This is from a closed thread.
This is from a closed thread.
This is from a closed thread.
This is from a closed thread.

My thread refers to the dilema here. Stay on topic if you wish.

The dilema I see here is providing proof to an argument without bending(?) board rules. I seem to remember a rule about linking to copyrighted material as opposed to quoting it.

All thoughts welcome.

Global Warming - NOT! The Counterarguement

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

That was my post, which was about trying to have a discussion that consists of nothing but links to videos saying "watch this video", which is something usually frowned upon.

What's that got to do with the copyright issue?

Are you saying that a person would instead have to copy-paste a whole bunch of text from some website - and thus break the copyright rules?

That also, would be beside the point of having a discussion, in a thread, here.

__________________
Measure once. Cut twice. Power tools are fun.

Providing links is quite different than posting the links' content. The former is OK, the latter, where the content exceeds the rule for "snippets", is not.

OK, next question.


BTW, it's good to see your ASCII picture again, Marten of the Pines.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

One question I asked myself is: How can one cut/paste/quote small, but significant quotes from a video?


off topic = What is an ASCII picture? I thought I uploaded a GIF.

__________________
'Sir........, I don't like these numbers.'
'Then hire somebody that can change them!'
("`-/")_.-'"``-.,,
\. . `; -._( );, `)
(v_,)' _ )`-. \ ``'`
_.- _..-/ /((.'
((,.-' ((,/

It's simple with video editing tools. A lot of them are freeware.Just look below where you wrote in your sig

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

If it's a video available on the net, you do it by describing what the whole video is, making a link to where it's available, then say when in the video people should look:

If you look at this video from the second Top Gear show where they tried to kill a Hilux, at 1:20 to 1:52, then 2:45 to the end, you'll see their final failed attempt.

__________________
And the "driving on the freeway on a scooter" analogy still holds true because the pilots are sitting in 7 to 30 ton aircraft o' doom and you are running around them in your very own Meatbody, Mark I. Beep, beep.
Trying to make sense of computers, The Error Log.

Link to it, citing in-point and out-point, or running time, for your audience's convenience.

And, transcribe the words, fair-use, for those who don't have the bandwidth, time, abillity, or are otherwise limited. Or, ignore that part of your audience if you don't care, at peril to your argument. If there are so many copied words as to infringe copyright, summarize it in your own words.

If there's an important still image, capture it and present it, fair-use.

If only audio and/or video will persuade, say so, and link. That's very rare. Extremely rare.

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

One of the problems with going with video presentations is that the video itself is nearly always second (or third) sourced. A link to a video that claims "statistics are up this year" based on some report floating around out there is far less useful than a link to the report itself. First sourcing is always preferable.

The other thing is that in presenting an entire video, or "read this web site", is that it floods the reader with a great deal of information that isn't relevant to the claim you're supposed to be supporting.

Now, if you need to link to a video to show a particular statement was made, then sure, link to it with an indicator of the starting and ending times of the relevant quote, preferably with a transcript.

Ultimately it depends on the nature of the claim. "Apollo really is made of green cheese, watch this 30 minute video for the evidence" is not kosher, as the video is (at least) second sourced, probably won't itself provide its proper citations, and is likely either a violation of copyright (if you don't own the video) or a violation of board rules on promotion (if you do).

"Buzz Aldrin punched Bart Sibrel. Here's the brief youtube clip!" is probably fine, although the "fair use" on that may be iffy. It's sufficient and appropriate to support the claim in question, however.

__________________
In Fallout 3, 'happiness' is a warm junkyard dog and a loaded gun. It's mostly the loaded gun.
- Moose's one-line review.

"your going to regret that one. You are now a colonoscope...
- Chrissy, corrupting PraedSt's wish.

Yeah, that's what clearly said Moose.

Copyrighting is the name itself , your presenting a copy which is not yours.

Better just site a part of the video rather present the whole video itself.

__________________
Jean
-----
"The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing." - Albert Einsteiin

Linking to something is in no way copyright violation.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Read more

"Publish and be damned" ~ Duke of Wellington.

__________________
`Irony` actually does mean `metal like`...

I'm not worried about people linking to sites. If I actually get take-down requests, I'll comply and remove the links.

__________________
Fraser Cain
Publisher
Universe Today - Free space news delivered by email every weekday.