Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> <http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2006/12/28/time-to-rething-waste
-culture-amid-global-warming/>
>
> Once again Roy is in flagrant disregard of copyright, and is doing so in
> more than one way.
>
> Notice he's using a picture stolen from the BBC, which he has modified in
> addition to using the BBC trademark.
>
> From the BBC's own site:
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/terms/
>
> "The names, images and logos identifying the BBC, BBC Worldwide or third
> parties and their products and services are subject to copyright, design
> rights and trade marks of the BBC, BBC Worldwide Limited and/or third
> parties. Nothing contained in these terms shall be construed as conferring
> by implication, estoppel or otherwise any licence or right to use any
> trademark, patent, design right or copyright of the BBC, BBC Worldwide
> Limited, or any other third party."
>
> Also:
>
> "You may not copy, reproduce, republish, download, post, broadcast,
> transmit, make available to the public, or otherwise use bbc.co.uk content
> in any way except for your own personal, non-commercial use. You also agree
> not to adapt, alter or create a derivative work from any bbc.co.uk content
> except for your own personal, non-commercial use. Any other use of
> bbc.co.uk content requires the prior written permission of the BBC."
>
> So let's review the violations, shall we?
>
> 1) He's copied and reproduced copyrighted works without permission.
> 2) He's altered (or created a derived work) from a copyrighted work, again
> without permission.
> 3) He's used BBC tradmarks without permission, not to mention reproduced
> them and appears to be trying to confer BBC sanctioning of his works.
> 4) He's doing all this for commercial profit, as he recieves ad revenue
> from the pages.
> 5) He's making it seem like an article, published on a different site, is
> connected to the BBC.
The use of the "BBC News" logo is suspect as it confers inappropriate
authority to the item, and should be removed. Replace it with a link to
the BBC's news site within the caption.
The journalism is flawed. The images relate to the 2004 Boxing Day
tsunami which has nothing to do with global warming.
Flawed journalism aside, the use of the images falls within "fair use"
provisions, so other than the mis-use of the "BBC News" logo I fail to
see your problem.
> One would have thought he'd have learned his lesson from the last debacle,
> but no... Roy willfully violates copyright laws at his whim.
>
> That's Roy "Do as I say, not as I do" Schestowitz - Pirate for you.
http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS_1.html
"Kildall allegedly went to IBM and pointed out where his own copyright
statement was still embedded in PC-DOS, but he did not dare fight it out
with the full force of IBM's legal division. Kildall's allegations of
theft by SCP, and the fact that the differences between QDOS and CP/M
are minute at best, can't have escaped Microsoft's attention at the
time. This leads to the interesting conclusion that if this is true,
then Microsoft and IBM knowingly acted as fences, and Microsoft founded
a global empire on a crime."
--
Immunity is better than innoculation.
Peter
|
|
