In the HTML header, there is a line like this:
Is it possible and allowed to have a line like this also"
The other way to ask this question, How do I give credit to another
persons work in this web page?
TIA
Dave
--
A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
Dave Kelly wrote:
> In the HTML header, there is a line like this:
>
>
> Is it possible and allowed to have a line like this also"
>
That will work fine.
--
//Aho
Hello,
Dave Kelly wrote:
> In the HTML header, there is a line like this:
>
>
> Is it possible and allowed to have a line like this also"
>
>
> The other way to ask this question, How do I give credit to another
> persons work in this web page?
Technically correct, but I doubt this is sufficient, if you are only allowed
to use the artwork with proper credits. In order to see it, you'd have to
view the document source - very few people do this.
You should place the credits visibly into the document body.
HTH
--
Benjamin Niemann
Email: pink at odahoda dot de
WWW: http://pink.odahoda.de/
Dave Kelly wrote:
> In the HTML header, there is a line like this:
>
>
> Is it possible and allowed to have a line like this also"
>
>
> The other way to ask this question, How do I give credit to another
> persons work in this web page?
Visible text that says, "Photographer: Harry Crofton". That way people
will actually see it.
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Scripsit Dave Kelly:
> In the HTML header, there is a line like this:
>
It's basically write-only code. Some authoring software spits out such
stuff, but virtually no software uses it. Technically, it can be seen by
users who view the source or use e.g. View/Page Info on Firefox, but that's
not particularly relevant to anything.
> Is it possible and allowed to have a line like this also"
>
You can use
content="whatever crap you wish to waste bandwidth" /> and everyone can and
will ignore that. Authors often waste their time because they saw some
clueless tutorial or example with lots of impressive-looking tags.
> The other way to ask this question, How do I give credit to another
> persons work in this web page?
What did he say when you asked him? After all, you needed a permission to
use his photographs, so you could just as well ask how he likes to be
credited, and you could suggest some alternatives.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Thanks guys for all your replies. This served a couple of answers for
me. Mostly it can be done. And does not cause the browser to vomit.
Also that this is a way to record who took the pictures when 100 years
in the future I am chasing some alien piscatorial life form in the
currents of the rings of Saturn and we wonder who took that picture of
the monster trout in 2007.
Thanks
Dave
--
Lets see. There should be one hiding behind that asteroid, if I can just
keep from hanging on that moon with my backcast.
Scripsit Dave Kelly:
> Thanks guys for all your replies.
You're welcome. It seems that you didn't understand most of them, but
there's little we can help in that department.
> Mostly it can be done. And does not cause the browser to vomit.
Quite a noble goal, is it not?
You seem to take great pains in avoiding the obvious solution of including
credits as normal content. By the way, stay tuned to getting sued for
copyright infringement some day. In many civilized countries, you are
required to announce the photographer or other author of a work, when using
another person's work. A court would hardly judge a meta tag as acceptable
for that.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit Dave Kelly:
>
>> Thanks guys for all your replies.
>
> You're welcome. It seems that you didn't understand most of them, but
> there's little we can help in that department.
But I do understand. You will be hard pressed to find a stronger
advocate of intellectual property rights than I.
>
>> Mostly it can be done. And does not cause the browser to vomit.
>
> Quite a noble goal, is it not?
If we do not dream the impossible dream; ask the inane question; chase
the noble goal: Humanity would still be walking around on all fours and
drawing on the wall of some cave with a burnt stick.
>
> You seem to take great pains in avoiding the obvious solution of
> including credits as normal content. By the way, stay tuned to getting
> sued for copyright infringement some day. In many civilized countries,
> you are required to announce the photographer or other author of a work,
> when using another person's work. A court would hardly judge a meta tag
> as acceptable for that.
>
Your paragraph above leads to an important point about the intellectual
property rights. It should be read by the new users and new adventurer
into website coding.
INFORMATION NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL THREAD
The pictures sent to me to be posted on the web site are sent by the
authors of those pictures. We are a nonprofit educational club of about
150 members teaching fly fishing to a wide range of people. From cub
scouts to groups of elderly in assisted living communities. Our
executive governing committee has a lawyer looking over my shoulder and
he gives me no breaks.
--
A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
Scripsit Dave Kelly:
> But I do understand. You will be hard pressed to find a stronger
> advocate of intellectual property rights than I.
Yet you still appear to try to find ways to avoid attributing photos to the
photographers in normal visible text.
> Your paragraph above leads to an important point about the
> intellectual property rights. It should be read by the new users and
> new adventurer into website coding.
I don't see any connection. You seem to have missed my point about the
requirements to announce the author.
> INFORMATION NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL THREAD
Stop shouting.
> The pictures sent to me to be posted on the web site are sent by the
> authors of those pictures.
That does not mean that you are not obliged to announce their authorship.
> We are a nonprofit educational club of
> about 150 members teaching fly fishing to a wide range of people.
Excuse me while I yawn.
> Our executive governing committee has a lawyer looking over my
> shoulder and he gives me no breaks.
Most lawyers have little understanding of copyright issues. But if your
lawyer has shown green light to your approach of hiding authorship
information in meta tags, you have probably misinformed him about what
you're doing and what meta tags are. They're comparable to invisible ink.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
On 2007-06-10, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit Dave Kelly:
>
>> But I do understand. You will be hard pressed to find a stronger
>> advocate of intellectual property rights than I.
>
> Yet you still appear to try to find ways to avoid attributing photos to the
> photographers in normal visible text.
>
>> Your paragraph above leads to an important point about the
>> intellectual property rights. It should be read by the new users and
>> new adventurer into website coding.
>
> I don't see any connection. You seem to have missed my point about the
> requirements to announce the author.
There is no such requirement unless the creator requires it.
--
Chris F.A. Johnson
============================================================ =======
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
Scripsit Chris F.A. Johnson:
>> I don't see any connection. You seem to have missed my point about
>> the requirements to announce the author.
>
> There is no such requirement unless the creator requires it.
Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright laws
that may apply, before making such statements. You're seriously misleading
people - even to commit crimes.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
On 2007-06-11, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit Chris F.A. Johnson:
>
>>> I don't see any connection. You seem to have missed my point about
>>> the requirements to announce the author.
>>
>> There is no such requirement unless the creator requires it.
>
> Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright laws
> that may apply, before making such statements. You're seriously misleading
> people - even to commit crimes.
If there is such a requirement, can you point to something that
substantiates your position?
--
Chris F.A. Johnson
============================================================ =======
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2007-06-11, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>> Scripsit Chris F.A. Johnson:
>>
>>>> the requirements to announce the author.
>>>
>>> There is no such requirement unless the creator requires it.
>>
>> Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright laws
>
> If there is such a requirement, can you point to something that
> substantiates your position?
I am interested as well. Having permission to use copyrighted material
is not under debate, but giving a credit for everyone to see is
something else entirely.
--
Berg
Scripsit Chris F.A. Johnson:
>> Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright
>> laws that may apply, before making such statements. You're seriously
>> misleading people - even to commit crimes.
>
> If there is such a requirement, can you point to something that
> substantiates your position?
See my advice about. I know the jurisdiction that I live under, and I know
what it says about copyright and about the requirement to indicate the
author of a work. I don't even know which jurisdiction you live under, but
I'm pretty sure you didn't check its copyright law before posting your
opinion.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> Scripsit Chris F.A. Johnson:
>
>>> Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright
>>> laws that may apply, before making such statements. You're seriously
>>> misleading people - even to commit crimes.
>>
>> If there is such a requirement, can you point to something that
>> substantiates your position?
>
> See my advice about. I know the jurisdiction that I live under, and I
> know what it says about copyright and about the requirement to indicate
> the author of a work. I don't even know which jurisdiction you live
> under, but I'm pretty sure you didn't check its copyright law before
> posting your opinion.
>
You are "pretty sure" that the poster didn't check the law? It's
statements such as these that, contrary to what you are presumably
attempting to achieve, actually degrade the apparent credibility of many
of your posts.
You frequently chide others on making assumptions, yet you do it all the
time. I'm not saying you're wrong, simply that you stated no good
reason for doubting the poster. As usual, you just got up upon your
high horse and pontificated. Sad, because you obviously are smart,
well-read on some topics, and are able to express yourself (usually) in
a lucid manner. Sad, because your effrontery in presentation oft times
precludes my (and other's) interest in even reading your pompous
pronouncements. Sad, because your wisdom is, then, being lost.
Although, I do realize that you probably don't really care. My
suspicion is that you simply delight in hearing yourself talk and that
furthers your view that all other human entities are lesser than than you.
Before addressing the issue at hand I will opine that rudeness is
/never/ acceptable. I have been, in my 57 years, guilty of it. I have
always tried to apologize for the incivility. You seem to thrive on
being uncivil. To what end, I have no idea. It demeans you in others'
eyes and reduces the import of what you have to say. But, hey, in
America we like to say things like: "That's ok! You wanna be an
asshole? No problem! This is the land of the free, knock your socks off."
Regarding the issue at hand, I can't presume to speak concerning your
jurisdiction, however, after extensive searching, and years of being
responsible for interfacing with corporate attorneys on such matters for
companies large and small, I have found nothing in U.S. copyright law
that requires a citation defining the copyright holder when one uses a
copyrighted work (or portion thereof).
It seems that the citation (and its form) would be something specified
by the copyright holder in granting permission to use the copyrighted
material.
Further, there is some case law that indicates that two things could be
significant in a dispute over a copyright:
1. The holder of the copyright should identify the copyright in any
usage. This /may/ be used in a dispute to demonstrate to the court that
the copyright holder was aggressively identifying his rights, thereby
precluding any argument by an infringer that "He didn't identify his
work as his." Not necessary under the law, but it /could/ be supportive
in court for the copyright holder.
2. An authorized user /should/ cite the copyright holder when using a
copyrighted work with permission. This not (as far as I've been able to
ascertain) required, however, in a dispute the (supposed) infringer
could use it as supportive of his intention to /not/ infringe.
These seem to be not requirements but, rather, incidental supportive
acts should a dispute arise.
Indeed, at least in the U.S., /the creation/ of a unique copyright-able
work is legally sufficient to ensure the copyright: That is, the author
does not need to register the copyright, the mere creation of the "art"
is sufficient to guarantee copyrights.
So, I would support, in the face of any other authoritative information,
the notion that one is not /required/ to cite the copyright holder (who
may not be the author) when using (with permission) a copyrighted work.
If the author requires such indentification in granting permission
and the user does not do so, then the user would (obviously) be in
violation of the terms of usage.
Again, I'm happy to have an actual attorney weigh in here with
authoritative experience. And very happy to learn and change my own lay
opinions in the face of actual learned experience.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
"Jukka K. Korpela"
> See my advice about. I know the jurisdiction that I live under, and I
> know what it says about copyright and about the requirement to
> indicate the author of a work. I don't even know which jurisdiction
> you live under, but I'm pretty sure you didn't check its copyright law
> before posting your opinion.
In the US, credit and labeling are negotiable licensing terms, not legal
mandates. It depends on the terms you've agreed upon with your publisher.
I thought that was part of Berne, but it may be unique to the US.
sherm--
--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Ed Mullen
> Indeed, at least in the U.S., /the creation/ of a unique
> copyright-able work is legally sufficient to ensure the copyright:
> That is, the author does not need to register the copyright, the mere
> creation of the "art" is sufficient to guarantee copyrights.
I would still say that registration is important, for anything but the most
trivial of works. It's not a question of "better rights", but of placing a
positive assertion of your rights into the public record. Entering them into
evidence, as it were, in any future legal disputes concerning the copyright.
sherm--
--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Sherm Pendley wrote:
> Ed Mullen
>
>> Indeed, at least in the U.S., /the creation/ of a unique
>> copyright-able work is legally sufficient to ensure the copyright:
>> That is, the author does not need to register the copyright, the mere
>> creation of the "art" is sufficient to guarantee copyrights.
>
> I would still say that registration is important, for anything but the most
> trivial of works. It's not a question of "better rights", but of placing a
> positive assertion of your rights into the public record. Entering them into
> evidence, as it were, in any future legal disputes concerning the copyright.
>
> sherm--
>
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#hsc
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
Dave Kelly wrote:
> This served a couple of answers for
> me. Mostly it can be done. And does not cause the browser to vomit.
>
SHssssssssssssh!!!!!!!!! Guys
This is not what I set out to learn. I was trying to find out if I could
send secret messages to the 20 year old waitress down at the Magnolia Diner.
--
A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
>>> I don't see any connection. You seem to have missed my point about
>>> the requirements to announce the author.
>>
>>
>> There is no such requirement unless the creator requires it.
>
>
> Please consult some primer on copyright, or ultimately the copyright
> laws that may apply, before making such statements. You're seriously
> misleading people - even to commit crimes.
German law says that the author has to be mentioned as he prescribes, in
the license agreement. There is no need for a visible notice, unless the
author asks for one.
DoDi