[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Killietalk] The "Drake Equation" was RE: Question
Mark - That's not realistic. You're talking about hundreds and perhaps a
thousand individual permissions. By making the record uneditable (it
absolutely should not be available in Word) and the photos uncopyable, AKA
avoids being in a potential position of abetting copyright infringement.
Copyright law is complex and expensive to ignore. Putting all that together
with a search function is a complicated and difficult job best left to
experts. For those who want Christmas now, there is always the alternative
of DIY. - Bob Goldstein
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Delraso" <altos at att_net>
To: "killifish discussion list" <killietalk at aka_org>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Killietalk] The "Drake Equation" was RE: Question
> Unless permission is given!
>
> Mark DelRaso
>
> Brian Watters <bwatters at shaw_ca> wrote:
> Ken, you cannot legally do what you suggest because it would be an
> infringement of copyright and, if you don't believe me, consult a
> copyright
> lawyer. The mere fact that you are an AKA member does not give you the
> right
> to copy and distribute AKA materials. You can make copies for your own,
> personal, use but nothing beyond that.
> ___________________________
> Brian Watters
> 6141 Parkwood Drive
> Nanaimo, BC, V9T 6A2
> Canada
> Ph: (250) 760-0564
> E-mail: bwatters at shaw_ca
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: killietalk-bounces at aka_org [mailto:killietalk-bounces at aka_org]On
>> Behalf Of Ken
>> Sent: December 7, 2007 10:56 AM
>> To: 'Wright Huntley'; 'killifish discussion list'
>> Subject: Re: [Killietalk] The "Drake Equation" was RE: Question
>>
>>
>> Wright, everyone (excuse the multi-long-post, but this is a constructive
>> stimulating conversation)
>> ...
>> If someone (with good intentions or otherwise) has taken ownership of the
>> thing, but (for whatever reason) has not delivered unto us what we
>> demand/whine about, then we as a club/collective always have the option
>> to
>> simply take the thing back by doing it ourselves...
>>
>> We all know people appreciate a thing a lot more if their own sweat is
>> involved (understanding that group "sweat" is often be more bonding than
>> divisive, this thing probably shudda been a "open source" deal to begin
>> with)...additionally, we also know greed & bargains are good
>> motivators...
>>
>> So I propose you/we/whomever post all the issues that have already been
>> "electronically" converted and proofed... and likewise post a list of any
>> missing issues (assuming we are missing any)
>>
>> Now we offer say 10% off the "final" DVD to anyone submitting "unique"
>> raw
>> scanned JAKA's (at a given pre-agreed DPI & image quality)
>>
>> ...and say offer 33% off for "unique/missing" scanned JAKA's with proofed
>> "plain text" along separate raw image files (again of a set given
>> standard)
>>
>> ...and perhaps 50% off for mailing in decent missing back issues
>> (naturally
>> with a set return date and return postage)
>>
>> While I doubt we might get 50 people to submit unique/useable material,
>> there has got to be some "net gain" using the above proposal for
>> a lot less
>> individual effort...and so what we discount and/or giveaway a few
>> DVD's, how
>> much can a plastic DVD cost per unit anyway? (I'm assuming the
>> "master" cost
>> the same sweat/money whether we make 500 or 5000 copies)...
>>
>> And granted; I can envision this request for "sweat donations" to
>> be a total
>> waste of time, but it can't be any more of a waste of time/effort than
>> has
>> already been spent at this point
>>
>> KC >
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wright Huntley [mailto:whuntley at verizon_net]
>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 1:10 PM
>> To: ken_combs at sbcglobal.net; killifish discussion list
>> Subject: Re: [Killietalk] The "Drake Equation" was RE: Question
>>
>> Ken wrote:
>> > I thought I'd take a stab at humor as opposed to directly beating up on
>> one
>> > person or a small group of people over the thing...
>> Good stab, Ken. It did lighten things up a bit.
>>
>> The kind of public collaboration you suggest is done all the time, these
>> days in a form called "wikis." [Check with Thuan Nguyen of BAKA if you
>> want to help upgrade the current Wikipedia article on killifish.]
>>
>> The problem is one of objective. I regret that my former post on the
>> original thread was taken as sarcasm. My comment as to the rate of
>> technology change vs the project progress was dead serious. I was trying
>> to point out that the desire of earlier BOTs and a few academic types to
>> have a credible academic journal archive in uneditable, permanent form
>> was in conflict with Al's and my desire to just have ready access to the
>> contents. I do not care if it is on the web, on DVD, or any other
>> readily useful form. Just please don't try to deliver it on 3.5"
>> floppies. OK? [That was intentional sarcasm, BTW :-) ]
>>
>> JAKA is not, in general, a scholarly academic refereed journal. It is
>> basically a more-sophisticated-than-usual hobby publication, although
>> some of us might like it to be more than that.
>>
>> I, and I suspect most other authors, don't wish the AKA to act as
>> thought police and mess up the results by trying to use technology to
>> prevent copying. On the contrary, I have not submitted anything to the
>> AKA site gallery, because I simply do not want a "circle c" brand on the
>> caudals. The policy has had exactly the opposite results to what was
>> intended, at least in my case! I tolerate editing for size and color
>> reproduction in a different medium, but not any change in the visual
>> image itself. That, quite simply, makes it someone else's work, and not
>> mine.
>>
>> I could care less if someone wants to use my (unaltered) pictures in a
>> hobby newsletter, but I'm quite capable of bringing suit if they appear
>> in an ad in TFH without my permission. [I like to be asked and given a
>> copy, but always say yes for any legitimate hobby purpose.] Wasting
>> precious volunteer resources and delaying dissemination of valuable
>> information is not a generally good idea (my opinion), when our group is
>> so small, and those resources are so limited. This is a matter of
>> perspective and I know we all have slightly different views of what our
>> hobby represents.
>>
>> It would make the hobby better for a curious type, like me, if the JAKA
>> information was more readily available. It would do little to advance
>> the hobby to make the archived JAKA reprints meet all the needs of
>> academia (but a nice thing for science and posterity).
>>
>> I apologize to my good friend Barry, for not making clear that I was
>> just trying to point out the above differences in objectives, but in a
>> much shorter version. It did sound harsh on re-reading it. ASCII text
>> tends to do that, particularly when prepared by an old curmudgeon. :-[
>>
>> Wright
>>
>> --
>> Wright Huntley - 805 Valley West Cir., Bishop CA 93514
>> whuntley at verizon_net 760 872-3995. Cell 760 937-2276
>>
>> Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/aka/modules/content/index.php?id=9.
>> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
>> Modify your subscription at
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk
>
> Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/aka/modules/content/index.php?id=9.
> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
> Modify your subscription at
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk
>
> Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/aka/modules/content/index.php?id=9.
> Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
> Modify your subscription at
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk
>
Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/aka/modules/content/index.php?id=9.
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/
Modify your subscription at http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/killietalk