Ah, thanks. An even better solution for re-releases.

The other thing to remember with Copying cast is to NOT simply copy (uncredited) data over to a new Profile, but to completely verify it from scratch. We have no way to know where the data came from or if it was originally verified, so DON'T copy (uncredited).

Skip

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:

Lars:

Perhaps where you are doesn't recognize International Copyright Agreements, if you don't that says muh, and if your country does not, that does not make it right .

Skip

The implentation of copyright protection laws very from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. While they all (at least in developed countries) try to ensure a balance between the rights of the copyright holder and the rights of the consumer they do not do so identically.

This does not make one implementation "right" and another "wrong". It just makes them different.

Follow the laws of the jurisdiction you are in. Don't make comments on what is legal in other jurisdictions if you don't know the details of that jurisdiction.

Skip:

Have you studied the WIPO Copyright Treaty?

Quote:
Article 5
Compilations of Data (Databases)

Compilations of data or other material, in any form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations, are protected as such. This protection does not extend to the data or the material itself and is without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material contained in the compilation

Wouldn't that mean the IMDB data is not covered?

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
Lars:

There are also International Copyright treatises. I consider places which allow for Copyrights to be violated to be very very WRONG, it is a m oral issue, my friend. I have a right to be compensated for my work and not have it stolen by someone who happens to live somewhere that says it is OK to steal. Yes, I consider it theft. Furthermore places which allow do not support copyrights make things more expensive for me to buy.

Skip

I wasn't aware that you considered every American who have ever made use of "Fair Use" of copyrighted material to be immoral and a thief. A bit extreme I think.

Edit: In case you didn't notice: I am not talking about contributing any data, as that would be uploading it to the US where it is under US jurisdiction. I am talking about local use.

I don't know enough about copyright to get involved in all that.

My problem is should we really be giving people an easy way to bring potentially bad data into the Online. Yes there may be a "Don't use this data online" warning but that's no different to signs saying to "Keep off the grass" it just makes some people want to do it more.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great app & wish I could do things like that but I'm just worried that there are some who will still submit it and get the data in.

Quoting lmoelleb:

Quote:
Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
Lars:

There are also International Copyright treatises. I consider places which allow for Copyrights to be violated to be very very WRONG, it is a m oral issue, my friend. I have a right to be compensated for my work and not have it stolen by someone who happens to live somewhere that says it is OK to steal. Yes, I consider it theft. Furthermore places which allow do not support copyrights make things more expensive for me to buy.

Skip

I wasn't aware that you considered every American who have ever made use of "Fair Use" of copyrighted material to be immoral and a thief. A bit extreme I think.

Edit: In case you didn't notice: I am not talking about contributing any data, as that would be uploading it to the US where it is under US jurisdiction. I am talking about local use.

Lars:

IMDb does not grant copying of their data, and to my knowledge this has not been legally tested. Fair use refers to specific activities regarding media...not the Internet yet,. I am not willing to posit myself or Profiler as their test case. You evidently have no understanding or knowledge of the purpose for predatory lawsuits. Allow me to educate you, such lawsuits have nothing to do with winning or losing by the predator, it is simply about forcing the prey to expend resources on defense rather than development of product, thereby weakening the prey and ultimately destroying it as its resources are engaged.

Because of this I am offended by any user who takes the action that was taken. Because it is the Forums run by Invelos, which could also be used against Invelos, since it is their site. Did I see the user make any declaration that the link was to his/her site and that it had NOTHING to do with Invelos and that according IMDb own Terms of Use that her link could represent a violation of those Terms and could represent a Copyright violation. No, he/she did not do that, at all. Did he/she do it via PM...no he did not. Instead he posted it on a public forum run by a company who is a competitor, thus opening a potential door for action...as if there wasn't enough already. I don't know if and/or where the tipping point might be. But I operate very conservatively because I like this program and ken and I don't want to see ANYONE do ANYTHING which could jeopardize either of those.

I am also offended by you attempts at defense, Lars. The position is completely indefensible, I know and understand Fair Use and make use of it within the definition as applied by SCOTUS. But i won't cross the bounds of that finding.

Gunnar, as I have noted, then Karsten's proper platform wouyld have been via PM not a PUBLIC link.Are we thouroughly dense. Gunnar, do you think I say everything I can or have to say publicly, there are certain things which are best left PRIVATE.

Skip

Skip

I understand you are offended, I would offend myself as well if I wrote what you think I wrote. You appear to read the worst into every post, and on top of that you do not really seem to read posts with much care... an unfortunate combination. Specifically when you then try to "educate" people.

If you in any way interpret my post as endorcement of copyright violations you are not reading it correctly. My sallary for the last 12 years have been payed exclusively due to copyright laws allowing the companies I work for to make money. I support copyright laws.

I reacted to your post that the program was illigal - simply because you didn't specify which jurisdiction it was considered illigal in. If you wrote "The program is illigal in the US" I wouldn't have mentioned anything at all.

The reason I brought up Fair Use is not because I think it applies here (I personally don't care if it does, Fair Use has no legal meaning in my jurisdiction and I can't learn all laws of every single jurisdiction on the planet). I brought it up as an example of a law that allows people within a certain jurisdiction to legally and morally perform acts that would be considered copyright violations and imorral in other jurisdictions.

Basically Fair Use as applied by SCOTUS define certain situations/conditions where use of copyrighted material is not considered copyright infringment within the jurisdiction of SCOTUS. But that is the whole point I am making - they are ONLY defining it for there own jurisdiction (after all, they have no rights to define it anywhere else). While there are indeed world wide treaties that define a baseline, you will find that the actual details of what rights you have vary quite a bit.

Again:
1) I am not endorsing copyright violations.
2) I am not endorsing bringing the link on the Invelos page (I leave it to Invelos to decide if they want it or not - trusting they'll simply remove it and/or amend the forum rules as needed). I even think it's a good idea if you notify them with a PM that there might be a problem with the link so they can take action swiftly if they deem it necessary.
3) I AM pointing out that declaring a program "illigal" and "imorral" can only be done within the context of a defined set of jurisdictions.