is an asset of
>their corporation. To use it without permission is stealing, like it or not.
>
>So if you are offended by the rules, fine. Do whatever you want.
>
>If you are industrious, call Simmons-Boardman. Ask them about this
>specific article, its intended use and then ask them to send you a
>letter authorizing the use. Upload the letter to the list.
>
>Remember the U.P. licensing fiasco. If these guys think they can
>make a buck they will. They hire outside companies that do nothing
>but troll the internet using sophisticated search engines to look.
>Then they send a letter and an invoice.
>
>So who pays when everyone else skates away? Mark and Dave.
>
>Randy Danniel
>
>
>
>--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, Tim Fleck <tf5077@...> wrote:
> >
> > WAA WAA WAA....
> >
> >
> > What a way to destroy a list...... Let the department of Justice
> who Iam sure has nothing better to do than chase down copyrite
> offenders # 1 No one is using the information for monetary gain. #
> 2 It is being shared for education purposes. A couple of examples
> at which are looked at for infringement.
> >
> > Thanks Mark
> for sharing the information........
> >
> > --- On Sun, 6/7/09, mark.g92753 <markg99051@...> wrote:
> > From: mark.g92753 <markg99051@...>
> > Subject: [CBQ] No good deed goes unpunished
> > To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Sunday, June 7, 2009, 10:57 PM
>This is absolutely ridiculous. I have pulled the file. If anyone
>wants to read the article, e-mail me and I'll send it to you.
> >
> > I am 100 percent confident that there never was any violation of
> anything, and I'm absolutely willing to assume full responsibility.
> Ten minutes of research will yield hundreds of similar examples of
> fair use. But, I see no reason to continue the debate.
> >
> > Thanks for the many kind notes from those of you genuinely
> interested in learning more about the CB&Q and preserving the
> history of the same. I am happy to share new information with
> others as I learn more about the history of the railroad and hope
> to connect with likeminded individuals who will share information
> they discover as well.
> >
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:CBQ-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:CBQ-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|