|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 15:57:20 GMT -5
All: I received notice today from Proboard that they had removed a thread on the board because of copyright violations initiated by someone associated with a member of the Beatles. (Yes, I know who it is.) I don't know any details on what or why (and I'm not sure I'll be able to find out). But from this point forward, we're (John and me) are going to be stricter about what goes on the board. That includes pictures and videos. These are monitored by the Beatle trust. (I know from experience elsewhere.)
I will be posting new rules regarding posts soon. In the meantime, watch what you do, please.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 11, 2014 16:03:21 GMT -5
This is very intriguing, to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 16:18:09 GMT -5
This is very intriguing, to say the least. I have other words for it. Scary, strange ...
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 16:20:13 GMT -5
To be a little more specific, it was the Lennon estate. Please keep any comments on the board about the nature of violations and not about people.
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Feb 11, 2014 16:58:42 GMT -5
Which thread was it?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 17:00:24 GMT -5
I don't know and I'm not sure I'll even be able to find out. I have the thread link (which, of course, is dead), but not the title.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 11, 2014 17:28:55 GMT -5
I quickly looked but off hand didn't see any glaring missing Threads. Certainly not in the 50th Anniversary Board which has some of the newer Threads.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 18:05:38 GMT -5
Apparently, it was just a post that removed, in reading through the complaint.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 18:15:14 GMT -5
I've updated the rules with added rules for copyright and libel. Copyright rules are no brainers. And be careful with what you say and how you say it. The moderators (especially me) thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 11, 2014 18:28:28 GMT -5
Brrrrr... this is weird because it's so mysterious. I can understand someone (famous?) being displeased regarding the non-permitted usage of copyrighted material (like a video or a photo). But if it's about something someone has posted (said) .... that is just bizarre. I mean, how are we to know how far this is to be taken when it comes to writing opinions, and so forth?
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 18:37:14 GMT -5
Use common sense, Joe. If you call someone a derogatory name, that's probably taking it too far. And I just deleted a few things that fell into that category.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 18:54:09 GMT -5
Let me make one other point: Free speech does not exist here. Anything is subject to being deleted.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 11, 2014 19:06:37 GMT -5
Steve - please understand that I wasn't talking about you or the regular members here. I was wondering who was offended out there from the Estate, and how are we to know what we can and can't write regarding them? I'm glad I'm always speaking up in defense of Yoko.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 11, 2014 19:33:54 GMT -5
Steve - please understand that I wasn't talking about you or the regular members here. I was wondering who was offended out there from the Estate, and how are we to know what we can and can't write regarding them? I'm glad I'm always speaking up in defense of Yoko. Again, common sense, Joe. You can be critical, just not derogatory. Yeah, I could be overreacting, but I'm the one under the gun here.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 11, 2014 19:37:33 GMT -5
I understand.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Feb 13, 2014 21:16:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Snookeroo on Feb 15, 2014 10:33:14 GMT -5
Probably a YouTube video. Clips from LET IT BE are always getting removed from YouTube.
As far as Yoko goes, what horrible comments can be hurled at that now that haven't been hurled in the past. Anyway, she's above letting that be an issue. Steve mentioned "copyright", so it must involve video, or music. I would imagine that as long as it's removed then there's no big problem
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Feb 17, 2014 5:03:51 GMT -5
Just to be on the s*fe s*de, I'm going to make s*re my pr*f*n*ty is d*livered in as c*rc*mspect a f*shion as p*ssible from n*w onw*rds.
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Feb 17, 2014 8:30:11 GMT -5
It's the same old song...
Copyright, Johnny!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2014 2:53:32 GMT -5
I'm not much of a Lennon fan nowadays so i'll do my best not to offend the estate.
Imagine no videos, it isn't hard to do..
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 2, 2014 11:12:12 GMT -5
Actually, I think it was a comment that did it. Not that I want to censor comments, but be cautious on the critical comments. You can criticize, but don't call people names. Nothing has happened since I got the word, btw.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Apr 2, 2014 17:03:03 GMT -5
I got to thinking it might had been an avatar I used for about a day and a half.
I took the picture of John from Dec 8th where he had his eyes closed and photo shopped it into the cartoon drawing of John that I use now and then. It looked pretty creepy so I ditched it pretty quick.
I personally try not to say anything I wouldn't say if the person was present, although I might forget that here and there.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Apr 3, 2014 10:30:23 GMT -5
I got to thinking it might had been an avatar I used for about a day and a half. I took the picture of John from Dec 8th where he had his eyes closed and photo shopped it into the cartoon drawing of John that I use now and then. It looked pretty creepy so I ditched it pretty quick. I personally try not to say anything I wouldn't say if the person was present, although I might forget that here and there. Avatars can't be googled, I don't think. Words can. Which is why I think it was that.
|
|