Resource Copyright and BF- new rules

Remove this Banner Ad

Referring to the sticky above, this means whole articles snipped from online papers/magazines behind pay walls?

What about photos? Eg the Duursma Mark?

As far as we know it is articles in their entirety. A relevant snippet and a photo no dramas, as long as they have the article link in the post to drive traffic to the source.

We had similar concerns over the last year with full articles from The Mongrel Punt being posted and those authors were justifiably miffed their work behind a paywall was being exposed (they were always quite kind and patient when touching base with the mods).
 

Log in to remove this ad.

As far as we know it is articles in their entirety. A relevant snippet and a photo no dramas, as long as they have the article link in the post to drive traffic to the source.

We had similar concerns over the last year with full articles from The Mongrel Punt being posted and those authors were justifiably miffed their work behind a paywall was being exposed (they were always quite kind and patient when touching base with the mods).


Paywall…posting..whole pages?

Schultz defence
 
As far as we know it is articles in their entirety. A relevant snippet and a photo no dramas, as long as they have the article link in the post to drive traffic to the source.

We had similar concerns over the last year with full articles from The Mongrel Punt being posted and those authors were justifiably miffed their work behind a paywall was being exposed (they were always quite kind and patient when touching base with the mods).
So they actually read Big Footy ....😲
 
Bigfooty members release multiple footy angles online for everyone to read for free.

‘Journos’ concoct story by using Bigfooty members info and then hide it behind a paywall.

Bigfooty members must now pay ‘Journos’ to read their original footy angles..

Sounds fair..
 
According to the admin Wosh ...

"Fair dealing in many jurisdictions allows for a small amount of a work to be reproduced for a number of purposes, including parody/satire and criticism or review."

So it's okay to post John Ralph content as long as you take the piss out of him immediately after?
 
According to the admin Wosh ...

"Fair dealing in many jurisdictions allows for a small amount of a work to be reproduced for a number of purposes, including parody/satire and criticism or review."

So it's okay to post John Ralph content as long as you take the piss out of him immediately after?
I think the only reason to post Jon Ralph's content would be to take the piss out of it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's time!

It will be only be time when copyright impacts GIFs and Memes

Season 3 Were All Doomed In The End GIF by A&E
 
It’s Greg Gasometer and it’s Jeff

I deleted the post as it was poor taste

But as Gough Whitlam never said, “fight for your GIFs”
I'm glad we've cleared up the pronunciation issue. Some people mistakenly pronounce GIF as GIF when it should be GIF and obviously, that gets my Joat.

I'm well versed in the Berne convention and I appreciate the need to protect the intellectual property rights of creators, having taken legal action against one of the larger educational institutions in this state (successfully) when they partnered with a larger international organisation to create internet content on behalf of certain interests to the north of Australia and represented about two years of my work as their own, but were stupid enough to leave my email address in the meta data that I'd included for search engine optimisation (in those days, Lycos and Alta Vista).
 
I'm glad we've cleared up the pronunciation issue. Some people mistakenly pronounce GIF as GIF when it should be GIF and obviously, that gets my Joat.

I'm well versed in the Berne convention and I appreciate the need to protect the intellectual property rights of creators, having taken legal action against one of the larger educational institutions in this state (successfully) when they partnered with a larger international organisation to create internet content on behalf of certain interests to the north of Australia and represented about two years of my work as their own, but were stupid enough to leave my email address in the meta data that I'd included for search engine optimisation (in those days, Lycos and Alta Vista).

I once used a photo for the * Thread

Somehow the content owner tracked me down and was told to remove it
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Resource Copyright and BF- new rules

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top