- This topic has 28 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Big photo on page 28.
Caption:
“Blade Runners… Southern Stampede player Corey Down (left) and Canterbury Red Devil Anatoly [b:25hkdqnw]Khoroz[/b:25hkdqnw] compete for the [b:25hkdqnw]ball[/b:25hkdqnw] in their New Zealand Ice Hockey League clash at the Dunedin Ice Stadium on [b:25hkdqnw]Saturday night[/b:25hkdqnw]. The Red Devils won [b:25hkdqnw]9-2[/b:25hkdqnw].”[list:25hkdqnw]
[*:25hkdqnw]Isn’t is Khorozov, not Khoroz?[/*:m:25hkdqnw]
[*:25hkdqnw]On Saturday, didn’t Stampede win 4-3?[/*:m:25hkdqnw]
[*:25hkdqnw]Since f**king when is Ice Hockey played with a goddamn [b:25hkdqnw]BALL?!?!?![/b:25hkdqnw][/*:m:25hkdqnw][/list:u:25hkdqnw]Whenever the ODT interviews me about hockey I [b:2r5asxt7]always[/b:2r5asxt7] tell them to send the draft to me because of how ridiculous some of their colleagues articles have been. They usually say ‘maybe, we’ll see’ and sure enough they don’t send me the draft and it’s all messed up!
According to the ODT (from article about Zanzee and Megan a while ago) Brooke Pielak-Jones (Zanzee’s brother) is a former NZ rep! That article also had a bunch of other mistakes but I can’t remember what they were.
Ryan,
"nzicewebmstr":3266v2me wrote:can anyone scan the page – I’d like to put it up on the nzicehockey site pse. … [/quote:3266v2me]Um, aren’t you concerned about breach of copyright?
Ryan,
It’s not a breach of copyright if you scan the page and put it up. It’ll be clearly identified as an ODT story.
Breaching copyright would be stealing the story and putting it somewhere as your own work.
"Kyle":283tjmm0 wrote:It’s not a breach of copyright if you scan the page and put it up. It’ll be clearly identified as an ODT story.Breaching copyright would be stealing the story and putting it somewhere as your own work.[/quote:283tjmm0]
I clearly don’t understand copyright then!
So could I publish the entire ODT news paper online then? Scan the whole thing and upload it?
Ryan,
Umm, no, sorry Kyle, it would be breach of copyright. Ryan: you have the right idea.
However, the consequences of said breach would be, well, nothing, so I’ll scan it and plunk it up soon.
Not necessarily. Just because everything is copyright upon publication doesn’t mean you need to get permission to reproduce it. There are exceptions to copyright.
It would also depend on the agreement (or lack of) between the NZIHL, the rink, and the ODT.
Either way, the ODT isn’t going to sue if you credit them. And they probably won’t even sue if you don’t credit them. And they’ll probably never know.
For the love of god, just scan the damn thing and post the freakin article!!!! Stop being a bunch of wussies!!!
Hmm, you realise I take Intellectual Property Law, right Kyle? You really, really, REALLY do need permission to reproduce the article. As in really do. As in I’m 100% sure you do. Trust me, you do. You do.
But you’re right, it won’t make a shit of difference.
Give me ten minutes and I’ll post the article.
"Kyle":3hu9et39 wrote:Not necessarily. Just because everything is copyright upon publication doesn’t mean you need to get permission to reproduce it. There are exceptions to copyright.[/quote:3hu9et39]There are exceptions for publishing a certain percentage of copyrighted material for educational purposes and probably some other reasons I’m unaware of. But publishing a news item from one publisher on another publication (website) I’m certain would definitely not be legit.
But I’ll trust Chris when he says it wont matter shit all.
Ryan,
As a point of interest, the “certain percentage” thing is a popular misconception. The test is actually whether a ‘substantial part’ of the original work has been copied. There’s no fixed percentage, because that would be artificial. Also, there are overlapping copyrights. To take a simple example, the author of the article might own the copyright which subsists in the literary work, and the photographer may own the copyright in the photograph, but the ODT may own the copyright in the entirety of the article as a literary compilation.
That may not be how it works, of course, as the ODT may employ the photographer and writer under the condition tat they retain the copyright, but license use of the copyrighted work to the author/photographer for certain specified uses, e.g. for a display of the photographer’s work.
It’s really a very interesting area actually.
The 10% rule is an agreement between the Copyright Licensing Authority, or whatever it’s called, and educational institutions. I’m not sure if it’d codified in law or if it’s just an agreement. There are exceptions to the 10% as well – it’s 10% or an article or chapter, whichever is larger etc.
Anyway, there are exceptions in copyright law. A common one which is invoked is satire. You can take an advert off TV, mash it up and re-publish it in satire of the original, and then claim fair use of copyrighted material for satire purposes. There’s others to do with news/media reporting, though if the story has a photograph with it that would be trickier to get around as the law I think is stricter on those.
You 2 need a damn time out. You sound like a couple of bickering 5 year olds in a playground. POST THE DAMN ARTICLE!!!!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.