 Poster: A snowHead
|
davidof, I have also e mailed the club via a different route. This sucks, and is a massive and lazy own-goal. There is no one on the Club thread about this (including Tim) who thinks the Club has done the right thing here. If I were you I would send them an invoice...
chrisb, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Anyway, Tim Brown, that link you provided contained no data that's not available to any Non Ski Club member anyway? I doubt many would be stupid enough to post all that data anyway. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, but certainly if I was a member I'd want to keep information that others can't get (because they haven't paid a sub) to myself.
To the core point -
Before I even read through this thread, I noticed that the bottom of that picture was chopped off, absolutely shameless. I was considering maybe joining the SCGB (I'm sure there was a reason!) - but they can shove it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Interestingly only Tim Brown seems to feel that the SCGB's actions in plagiarising davidof are no worse than those  's who quote snow depth figures posted (but not originally sourced) from the SCGB website. This despite the fact that they are credited to the site and are not their copyright anyway. Is there any logic to this view or is it just blind loyalty to club chums? hmmm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| AxsMan wrote: |
Tim Brown, so what WAS your point old boy?  |
the point you choose to ignore because it suits you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
AxsMan, I didn't say it was no worse. Try not to put words in peoples' mouths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AxsMan, btw, the historical snow depth info on the SCGB site is © 2006 Ski Club of Great Britain Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
AxsMan, and he has my support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan, btw, the historical snow depth info on the SCGB site is © 2006 Ski Club of Great Britain Ltd |
Already answered above (by davidof. )
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
It looks pretty poor behaviour by SCGB, although I don't know all the facts. It emphasises the point I made during our earlier 'breach of copyright' discussion; if you put stuff on the web, then rightly or wrongly (wrongly, in fact) someone can easily cut and paste it into their site (I assume that there are ways of physically preventing this?). Even if you find out about it, doing anything can be tricky; even if you find them, they may just give you the 'sue me' routine, doing which is not an option for most individuals or businesses.
I wouldn't put anything on a website which I wasn't prepared to see copied without any reward or acknowledgement. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after them, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eddyr,
| Quote: |
| Anyway, Tim Brown, that link you provided contained no data that's not available to any Non Ski Club member anyway? |
Actually it does. That's a cut and paste from a copyright, members-only page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
richmond,
| Quote: |
| I wouldn't put anything on a website which I wasn't prepared to see copied without any reward or acknowledgement. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after them, of course. |
This is a very good point. This is the internet after all. But you'd expect higher standards from the SCGB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| chrisb wrote: |
| This is why I am not a member of SCGB anymore |
I think that it was a genuine error due to lack of staff training in this difficult area of copyright which is not easy for even experienced people to get their head around. I am afraid errors arise in life!. I wouldn't say that would be a sufficient reason for me to resign as a member of the SCGB. I am sure that they will do the right thing tomorrow.
Just be patient folks ( I find myself in the scenario of being a member of the SC and having a great deal of respect for pistehor - neither of which I wish to lose ).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| AxsMan wrote: |
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan, btw, the historical snow depth info on the SCGB site is © 2006 Ski Club of Great Britain Ltd |
Already answered above (by davidof. ) |
Well he got it wrong and I corrected him. As collators of the information, the SCGB have copyright. Do try and keep up, old chap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| richmond wrote: |
| I wouldn't put anything on a website which I wasn't prepared to see copied without any reward or acknowledgement. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after them, of course. |
Unfortunately that goes for almost anything these days. I can OCR stuff with pretty good accuracy and of course CD and DVD piracy is rife. I don't disagree with your post but if we follow its logic no one will make films, write books or publish music.
However one kind of expects a century old not-for-profit club claiming to represent all of the UK skiers to have higher standards than a spotty faced computer geek sitting in his mom's basement creating MFA websites and pirating Cliff Richard CDs (or something).
I wouldn't have even made this post if they had even linked back to PisteHors. I have spoken to them twice in the past about complete copies of articles and on both occasions they have assured me it was an error and wouldn't happen again. I believed I had a good relationship with the club and I don't really see PH in the same space as the Ski Club. I hope this will force a review of their procedures for the good of everyone.
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Wed 29-11-06 22:02; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan wrote: |
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan, btw, the historical snow depth info on the SCGB site is © 2006 Ski Club of Great Britain Ltd |
Already answered above (by davidof. ) |
Well he got it wrong and I corrected him. As collators of the information, the SCGB have copyright. Do try and keep up, old chap. |
If you read my original post I made that exact point Tim, Do try to keep up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| hibernia wrote: |
| chrisb wrote: |
| This is why I am not a member of SCGB anymore |
I think that it was a genuine error due to lack of staff training in this difficult area of copyright which is not easy for even experienced people to get their head around. I am afraid errors arise in life!. |
I'm not encouraging anyone to resign from the Ski Club but I really do fail to see how removing copyright information in photoshop is a simple error and a concept that is hard for the ski club to get its head around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Tim Brown, if even Mark Ogilvie, a former Director of the Ski Club, is saying your line of fishing is irrelevant to this current issue and that he is not interested if snow report information is given out on snowHeads, then I'd suggest you take heed. Your arguments are only putting the SCGB in a worse light. I think everyone agrees this is a serious cock-up on their part which will hopefully be rectified, and apologised for, tomorrow - and not be repeated in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Tim Brown, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cathy, I am a great believer is putting your hand up and admitting one has made an error and going by the book - it certainly looks like davidof, is due at least an apoplogy in this instance.
Just say sorry and move on!.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hope this can be sorted out to davidof's satisfaction. It is quite galling the the Ski Club has, not for the first time, ripped off a site which gives so generously to the ski and board community. Maybe by way of compensation a piece in the Ski & Board magazine to highlight the excellent work that PisteHors does would help shed a little more light on this unique resource?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| davidof wrote: |
| richmond wrote: |
| I wouldn't put anything on a website which I wasn't prepared to see copied without any reward or acknowledgement. Doesn't mean that you shouldn't go after them, of course. |
Unfortunately that goes for almost anything these days. I can OCR stuff with pretty good accuracy and of course CD and DVD piracy is rife. I don't disagree with your post but if we follow its logic no one will make films, write books or publish music. |
Taken to it's conclusion, you're right of course. However, the web is different from most media in being easy to publish. If something is published as a book, that's probably because in commercial terms that's the best format. It's fairly easy to put a book on the web, in breach of copyright, but it won't rob the book publishers of many sales. If something is on the web because that's the best, or a good, place for it, copying seems to be a trivial thing to do. Web copyright infringement of CDs and DVDs is widespread and exercises publishers considerably. Fortunately only a smallproportion of potential purchasers are willing to break the law by downloading the stuff.
With magazine type articles published on the web, often available to all for nothing, as for example posts here, the possiblity of controlling copying is effectively nil; a large part of the interested audience can be presented with the material very easily with virtually no risk of adverse consequences to copiers. Pursuing them for damages is likely to be impractical, if only for financial reasons or because you can't find them, and gaining significant financial damage mght be hard if you make the stuff freely available in the first place, to say nothing of the near impossibilityof getting your hands on the loot if you do get an award. Criminal penalties may be available if the copying os 'commercial', but again the practicalities are almost insurmountable unless you're the record industry or the like.
The web does present a huge challenge to copyright owners and enforcers, and we're a long way from addressing it successfully; quite the reverse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| hibernia wrote: |
| chrisb wrote: |
| This is why I am not a member of SCGB anymore |
I think that it was a genuine error due to lack of staff training in this difficult area of copyright which is not easy for even experienced people to get their head around. I am afraid errors arise in life!. |
Copyright law is complex, but the rule 'Don't copy stuff from the web or anywhere else for your own site without asking.' isn't.
I'm sure that the SCGB wouldn't dream of copying something out of a book or a mag and shoving it on thir web site without a by your leave; the web is treated differently, even though SFAIK the law is the same (although more difficult to appy).
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Thu 30-11-06 0:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I think the most damning indictment of Tim Brown's comments is that they seem to be consistent with David Goldsmith's views that posts on an internet forum count as journalism!
Anyone who can't make a distinction between posts on a forum done by people for fun and jounalistic articles done by people who are paid to produce them is clearly barking up the wrong tree.
... and finally, am I the only one who finds richmond's view on the matter depressing? thank god for people like davidof and leelau who are prepared to share their work at the risk of someone stealing it. my life is certainly enhanced by their efforts
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Arno, sorry, didn't mean to be a miserable git. I was just pointing out what I see as the pitfalls of shoving your material on the web. I think that it's great that people do put stuff onto the web in the way they do, and it's a pity that there's no adequate protection for it. I suspect that the answer will be technological rather than legal, although any tech fix only seems to last about 3 weeks before some 'property is theft (except my property, dude)' progammer finds a work around.
Incidentally, are any of those complaining about the SCGB's behaviour here or the magazine's behaviour in the other copyright issue the same people who were defending illegal music downloads a few weeks ago?
Your point about forums v journalism makes sense, but there is no distinction made in copyright law, SFAIK. The issue of damages doesn't apply so obviously, but someone owns the copyright even in this drivel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
davidof wrote
| Quote: |
one kind of expects a century old not-for-profit club claiming to represent all of the UK skiers to have higher standards than a spotty faced computer geek sitting in his mom's basement creating MFA websites and pirating Cliff Richard CDs (or something).
|
surely that is the key point? The fact that some internet users flagrantly ignore both the law and common courtesy, and are hard to stop, should not mean that we have to act on the assumption that everyone will do so. That way madness lies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| surely that is the key point? The fact that some internet users flagrantly ignore both the law and common courtesy, and are hard to stop, should not mean that we have to act on the assumption that everyone will do so. That way madness lies. |
If you know that your car isn't secure you don't leave valuables in it, even though people shouldn't nick them. To suggest that people need to be cautious about what they put on the web is not to condone copyright infringement.
If you put material on the web, you need to be aware that some people (not everyone by a long way) can and do copy it for a variety of purposes and that there's little you, as an individual, can do about it except complain loudly. That shouldn't stop people from putting their material on the web, if only because most of it has no market anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| cathy wrote: |
| Tim Brown, if even Mark Ogilvie, a former Director of the Ski Club, is saying your line of fishing is irrelevant to this current issue and that he is not interested if snow report information is given out on snowHeads, then I'd suggest you take heed. Your arguments are only putting the SCGB in a worse light. I think everyone agrees this is a serious cock-up on their part which will hopefully be rectified, and apologised for, tomorrow - and not be repeated in the future. |
One issue that arises from this situation is unauthorised use of copyright material - obviously! The rules should apply to all and not just to people and organisations you don't like.
EDIT
| Quote: |
| I think everyone agrees this is a serious cock-up... |
BTW, go and look up the meaning of the word serious. But it's a cock-up, for sure.
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Thu 30-11-06 1:10; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| richmond wrote: |
| Your point about forums v journalism makes sense, but there is no distinction made in copyright law, SFAIK. The issue of damages doesn't apply so obviously, but someone owns the copyright even in this drivel. |
Quite so. Although my postings may be drivel, at least they are my drivel! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| davidof wrote: |
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan wrote: |
| Tim Brown wrote: |
| AxsMan, btw, the historical snow depth info on the SCGB site is © 2006 Ski Club of Great Britain Ltd |
Already answered above (by davidof. ) |
Well he got it wrong and I corrected him. As collators of the information, the SCGB have copyright. Do try and keep up, old chap. |
If you read my original post I made that exact point Tim, Do try to keep up. |
This is the same quarrel as over Companies House data - the form or presentation or the collated body of information is copyright - the individual data elements can't be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I hope nobody will feel I have stolen the issue but I have posted a thread in the SCGB chat area complaining about this.
Edit: Oops, I thought I had searched for another thread on there already but missed the Internal Ski Club matters section where it was already covered. Still, if I am anything to go by most members probably don't look there either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| richmond wrote: |
| Your point about forums v journalism makes sense, but there is no distinction made in copyright law, SFAIK. The issue of damages doesn't apply so obviously, but someone owns the copyright even in this drivel. |
I think you're right but the question is to what extent Snowheads the entity (to the extent that there is such a thing) should be responsible for the content of random people posting on its forums versus how responsible the SCGB should be for the work (presumably) of one of its employees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Arno, And interesting isn't it, that we 'random posters' do our sources the courtesy of crediting them, and don't generally copy articles verbatim. Possibly because our motivation is to share information freely, while giving credit to its originators. There is a world of difference between posters here reproducing publicly available data on snow depths, and SCGB copying verbatim a whole article including the photos which they seem to have 'accidentally' cropped to remove copyright text. No one (apart from Tim Brown possibly) could confuse the two actions, nor believe that the SCGB's act was not deliberate. One can only speculate as to the motivations of the people involved, but 'sharing information freely and crediting it's originator' does not seem likely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
You can't own information you don't generate. You can own how you organised and presented it but we can reproduce snow depths if we like as long as we don't reproduce it, from any source, as a job lot. Individual sets of snow depths are completely different from whole sections of databases or whole articles with pictures with copyright marks cropped out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The snow report copy & paste may classify as "Fair Use", especially as it's attributed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
whole articles with pictures with copyright marks cropped out.
|
If this has been done by the SCGB then surely this is proof that someone at the club knew exactly what they were doing and any pleading of 'a lack of training' or 'over enthusiastic staff' is a little difficult to excuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| boredsurfin wrote: |
| Quote: |
whole articles with pictures with copyright marks cropped out.
|
If this has been done by the SCGB then surely this is proof that someone at the club knew exactly what they were doing and any pleading of 'a lack of training' or 'over enthusiastic staff' is a little difficult to excuse. |
It certainly shows an intent to pass the material off as their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do people do it?. The beauty of the internet is its speed and a basic news header with a link to www.pistehors.com would have given the members exactly what they required - THE STORY. Someone has done this to cast either themself, or the ski club in a better light
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
