Posting Of Pay Site Images - All Read.

[seanchai]

Originally Posted by johndowe

HAS to be said is that everything that is posted on the internet becomes de facto public domain, so copyrights are a bit of a non issue

So basically, you just made that up? It has no legal grounds or precedent?

I heard your brain was missing so maybe I'll grab that for a laugh or too.
Arse.

[johndowe]

Originally Posted by seanchai

So basically, you just made that up? It has no legal grounds or precedent?

I heard your brain was missing so maybe I'll grab that for a laugh or too.
Arse.

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up, it is a fact, when you place a file on the internet, that ostrich you posted for example, the person who took it posted it on the internet, then you found it, and you reposted it here, the guy who posted it no longer had ANY control over it is now public domain, if he wanted to delete every copy of it could he? No, because it is no longer his to control, the one in your cpu is now yours, not his anymore, wheather he put it up for pay or free, remember; ownership is 90% of the law.

That is the REALITY of the internet, and no law will change that, not even software, it may make it a bit more complicated but it will not change.


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

Originally Posted by johndowe

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up, it is a fact, when you place a file on the internet, that ostrich you posted for example, the person who took it posted it on the internet, then you found it, and you reposted it here, the guy who posted it no longer had ANY control over it is now public domain, if he wanted to delete every copy of it could he? No, because it is no longer his to control, the one in your cpu is now yours, not his anymore, wheather he put it up for pay or free, remember; ownership is 90% of the law.

That is the REALITY of the internet, and no law will change that, not even software, it may make it a bit more complicated but it will not change.


JohnDowe.

I understand big words, "de facto" is two small words - and yes this, theory of yours holds no weight.
What a crock of shit, I even stated the ostrich was copyrighted to the original.
Your just an idiot - THAT is the reality.
Unbelievable.

Simple fact is, John. You can't post the content. Take it or leave it.

[SandraB]

Originally Posted by seanchai

I understand big words, "de facto" is two small words - and yes this, theory of yours holds no weight.
What a crock of shit, I even stated the ostrich was copyrighted to the original.
Your just an idiot - THAT is the reality.
Unbelievable.

Simple fact is, John. You can't post the content. Take it or leave it.

Hi all.

I see the old saying "There is none blinder than the one who doesn't want to see" is true.

And "his" theory is not a theory is is a FACT, you may ask to have the content removed, or even threaten to sue, but in the end it is still up to the owners and operators of the site to decide to keep or remove the posted content.

And if i had to choose the idiot between you Seanchai and JohnDowe i would pick you Seanchai.


Sandra.

[seanchai]

Originally Posted by SandraB

And "his" theory is not a theory is is a FACT, you may ask to have the content removed, or even threaten to sue, but in the end it is still up to the owners and operators of the site to decide to keep or remove the posted content.

Threaten to sue? Or sue? Or just go directly to the server company.
Whatever twist you want to put on it, it's illegal.

Regardless of any further idiotic arguments, I think I've made myself available for this topic to run it's course so rather than devolve it into a slanging match, we'll leave it here.

Our statements are clear enough on what we need to be done.

[johndowe]

Originally Posted by seanchai

Threaten to sue? Or sue? Or just go directly to the server company.
Whatever twist you want to put on it, it's illegal.

Regardless of any further idiotic arguments, I think I've made myself available for this topic to run it's course so rather than devolve it into a slanging match, we'll leave it here.

Our statements are clear enough on what we need to be done.

Hi there.

Go ahead, run away, since you see that you CAN'T win.

And the server company shouldn't even be part of this because they are only ofering the internet hosting, and they have NOTHING to do with this site otherwise.

It would be illegal for them to remove the material without the consent of their customer, namely the owners and operators of this site.

And to see someone who uses the internet as his work and doesn't underatand it, now that's unbelievable.


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

Originally Posted by johndowe

Hi there.

Go ahead, run away, since you see that you CAN'T win.

And the server company shouldn't even be part of this because they are only ofering the internet hosting, and they have NOTHING to do with this site otherwise.

It would be illegal for them to remove the material without the consent of their customer, namely the owners and operators of this site.

And to see someone who uses the internet as his work and doesn't underatand it, now that's unbelievable.


JohnDowe.

I'm not going anywhere John.
It wouldn't be illegal, we have sites closed by servers all the time, when notifiying them of stolen content and official DMCa notifications, it's not illegal. Wake the fuck up. We know what we're doing - you obviously are basing your comments on your own opinion - and not what actually happens.
I've no need to make unsubstantiated comments, this is just daily business for me, nothing new.

[GroobyKrissy]

Originally Posted by johndowe

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up...

Was busy over the weekend but nice to come back and see the silliness continues here...

Actually, you did make your definition of 'De Facto' up. It does NOT mean 'in effect' or 'by default' as you postulate. And, before you go shooting your mouth off, I have studied both Latin and law so, yes, I can speak on this matter.

De Facto is a legal term (thus, separating it from the context is, in itself, an improper usage of the term) meaning something that has no legal establishment but is generally accepted as true. The very fact that Copyright laws exist render your argument completely illogical from the start.

To state that any material posted on the Internet becomes De Facto Public Domain and have that statement be true, no other laws concerning the subject would have to exist and it would have to be generally accepted as true that Copyright Laws don't apply to the Internet. Both of these statements are FALSE.

Imagine standing before a judge and saying that you robbing banks is de facto OK because it has been done before. Or, try opening your own brand of Burger King and using their trademark / copyright and telling the judge, 'Well, it's on the Internet so it must be de facto public domain...' Let me know how that works out for you. He would laugh in your face and send you back to law 101. Before you start hurling insults at people and misusing terms you don't fully understand... How's about educating yourself a little more about what you're thinking of speaking about?