How do YOU define Intellectual Property?

[M&M]

A conversation elsewhere resulted in me making this observation. On TOB, one frequently sees a situation where a post is quoted by another poster, for the stated purpose of retaining it's original content, so the OP can't go back and delete or edit the post after controversy ensues. It fascinates me as a group behavior - the anticipating the train wreck mentality. I just imagine the disappointment when one doesn't ensue. But in light of this discussion about control of one's posts, it certainly is interesting. Obviously, people use the quote feature all the time, but that usage is specifically designed to eliminate the author's control over his or her words.

[Paints]

Re: the Truck thread. Yes, it is hilarious. But think of this. That thread, taken out of context, to a new location, such as Facebook. where the original author may not even know it exists, but there it is. Somehow, that content, which is more than a little "racey" and is downright porn in a sneaky way finds it way "out" of a supposedly protected area. Now... someone who is a teacher, whose "handle" becomes known, is found to have posted comments on that thread. You do realize that could be grounds for dismissal. So "your" response is .... but they could do that on UDBB too. Yes.... IF, they thought to look on a dressage based horse forum for that information. But, within that were/are anonymous names. Once that information is attached to a "person" on Facebook, its not much for nasty people to go hunting and figure out who the posters are, especially if they want to do damage. And that person may well have nothing to do with horses. Just with the people IRL.

From Digihorse's post - sorry couldn't find the quote feature.

First - I have no idea what lead to the demise of the UDBB and have no interest. But I am sure many others often felt like me, when you where posting or reading the UDBB it was a conversation amongst a relatively small group of people. It was so easy to forget that anyone could read it - regardless of whether they were a member or not and even copy it and post it anywhere.

I think we need to take responsibility ourselves as to what we are willing to share on an internet forum. If we have a job such as a teacher then you know what it acceptable to publish in public, because posting on a forum is no different than buying space in your local newspaper and putting your conversation in that space. Well, except the internet is more easily accessed, is free and doesn't line the bottom of birdcages.

If someone posted something on the Truck thread (the absolutely hilarious, classic Truck thread) that would harm them professionally then they were foolish. There is no anonymity despite the username. You have to take some personal responsibility, imho, for what you say here.

Please do not think I am condoning people copying and posting on other sites or outing a user or taking IP without the permission of the creator with or without identifying the creator. I think these activities are unequivocally wrong.

[digihorse]

... Obviously, people use the quote feature all the time, but that usage is specifically designed to eliminate the author's control over his or her words.

Actually, its the feature is not designed for that purpose. It just incorrectly has that behaviour. If someone who programs, would go FIX that, then that problem would disappear. And it truth, all it takes is a change to a database query, and the posts which are quoted should also be deleted if a user chooses.

Chance: You mention the BB format going away because of this issue. It doesn't need to. What needed to happen is Board Owners, (pointing my finger at you) need to put up Terms of Service that cover copyright. Again, this is addressed on the COTH Forums TOS. Any of the major Forums, have adjusted their TOS to cover the IP of the posts of the members. One of the reasons, I've removed most all of my content from LInkedIn, and put it on an outside website, I control, is that they changed their TOS, to state that THEY own all content you post. Period!. That was just not ok with me because that IS personal information.

Paints: I agree. The advent of Facebook and similar changed forever, what was a smaller community feel of the BBs. You always felt like you "knew" people, and would perhaps share things you shouldn't. Because the BBs have always been interest focused asnd smaller, it would have taken a lot more "work" for someone to hunt down damaging posts. (I don't agree with the whole teacher thing. I just know it has happened) Teachers are human too )

I've changed what I post a whole bunch in the last few years. I just don't trust who is out there. I don't trust how this medium of the Internet is used to "harm". It used to be, and still can be, a great resource to share information and have dialogue. But it can also be a way for weak evil minded people to seek out and harm others.

[M&M]

I don't trust how this medium of the Internet is used to "harm". It used to be, and still can be, a great resource to share information and have dialogue. But it can also be a way for weak evil minded people to seek out and harm others.

True dat.

And Digi, I think if the code was fixed so deleting or editing one's post changed it also where quoted, I'm guessing those folks would go to taking a screen shot. Not that I'm trying to teach people how to be assholes.

[digihorse]

I don't trust how this medium of the Internet is used to "harm". It used to be, and still can be, a great resource to share information and have dialogue. But it can also be a way for weak evil minded people to seek out and harm others.

True dat.

And Digi, I think if the code was fixed so deleting or editing one's post changed it also where quoted, I'm guessing those folks would go to taking a screen shot. Not that I'm trying to teach people how to be assholes.

LOL. Yes... if someone is intent on doing damage, they will find a way. That level of work however, would tend to make one understand from the git that the poster with the screenshot was a *)(&(&(*& to begin with.

[M&M]

Which is kind of my take on it when they quote it and then comment "Saving for posterity" or "saving for future reference".

[CanadianTrotter]

Canadian Trotter, it is in theory, because nothing from there will be posted here - or if it is, the mods will delete it. Nothing from there will be accepted here. Therefore, this is a theoretical discussion - or is intended to be. For the sake of argument, assume that there were no illegalities. Those who find it disturbing are not only citing the legalities as why they find it distressing. The reasons aside from the legalities are what I, and I believe Chancellor, are interested in discussing.

I see it as more of a bit of bullying from those who wanted to copy certain UDBB threads and pushing those that disagreed to justify themselves.

Now that I think of it(correct me if I'm wrong), I think I remember Deanna moved UDBB threads to her DD site that she had up temporarily before Chris bought the UDBB.

[CanadianTrotter]

Chance, as far as I remember you and I have never butted heads so this isn't personal. But when you write: "In case it isn't crystal clear, please do not post any content from UDBB to DDBB. This is a completely separate board.
There are too many people threatening litigation if content from UDBB is posted here.

Even if we don't agree with it, it can't be done. Sorry guys. I wish we could too.

By all means, please PM me if you have any questions regarding this rule. As is often the case, a few people ruin it for all.

DDBB is a completely separate entity with no ties to the former UDBB. As such, we would like to remain separate from any pending or future litigation regarding the former UDBB." it feels pretty unwelcoming.

Some of the people accused of threatening litigation have denied it. They have said they are just pointing out the issue. Now maybe you know something I don't. Still not wise to put such things on an internet bulletin board. Nowhere in your sticky do you acknowledge there is an issue, you just blame the people bringing up the issue. To me it feels as if those pointing out the cliff are getting blamed for the existence of the cliff. And posts like the sticky tell us all we could be the future subject of a sticky saying we are part of the few who ruin it for all. That is not a welcoming statement. Not to mention 6c getting banned.

6c was banned? She only has two posts and I didn't see either of them as being wrong or in poor taste.

[CanadianTrotter]

I will revise my statement on that sticky.

Thank you... you deserve credit for this.

[DJR]

CT, just FYI, I didn't bring any UDBB posts to my version of DDBB. I, like most on UDBB when Mark closed it, had no access to it when I started DDBB. And, when I closed my version of DDBB, I saved nothing from it.

[CanadianTrotter]

CT, just FYI, I didn't bring any UDBB posts to my version of DDBB. I, like most on UDBB when Mark closed it, had no access to it when I started DDBB. And, when I closed my version of DDBB, I saved nothing from it.

Really? That's odd.

I have a strong memory of the Truck thread, Blowdrying a Chicken thread, etc.., on the DDBB.

Possibly they were on the just on the UDBB in their own special spot and I have it confused.

[CanadianTrotter]

Not to mention 6c getting banned.

6c was banned? She only has two posts and I didn't see either of them as being wrong or in poor taste.

Bringing this up again because when I searched her on the member list it doesn't show her as banned. I hope she's okay.

[Chancellor]

CT- 6c legs has been removed and I am fairly sure you know that. There will be no more discussion on this topic.

[TequilaMockingbird]

How did this topic become so contentious here? I have participated in countless message boards over the years, most much larger than any dressage board ever known. Yet this is the only place I've encountered that has argued about this on what seems like a near constant basis.

If you don't want people to people to use your posts without your permission, either don't post it on the internet or start your own website and copyright your content.

I haven't read some of these old threads people are referring to (blow drying chickens and such) but these threads give the impression that these stories were on par with David Sedaris.

[M&M]

Canadian Trotter, I again disagree with you. I found the philosophical-only conversation interesting, and, in fact, changed my opinion during the course of this conversation. I know at one other person has as well. Where you saw bullying, I saw discussion. The discussion has had some strong feelings being expressed, and several examples of people hearing each other and walking away from strong feelings because of the discussion.

[DJR]

CT, just FYI, I didn't bring any UDBB posts to my version of DDBB. I, like most on UDBB when Mark closed it, had no access to it when I started DDBB. And, when I closed my version of DDBB, I saved nothing from it.

Really? That's odd.

I have a strong memory of the Truck thread, Blowdrying a Chicken thread, etc.., on the DDBB.

Possibly they were on the just on the UDBB in their own special spot and I have it confused.

As I said, there is no way I could have brought content over from UDBB (after Mark closed it) to my version of DDBB since my DDBB site was opened while the former UDBB was closed. I seem to recall that there was a brief overlap when both DDBB and UDBB were online, but I did not bring content over then, either. Even if I had wanted to, I had nothing saved of mine or anyone else's from UDBB prior to Mark closing it.

There's a possibility that others might have posted saved UDBB content to my version of DDBB (i.e., content THEY saved prior to Mark closing UDBB), but I honestly don't recall. I just know that I personally never did. And, once my version of DDBB closed, all posts went into the ether (I saved nothing).

You're correct that once the new UDBB was resurrected, many of the "favorites" from UDBB were moved to a new "Best of UDBB" forum. That all happened within the UDBB site -- no UDBB content was exported from UDBB in order to set up that forum.

[Ryeissa]

.

[CanadianTrotter]

Ryeissa...

Yep, I am aware that drg and DJR are different people. I just thought that I had seen some of the UDBB threads on the DD site that DJR hosted for a short time before the UDBB came back.

[CanadianTrotter]

CT- 6c legs has been removed and I am fairly sure you know that. There will be no more discussion on this topic.

I didn't realize she had been removed from here... I thought I had heard through the grapevine that it was the UDBB Facebook she had been removed from. I got it confused... my apologies.

[Ryeissa]

.

[Chancellor]

Nothing is going on with the content with regards to this site Ryeissa. Nor will it. I'm guessing that drg won't want to do anything with it either except keep it for herself personally. Too many threats of lawsuits going around.