Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Technically, OJ posted a URL (wrapped in IMG HTML); he did not copy the image. Rather, each person, when reading this page, invokes software (a browser) on one's own machine that goes out and fetches that image from the copyright owner's designated server.
It is each browser that integrates and renders the copyrighted material.
I'm now wondering (seriously) whether this is a distinction without a difference. Or is what OJ did more akin posting a URL to a text page, even though each reader gets the content automatically rather than having to explicitly click on a link.
(Now if he'd written a jsp or equivalent to integrate the content on the MFO server, that would have been a lot closer to direct copying. Or would it?)
I like the link-resolving-to-a-cartoon thing, but it does a tiny bit appear that Mr. Adams would like rather more than $100 for the right to use yesterday's Dilbert on a website.
Because we care so durn much (hah!), Chip has contacted an intellectual property attorney - the woman who's handling MFO's trademark filings and such - to get a more definitive opinion. We'll let you know what we hear.
Did Ritholtz ask the same question when he posted the cartoon on his site? Furthermore, if we are LINKING into MFO using an < IMG > tag, that makes the cartoon appear in the post, is not the same thing as grabbing the picture, storing on one's own web server and then posting it on the website.
What I'm saying is if I grab some content of CNN, Yahoo, whatever and copy/paste it then content will get stored on server that hosts the content on which I'm pasting it. However if I'm linking to content on another website (text, picture, whatever), I don't see how it can be copyright violation. Once on web, it should be linkable from anywhere or we don't have an "internet".
@ MFO Members: Same cartoon direct from Scott Adams Website. Now, if I view it its OK, but if I link it, its a copywrite violation, of course not. Come on people lets get serious. Regards, Ted http://www.dilbert.com/strips/2014-09-10/
@ MFO Members: Same cartoon direct from Scott Adams Website. Now, if I view it its OK, but if I link it, its a copywrite violation, of course not.
Ah, but you are stealing the "hits" from his web site and the possibility that someone might want to click on the "SHOP" button and buy a print of the strip, unframed, for $20.
On the other hand I doubt that anything could "go viral" and attract a new and permanent audience for a web site if the web site didn't allow the content to be reposted elsewhere as full content and not just a link. It is my understanding that "going viral" is a real good thing.
There is a "share" button right below the strip. That would seem to alter the complexion of things. And is a way to go viral, I'd guess. (I don't tweet, tumbl, Instagram, Facebook, or similar, so don't know what happens when one "shares" in that fashion. Doesn't it copy something?)
The answer seems to be that there's not really a simple answer. In general, we shouldn't copy other people's work. If we do copy a small portion, we should attribute the work to the author and link back directly to it whenever possible.
In this case, I would say that Ted's link back to the cartoon on the dilbert.com site is probably the safest method for avoiding copyright infringement.
I don't use social media either but from what I understand from the kids, if you click facebook then the Facebook app launches and whatever you share will be put on your page whether it be a link or a picture. Same with Twitter.
Also it probably opens you up to all kinds of spam as the site you share knows you are a fan of sorts and sends you more stuff. It's a vicious circle IMO.
John that helps a little. But what happens when you chose your favorite social media site? Sorry for my keep asking, but it is the social media side that I am unfamiliar with.
I'm guessing a link appears in your Facebook news feed or Twitter feed? If you are not familiar with the tedium of Facebook, you have a profile where you have a feed of general BS ("So and so likes Taco Bell", "So and so just says they had pizza for lunch and you are supposed to give a crap.") and a link to MFO would likely be displayed in your feed that would go out to all of your "friends".
What @Maurice said reminded me of something. The networks are fighting for the younger demographic. This is the key for the future or so they say. No wonder the social media aspect is so big with all these new shows.
Lately I have been watching a new show called Longmire. Well written and it's different from all the other stuff. It has a western bent to it. According to some outlets, Longmire is a big success with higher ratings than Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Sounds good? Well they just cancelled the show because only older people are watching it. They want shows that the young ones will watch.
The networks should learn that us "older people" are an audience too.
I'm not sure if this gives you any better idea of sharing and other Facebook uses @Maurice . Facebook came out during my freshman year of college and we were one of the first universities added. That said, I notice that my use of Facebook diverges from that of those who integrated it with their lives prior to coming to college.
There are many ways that I use social media. I find that with my travelling math team. Announcements about practice times and locations, uploading questions and links for further investigation are all most useful when posted to our Facebook group. Emails tend to be ignored but in the collaborative forum offered online they tend to discuss ideas in greater length and depth, cross linking further ideas for study as well.
When travelling I will announce on Facebook where I'll be staying on what dates and friends will often contact me to set up dinner plans to catch up. Often seeing Friends who had moved without me realizing. Had a delightful dinner in the Zurich airport where a friend and I had simultaneous layovers. It can assist in the creation of serendipity.
There is a tremendous amount of blather, but has served as a sounding board for advice from people I already trust on topics that don't have a clear set of experts. If I've read a particularly interesting article that I am curious what my peers think of or would like to discuss with them I'll share that article, which posts the article title and a small thumbnail and blurb to my newsfeed and pushes that to the newsfeed's of my friends (sometimes marking specific people's names like we do here with @Maurice). I'll usually add what I hope is a particularly thought provoking excerpt to that and receive commentary in impromptu book clubs if you will.
Lots of useless advertising and oversharing (I now know far more about my colleagues divorce than I think appropriate is a recent example). But it has allowed me to maintain meaningful friendships on 4 continents with significantly less effort than might otherwise have occurred.
Comments
OJ
It is each browser that integrates and renders the copyrighted material.
I'm now wondering (seriously) whether this is a distinction without a difference. Or is what OJ did more akin posting a URL to a text page, even though each reader gets the content automatically rather than having to explicitly click on a link.
(Now if he'd written a jsp or equivalent to integrate the content on the MFO server, that would have been a lot closer to direct copying. Or would it?)
Edit: OK, we'll see what the MFO oracle has to say.
Regards,
Ted
Regards- OJ
Because we care so durn much (hah!), Chip has contacted an intellectual property attorney - the woman who's handling MFO's trademark filings and such - to get a more definitive opinion. We'll let you know what we hear.
As ever,
David
weyou have to!OJ
Furthermore, if we are LINKING into MFO using an < IMG > tag, that makes the cartoon appear in the post, is not the same thing as grabbing the picture, storing on one's own web server and then posting it on the website.
What I'm saying is if I grab some content of CNN, Yahoo, whatever and copy/paste it then content will get stored on server that hosts the content on which I'm pasting it. However if I'm linking to content on another website (text, picture, whatever), I don't see how it can be copyright violation. Once on web, it should be linkable from anywhere or we don't have an "internet".
Regards,
Ted
http://www.dilbert.com/strips/2014-09-10/
Dilbert Select Your Own Strip Unframed Print
$19.99
This point was brought up the last time we went through this.
In this case, I would say that Ted's link back to the cartoon on the dilbert.com site is probably the safest method for avoiding copyright infringement.
Also it probably opens you up to all kinds of spam as the site you share knows you are a fan of sorts and sends you more stuff. It's a vicious circle IMO.
Lately I have been watching a new show called Longmire. Well written and it's different from all the other stuff. It has a western bent to it. According to some outlets, Longmire is a big success with higher ratings than Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Sounds good? Well they just cancelled the show because only older people are watching it. They want shows that the young ones will watch.
The networks should learn that us "older people" are an audience too.
Edit: OOPS - Just noticed that Chip shared the current legal understanding. Thanks
There are many ways that I use social media. I find that with my travelling math team. Announcements about practice times and locations, uploading questions and links for further investigation are all most useful when posted to our Facebook group. Emails tend to be ignored but in the collaborative forum offered online they tend to discuss ideas in greater length and depth, cross linking further ideas for study as well.
When travelling I will announce on Facebook where I'll be staying on what dates and friends will often contact me to set up dinner plans to catch up. Often seeing Friends who had moved without me realizing. Had a delightful dinner in the Zurich airport where a friend and I had simultaneous layovers. It can assist in the creation of serendipity.
There is a tremendous amount of blather, but has served as a sounding board for advice from people I already trust on topics that don't have a clear set of experts. If I've read a particularly interesting article that I am curious what my peers think of or would like to discuss with them I'll share that article, which posts the article title and a small thumbnail and blurb to my newsfeed and pushes that to the newsfeed's of my friends (sometimes marking specific people's names like we do here with @Maurice). I'll usually add what I hope is a particularly thought provoking excerpt to that and receive commentary in impromptu book clubs if you will.
Lots of useless advertising and oversharing (I now know far more about my colleagues divorce than I think appropriate is a recent example). But it has allowed me to maintain meaningful friendships on 4 continents with significantly less effort than might otherwise have occurred.