A Chuck Hicks Post
"hank alrich" skrev i en meddelelse
...
Peter, to me what you are saying is that if I see a poster on a public
notice board I have to ask the creator's permission to alert you to
that
poster.
No Hank, I am saying that if you repost it in another context you have
to
ask, on FB you could share within the already given permission defined
by
the original poster, but there is no pre-existing permission for this
usenet
newsgroup. Linking to it would be a different issue because a link -
except
perhaps an iframe - maintains the context.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
FWIW, I asked for permission after your reminder, and he gave it with no
hesitation.
"No problem, Jeff Henig... feel free. I think it not folly to repost
without permission. It's viewable to the public anyway."
Which is what I've contended here. "Public" is just that - no boundaries
are imposed. Posting a link is useles to those who haven't FB accts, in
most cases.
The common sense - and droit morale - angle: Consider the example of taking
the audio from one of your youtube videos and posting it for download, not
linking to it, posting it, on a debate forum as a topic of discussion
_without_ a release from you and thereby also notification to you so that
you could read and if need be take part.
Yes, common sense also suggests in this context of Chuck Hicks post that you
would get a release for posting in the newsgroup on asking and even that he
probably would not be angry if you didn't ask. But that is not a valid
reason for not doing it properly.
Hank, a release to another context can not be _assumed_ because of public
access, it has to be explicit. I think it highly relevant to adhere to that
here, if not we are to set good examples, then who are?
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
|