Internet Lawyers; Forum Post and Copyrights

Another Tesla forum bitch and complaint. I see everywhere people posting in their signatures that their posts are copyrighted, any quoting of their posts outside of the forum is a violation of copyright law

Every forum I can think of is a private website but in the public domain. When I looked into copyright law it basically states that artistic and literary works; novels, poems, etc can be copyrighted. However you can not copyright an idea or expression (intellectual property), you can only copyright the process in which it is executed (instructions I guess) I don't see forum posts being viewed as artistic expression in any form.

from copyright.gov:

what saith the beeb on copyrighting of fourm posts?

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf

 

No lawyer, but it’s basically no different than taking pictures in public. If you don’t use them for a commercial / business purpose there is very little they can do legally from being quoted etc. Its public.

 

So, sue me.

 

I'd like to see some dope try that crap here. The jackals would be on him like a fat kid on birthday cake.

 

one's perception of the "quality" of the literary work doesn't change its protectability under the copyright act (assuming that it is an original work of authorship).

it is entirely different from taking pictures in public. that something can be seen by the public does not make it public domain.

whether quoting a post (or portion thereof) might be seen as "fair use" of the material can be a detailed inquiry.

whether there are damages sufficient to take legal action against an alleged infringer is an entirely separate matter.... (as motoboy and DaveK so eloquently suggest)

 

That's about as binding as the dump trucks with the "not responsible for broken windshields" signs... If their load isn't properly secured they damn well are liable.

 

without my express consent

Yeah, I'd take that statement really seriously. The author clearly knows what he's up to.

 

ton - interesting. Why do it it if the chances to protect are slim? Prevent commercial use by <example here> Tesla? Ego? Just because?

 

What happens if the forum owners post a rule saying that members forfeit ownership of any content posted on their website?

 

Are the posts any more or less protected with the warning?

 

From http://www.legalline.ca/legal-answers/copyright-laws-and-the-internet/

So, in theory, it could be. In practice, it would cost that moron a shitload of money to make his point before a court of law, so he can pretty much go f@ck himself.

 

So he's saying I can't do this?

 

on the surface, it seems like internet sheeping... and ego. i suppose there are forums out there where ideas discussed may form the basis for an invention, so some record of those conversations may be perceived as valuable? (though, who does that publicly??!!)

copyright inhers to the author without the "warning", though much as with... say JU's articles on the website, the warning may serve to limit the amount of ignorant copying.

as for Papa's question, re: forum owners rules of ownership forfeit, now we're into the technicalities of whether a binding contract (to transfer copyright ownership) can be formed in that context. in theory... maybe?

 

Side note, I wonder how long before someone over there finds out I make fun of them publicly in other spaces and I catch a ban.

 

Just show them your heroic defense of e-cars in the CA thread. All will be forgiven.

 

Unless that person is also a lawyer.

 

EVs are the future for the vast majority of vehicle segments, however, that doesn't mean Elon is hey-seuss and Tesla is coming of the rapture. In fact there are a lot of things about Tesla I don't like.

 

I’m still not convinced. If I had to bet, by the time the electrical infrastructure/technology starts to catch up and the costs start to come in line for normal use, I think it’s very likely a new/better tech may well be in development or in use. But ... time will tell.

 

I'm betting on "Mr. Fusion"....