| Author | Message | ||
| Tim N (Timn88)
Advanced Member Username: Timn88 Post Number: 3038 Registered: 6-2001 |
...and hes washing it at a drive in carwash. No shame in that. If i had an Enzo, i'd want it to be clean. Hell, i keep my acura clean most of the time. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member Username: Whart Post Number: 1116 Registered: 12-2001 |
Craig, if you are really asking for an answer, rather than posing a rhetorical question, the short answer is : the magazine is an authorized copy. On display in a public place, you are free to look at it, with the obvious limitations associated with not being able to take the copy with you unless you buy (or steal) it. Assuming you buy the copy, something called the first sale doctrine kicks in, allowing you to dispose of your copy with impunity, by giving it away, reselling it, etc. The first sale doctrine is essentially what allows video rental stores to be in business. They buy the cassettes (or DVD's) and then have the right to loan them out in exchange for money, none of which goes back to the studio, distributor, etc. But, if you made a copy of the book or tape you bought, you cross the line, because the first sale doctrine only extinguishes the copyright owner's distribution right with respect to that copy, not his/her right to make and authorize the making of further copies. This is the issue that roiled everybody (and in some quarters, still does ) in the context of music CDs and file sharing. You can share the physical CD with a friend by loaning him your copy, but you can't make a copy to accomplish the same thing. That is copyright infringement. Sorry to sound like a cop, but i've spent alot of time trying to protect "content," and the current wave of thinking seems to be, that unless one is commercially revending (as in piracy), a copy here and a copy there shouldn't matter. I'm glad a number of you were induced to go out and buy copies of the magazine. I wish that were true in all cases when material gets posted to the 'Net, but how many people who can download an unauthorized copy of song for free will really have reason or need to go out and buy an authorized copy? | ||
| Craig A (Milo)
Junior Member Username: Milo Post Number: 166 Registered: 4-2003 |
What is the difference in posting the article like this and me buying the magazine and passing it on to a friend after I finished it and him passing it on and it being passed on again and again? True the volume of people reached is not the same the in principal it is the same. Or how about all the people who go to Borders (brick and mortar store) and grab the magazine, read it in the coffee shop and put it back on the shelf when finished? It is a great article. And let me be the first to say I don't need to buy the issue now.  | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 167 Registered: 3-2003 |
Don't know how close you are to Frankfurt, but it's available at the airport newsstands. | ||
| Ansgar Schürmeyer (Taunus)
Junior Member Username: Taunus Post Number: 174 Registered: 6-2002 |
I didn't found the magazine here in germany...  | ||
| Kristoffer Hansson (Maverick)
Junior Member Username: Maverick Post Number: 140 Registered: 3-2001 |
Im gonna buy that mag as well. Wouldnt if Ansgar had not posted these pics.. | ||
| Vernon Hill (Vwh3rd)
Junior Member Username: Vwh3rd Post Number: 149 Registered: 1-2003 |
So much for damages from copyright issues here, because of Ansgar and F-chat, I just spent $7.95 on a CAR magazine that I would have never bought if it wasn't for this post. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member Username: Whart Post Number: 1103 Registered: 12-2001 |
OK, gave Rob some language for his Terms of Use. Jon H: tend to agree that copying and posting of copyrighted content occurs all the time on the 'Net without legal repercussion, but let's not encourage copying verbatim from commercial magazines. Also,its not a bad idea for users to know what the true limits are; Faisal's position is the norm these days, as you know. JRV and Jim G: linking is the glue of the Internet and is not, in itself, actionable. The legal issues arise in two contexts: linking is typically not regarded as copyright infringement, largely because it doesn't involve copying (although there are links that do copy content and those could be actionable). The issue more frequently comes up as a matter of unfair competition or trademark infringement, where the "linked to" site is deep linked (inner page of content) and then reframed by the linker with different ads, etc. One gripe is that this often bypasses the "clicker" that enables the remote site to count hits and get paid for them by its advertisers. In Universal Studios v. Remeirdes, the court held that a web site offering a "hack" software executable to unlawfully decrypt DVD movies, in violation of the anti-circumvention laws (not strictly a copyright issue) was liable for linking to other sites where the executable was offered. But, like the Utah case, the evidence showed that the web site operator was intimately involved in encouraging others to post the software on remote sites, and then to send him the URL so he could link to it on his site. (This was done only after the court enjoined him from posting the software hack directly on his site). JRV: on notice and remedies, the US notice and takedown procedure is designed to give copyright owners a quick way to get infringing stuff off the 'Net, and at the same time insulate unwitting ISP's from getting caught in the middle. I can explain that in greater detail publicly or privately, if you like. | ||
| izel k. (Ferrarist)
Junior Member Username: Ferrarist Post Number: 231 Registered: 3-2001 |
Thank you so much Ansgar! I'm gonna buy that car mag. | ||
| Me Myself (Kid_enzoz)
New member Username: Kid_enzoz Post Number: 27 Registered: 4-2003 |
Just incredible... black is the best color for the Enzo... | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 152 Registered: 3-2003 |
Fair enough. I stand corrected. Rgds, Faisal. | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1502 Registered: 11-2002 |
Isn't there "notification" and "remedy" somewhere in the picture? | ||
| Jon Honeyball (Jhoneyball)
New member Username: Jhoneyball Post Number: 6 Registered: 4-2003 |
Rob i dont think you need to worry about legal liability. The likelyhood of Car's publisher taking action is so small as to be nil, and over copyright violations of my own stuff, the most I do is a polite cough (unless it is a blatant rip-off for commercial purposes). Its just a matter of best practise and trying to run an excellent website (which this is). How about a policy statement that all uploads of pictures and links etc are encouraged, but that you expect the uploader/poster should ensure it is their copyright (their pictures etc). And that dubious material from dubious sources will be frowned upon :-) | ||
| JRV (Jrvall)
Intermediate Member Username: Jrvall Post Number: 1501 Registered: 11-2002 |
The 'linking' issue seems very important also, to me. If sites/pages can't legally be linked together?????? | ||
| Rob Lay (Rob328gts)
Board Administrator Username: Rob328gts Post Number: 4969 Registered: 12-2000 |
Ok, my head is spinning, my worst grade in school was law. I need to know... 1) Should I remove the link and start moderating the board more heavily to minimize legal liability? If that's the case, then you can bet I'll start charging $9.95 a year for users. Right now it doesn't matter because I really don't moderate for the most part. 2) Bill, I would love input on posting some lawyer speak to protect FerrariChat.com and also formulate policies that I then would have to enforce. Urgh, but I already loose enough money, a lawsuit wouldn't help that negative line at all.  | ||
| Jon Honeyball (Jhoneyball)
New member Username: Jhoneyball Post Number: 4 Registered: 4-2003 |
wmhart -- thanks for the opinion faisal -- I'm Contributing Editor to a major UK publisher, and your opinion of UK copyright law is a long way away from the legal reality, and thats no difference in the UK, Germany or USA. The defence of "not a substantial amount" fails miserably when a whole article is posted. Whatever the precise legal position, I think it is just a pity that people have this view that 'because its the internet and no-one died, its somehow alright'. Or to put it another way, I think people on here would rightly be the first to leap to Ferrari's defence to protect their wonderful designs by using copyright law. Car Magazine's article about a Ferrari is no different to a Ferrari itself -- if you want one (ferrari or ferrari article), dont steal it but save up and buy one yourself (from your Ferrari dealer for the car, or from a newstand or the magazine's publisher. (Car is available to USA subscribers, and they have a backissue department too). Jon | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1380 Registered: 10-2002 |
WM I agree and found your explanation very understandable. What about linking? Is is something we shouldn't be doing either? (To something that is not copyrighted such as me linking my P4 posts to a GT40 board?) Best Jim PS Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions and advising Rob | ||
| William Huber (Solipsist)
Member Username: Solipsist Post Number: 941 Registered: 9-2001 |
Wow, thanks for posting this. Great story indeed. Regardsless of copyright laws, I see jpeg. & animations copied here all the time so it's no big deal. Soal stealing by photography is another story.... | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 148 Registered: 3-2003 |
Pick one up? The article said it weighed 3000 lbs...! ;) | ||
| stephen r chong (Ethans_dad)
Member Username: Ethans_dad Post Number: 266 Registered: 3-2002 |
Ron, The car or magazine ; ) | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member Username: Whart Post Number: 1102 Registered: 12-2001 |
Guys: just got in touch with Rob, and am awaiting his input. In the meantime, let me help you out in understanding how the law in this area works. First, with respect to individuals who post copyrighted stuff to the Internet (i'll get to linking later), the law is not really much different on the internet than in is in the "brick and mortar" environment. While Faisal makes most of the arguments on fair use, you should know that there is no "for profit" element to the US Copyright Law (most of what i'll say here is about US Law, although with some exceptions, foreign law isn't a whole lot different). The acts of copying and physically distributing (as opposed to scanning and posting, and electronically displaying or transmitting) are effective equivalents. Giving copyrighted stuff away for free is no defense. Fair use typically arises in the case of criticism or commentary (like parody, in the 2 Live Crew case or social commentary like the "Wind Done Gone" book), but implicit in that is usually the notion that the entire copyrighted work is not copied and posted verbatim. Copyright law presumes harm from wholesale, verbatim copying. Remember the Napster case: the argument was, in effect, that it enhanced legitimate sales, but the court said it didn't matter, cause when you file share the entire work, for its intrinsic content, its not fair use. Now, to third party liability issues. Ansgar is in Germany, i don't know where the server is where these things were originally posted, but its not an authorized Car Magazine site. It is, by all appearances, a rather crude scan of the pages from the magazine, text, photos, etc. Although i haven't double checked German law, i suspect its an infringement there, but even if it weren't, it is infringement in any country, like the US, where case law has already addressed this, ad naseum. Then, the issue becomes, what is the responsiblity of a third party ISP, whose service effectively contains this stuff, put up by a user. The big case (in which i was involved) that decided this was Netcom, which held that an ISP could be liable if it failed to take action after being given very specific notice by the copyright owner of the alleged violations. That led to the passage of Sec. 512 of the US Copyright Act, which contains a complex set of rules about notice to or knowledge by the ISP of the alleged infringement, and a right to remove the alleged infringement on notice from the copyright owner. These provisions also minimize the ISP from damages liability if they act promptly in accordance with the steps in the statute. Many other countries follow a similar procedure. (One of the other cases i was involved in was in The Hague, and articulated the same rule as Netcom). So, finally, the question whether linking is infringement. The argument is, by linking to something, you are not necessarily copying it, but merely redirecting the browser. A more recent case held that linking can be a violation of the copyright owner's display right (Arriba Soft). There is also a quirky case in Utah, involving the posting of plaintext URLs (not "hot links") that was held infringing, in a "contempt"-like context, where the def. had originally posted infringing text, removed it on demand, then encouraged others to upload it elsewhere, and then gave the internet addresses of the other locations where the stuff could be found. Obviously, that def. was intimately involved, unlike Rob here. But, to get to the punchline, i think it would be a good idea to discourage this (i am trying to be diplomatic here) and in the meantime, i'll help Rob formulate some policy, the main objective of which is to minimize strife for everybody. Regards. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4137 Registered: 8-2002 |
Um... Yes, there is one/(are some) copyright attorny/(ies) here... If it's worth anything, Faisal's right in so far that i'mvery eager to acquire this particular magazine, so i can view the pictures myself, re-read the article (in one, clear, uninterrupted fashion) and so on... All in all, though, i just really wish the car could talk... Hubert... You're one of my favorite posters just because we both want an Enzo in black... i've read several of your comments pertaining to the Enzo and can appreciate all of them; including your response to my "If..." thread, asking what each person would choose if they could only have one car and it had to be a Ferrari... Your answer mirrored my own thoughts... Very cool... | ||
| Ansgar Schürmeyer (Taunus)
Junior Member Username: Taunus Post Number: 173 Registered: 6-2002 |
Hmmm, i didn't want to start any trouble here on the board. If there is a problem with copyright on this scans, please delete the post. Just found them in the net and thougt that they would be interesting.... | ||
| Ron Thomas (Ronsupercar)
Member Username: Ronsupercar Post Number: 813 Registered: 5-2002 |
Wow!!! Boy I love that car.......Black is an awesome color for that car.... Now I'm tempted to pick one up.. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 147 Registered: 3-2003 |
Nope, not a lawyer. Don't have to be one to know the law, but definitely don't profess to know it as well as a full-fledged lawyer specializing in this. | ||
| Gerald L. Roush (Ferrmktltr)
New member Username: Ferrmktltr Post Number: 25 Registered: 5-2003 |
As someone who sees his "copyrighted" material regularly copied and posted elsewhere (although I seldom get uptight about it unless it is pure plagiarism) I would like to know: (A) Faisal, are you a lawyer? (B) If not, is there a lawyer in this group who could give a legal opinion? I know that Kinko's won't photocopy material such as this, and my local Wolf/Ritz Camera shop won't make copies of any commercially produced photographs. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 145 Registered: 3-2003 |
Further, unless someone buys CAR magazine for only this author's articles, AND there is nothing else by this author in this issue, AND you find someone who says that they won't buy it now that they have read it here, you'd have a tough time convincing any jury that this posting hurt sales. I am actually more eager than ever to buy the magazine now, as I am sure are many other members. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 144 Registered: 3-2003 |
Sharing something you find interesting with others is indeed fair use. This is the defence accorded to anyone who disseminates machine-reproduced articles in a non-commercial use. And it is not commercial use in the context in which it is posted. The site may be commercial, but the use of this article is not. It is not promoting this site any more than any other interesting picture or post, or being cited to try and drum up additional business. Besides, it wasn't put up by the proprietor of the site. It is being used by one of the forum members in a public discussion forum in a non commercial way. Here's part of the relevant excerpt from US law: Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered "fair", such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair: the purpose and character of the use, including - whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; - the nature of the copyrighted work; - the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and - the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. [Rain Man] Definitely legal. Definitely. Uh-huh, de, def, definitely, um definitely. Yeah, right definitely... [/Rain Man] | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member Username: Whart Post Number: 1101 Registered: 12-2001 |
I will advise Rob on this. | ||
| Mr. Doody (Doody)
Intermediate Member Username: Doody Post Number: 1087 Registered: 11-2001 |
i'm not buying it faisal. this is not "fair use". and it's not non-commercial either, since rob is selling advertising and the like. furthermore, this post may very well result in fewer sales of the magazine. doody. | ||
| DanPic (Danp)
New member Username: Danp Post Number: 10 Registered: 2-2002 |
Trying this again..... While concentrating on the wonderful pictures in the magazine article itself, I totally failed to notice the green leather accents that Jay spec'd for the interior of that car. It wouldn't be my choice, but I think it turned out great! I'm still not sure about the yellow gauge faces though. - Dan | ||
| Hubert Otlik (Hugh)
Member Username: Hugh Post Number: 836 Registered: 1-2002 |
That guy is the ••••••• business. Any man that drops that kind of coin on a car, picks it up at the factory, romps on it in, gasp, the rain and then takes it to a self-serve car wash is a true car fanatic; caution to the wind, it's a car and you'll be dead anyway. Oh, and DES, read any of my Enoz posts, everyone of them will say Enzo (black) I've been pushing that color on that car since day 1. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 4135 Registered: 8-2002 |
This is an awesome article... The photographer did a great job of capturing the car, too... The car looks so good in black, i get so emotional everytime i see it... i wish it could talk so i could have a conversation with it... | ||
| Paul Bianco (Paulie_b)
Junior Member Username: Paulie_b Post Number: 151 Registered: 1-2003 |
the second picture of the black Enzo looks like a "stealth" car. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 142 Registered: 3-2003 |
Jon, don't get your panties in such a twist. This non-commercial scanning and posting is completely legal and does not constitute copyright violation, either in the US, the UK, or under international law. Look it up. Rgds, Faisal. | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 960 Registered: 10-2001 |
Ron , Jay Kay is the Singer of the Jamiroquai band . | ||
| Ron Vallejo (Ron328)
Junior Member Username: Ron328 Post Number: 136 Registered: 3-2003 |
I am hesitant to ask (and show my ignorance)...who is Jay Kay? | ||
| David Stoeppelwerth (Racerdj)
Junior Member Username: Racerdj Post Number: 189 Registered: 1-2003 |
It sure is good to see one on the road. | ||
| Jon Honeyball (Jhoneyball)
New member Username: Jhoneyball Post Number: 3 Registered: 4-2003 |
Is there no respect for copyright on this board??? | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 141 Registered: 3-2003 |
I really enjoyed reading this...latest CAR has not reached my bookstore yet. Thanks for posting! | ||
| Ansgar Schürmeyer (Taunus)
Junior Member Username: Taunus Post Number: 170 Registered: 6-2002 |
Nice report ! http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091359-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091357-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091351-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091365-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091367-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091376-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091390-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091393-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091398-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091401-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091444-F%20Enzoa.jpg http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics/2003-4-20/1091405-F%20Enzoa.jpg |