Creepy new ATS warning

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   
What the heck is this ugly thing?



I saw it on this thread.


Are the government and news media organizations cracking down that bad on copyright infringement?


It looks to me like this is just another way for them to silence us here at ATS and around the web.




[edit on 7/30/10 by FortAnthem]




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
A while back some users were referencing a website for aliens and UFO's. Of course the evidence from the links were fake but new users didn't know they were. I believe they ban the links from being used a while back. From what I read in the little rectangular box.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
A while back some users were referencing a website for aliens and UFO's. Of course the evidence from the links were fake but new users didn't know they were. I believe they ban the links from being used a while back. From what I read in the little rectangular box.



I was able to check out the OP. It was a story from a major news organ about police racism.

I don't think it was a credibility issue.

It looks to me like the copyright jerks are cracking down on us.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Gurrrr I hate copyright jerks.

Thanks for the thread




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Redundant

[edit on 30-7-2010 by LadySkadi]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I think that's related to the issue discussed in Newspaper Chain's New Business Plan: Copyright Suits.

The original link was to the newspaper whose lawyer is currently filing suits left and right claiming copyright violation, without issuing DMCA takedown notices first.

I would be interested to see a list of which sources we're not supposed to use, though.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I looked at the thread again. It was posted at 1:00 PM and by 6:00 PM the OP questioned what had happened.

It says they are currently involved in a legal dispute over the thread.


That was fast!

Those copyright A-holes must be working overtime if they shut it down that fast.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Let's face it - the companies in the USA have nothing else but so called intellectual property anymore. I mean we don't actually make much here anymore.

The have nothing else to do but constantly patro the net to see if anyone dares to use 'their' property with major payments to them. I'm NOT surprised to see this warning at all. In fact, I've expected it far sooner. Yet another sell out.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
if i get sued i won't pay. my last landlord already tried to go this route. good luck garnishing my wages, d hole.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by AidanK
Let's face it - the companies in the USA have nothing else but so called intellectual property anymore. I mean we don't actually make much here anymore.

The have nothing else to do but constantly patro the net to see if anyone dares to use 'their' property with major payments to them.


"IP" nonsense gets extended to everything and is a constant annoyance in just getting documentation how to use (programming and design info) hardware. Sometimes, it takes major payment.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
If I understand this correctly (and I'm honestly not sure that I do), the above seemingly innocuous graphic has the potential to change everything.

I'd venture to guess that over 50% of the net is founded on cross referencing itself. That is in fact the foundation of how information is shared and propagated. There are safeguards in place already to protect people's intellectual property.

All of a sudden I'm getting ATS popup warnings when I'm copy pasting anything including a simple external link. Since I have been a member here I do not recall a single policy implementation with as many broad ranging implications. And these implications extend beyond ATS.

This is not ATS' fault in any way in my view ... the world is changing and they are adapting. That little graphic is foreshadowing a great deal of what's to come, and nothing less than the control of this thing we call the internet is at stake.

Control the information flow, control the world.


Btw, a more benign explanation for the aforementioned graphic is available here.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Yes Righthaven has already hit GLP and ATS, our illustrious 3 Amigo's are hard at work in attempt to fight this new threat.

You might find it informing to do a bit of research on Righthaven and the CEO Steve Gibson and the "copyright infringement campaign"

***Just a note: in the future only copy and paste a very small portion(say less than 1/4) and make sure you point your link to the appropriate source in your post when it comes to MSM and known or suspected copyright sources. Together we can help ATS beat this, because these folks won't stop here****



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Looks like this warning is being given to all content taken from the publication in question, and no one is exempt:

Infiltrating Area 51 by Simon Gray.


edit, to replace the actual name of the publication in question with "publication in question", since I got the warning


[edit on 7/31/2010 by americandingbat]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
Hey any of you mods/staff know anything about this?
Sounds like the crackdown is here. Is this a tool being used to reinvent journalism? Sounds like it will be, whether directly or indirectly.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
You have to do a special filing with the copyright office, then you get the normal take down notice, instead of this new flurry of lawsuits that is based on this loophole. Apparently they sue you instead of putting a notice, because of the way the law is written. No representative where they can notify, then they sue you.

This is not legal advice. Figure it out with an attorney.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by time91
 


There was a response from SkepticOverlord here, not about the new warning graphic but about the lawsuits. I think the other owners posted in that thread also.

I don't think we'll hear all that much from them while they're still in litigation over it.

[edit on 7/31/2010 by americandingbat]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   
This can't be happening.

When a news article about police brutality, which is pretty public information, you do not own anything, just because you happen to write about it.

That is INSANE !

Unless... the reporter was charged a fee by the police brutality victim. Iassume he didn't...
Since it was a public event.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   
i've barely been following this phenomenon, so i shouldn't even say anything, but i was under the impression this issue is about copyright infringement which would involve reproduction of the work of another entity without proper attribution. a link to said work would never be a problem, right?

[i wouldn't imagine properly attributed quotations would be either, but i've been wrong before.]

also, paraphrasing of copyrighted work has got to be still ok, no?



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   
At first flush it looks like it's about money but a synthesis of all the clues and it appears to be another fiendish way to control the dissemination of information.

Most of what I see here at ATS is analysis of reported news. Someone posts it with some commentary and then we all bat it around for discussion. I love it. You get a lot of different perspectives on things which in some people may actually cause a brain cell to wiggle and produce a critical thought.

Can't have that can we? Too many people actually thinking and the ether could wear off. Could you imagine the collective scream of 300 million people who suddenly discovered they were sober, "My God, WTF's goin on around here"?

Things could get nasty if we refuse to accept the official spin.

Edit to add: I dug a little deeper into this and now I'm really curious as to who the offended party is and who, exactly, made the take down demand. I don't want to make a bad situation worse so I'll leave it here but I do hope that someone up above will keep us informed as to how this plays out. This does have some grim implications.

[edit on 31-7-2010 by CmdrZero]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:42 AM
link   
The notice is peripherally related to the referenced legal action.

A media group is engaged in predatory activity, seeking to monetize their content on the "back end" via law suits. While we (ATS) have traditionally respected the content of others and always insist our members use small snippets and links to source external information, this group is no longer deserving of our respect... for the time being.

To prevent giving this group the benefit of traffic from ATS (which is significant), we are automatically removing their content, even simple links and references to their content.

Hopefully, there will be a realization that everyone benefits from the free discussion of news and information, and we can eventually reverse the restriction.

Sorry it has to be this way... but that's life on the Internet in 2010.





top topics
 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join