It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Creepy new ATS warning

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:47 AM
link   
as an offensive, rather than defensive, move, i totally support this ... and i hardly ever support anything.




posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Its very easy to avoid, it just involves rewriting the content fully in your own words.

To be honest even though its obviously not a good thing for the website to be under legal attack, I hope this will at least prompt the exsisting members to stop being so lazy when it comes to opening new threads. In terms of doing so under the steam of their own content.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Logic suggests that creating new snippets and forcing membership to go to the source for the fulls story can't be anything but beneficial to the source.

Apparently not! IMHO, these 'news sources' are chopping off their nose despite their face. Go figure!

IRM



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Hi may I know which website or link is in the question so I can refrain from using it on ATS?



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 03:56 AM
link   
Just goes to show you that ATS is the "biggest little guy" on the block....

... a conspiracy site that is nothing more than the tallest midget or skinniest obese person.

With these "legal" things it shows they are actively looking... nobody is sending a memo.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   
It amazes me why they embed a symbol of fairness, balance, justice, truth and liberty to take away free speech


The Law has no jurisdiction here for restricting free speech, I can only assume that ATS obliged in some way in the decision making process If not then we may as well all go home....

It's not good enough to put up misleading symbols.....



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Hey SO, if you come back to this thread.

I had an idea. Can you talk with your lawyers about adding an addition to your copyright and usage statement?

Something like, if any site does not allow fair usage, they may not link or use any information on this site.

I think the internet better hit this as soon as they can.

I said awhile back this was going to be their technique to limit the internet. Sites would make it illegal to copy any information or even link to their URL making it hard to spread information.

This could be an idea to combat this. Now if this spread, these people that do it could be stopped from using the internet for a resource.

Just an idea.

[edit on 7/31/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Just wanted to add:

If you see one of these logos on a post and want to see what was blocked out, you can hit the "quote" button on that post and it will show you what the poster wrote.

You can cut and paste any links to your browser to find the offending article if you really have to read it.


After reading SO's reply, I wouldn't recommend giving those dirtbags any extra traffic if you don't have to though.





[edit on 7/31/10 by FortAnthem]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


Predatory media groups! My experience with predatory tow trucks ain't noth'in nice. To the point I believe the predator is more than fairgame.
Soon to be popular sport.
I hope I worded that well enough.


flag on this one fort.



[edit on 31-7-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seventytwo
It amazes me why they embed a symbol of fairness, balance, justice, truth and liberty to take away free speech


The Law has no jurisdiction here for restricting free speech, I can only assume that ATS obliged in some way in the decision making process If not then we may as well all go home....

It's not good enough to put up misleading symbols.....


I don't know any behind-the-scenes info, but from what SO indicated and what has been discussed prior, removing quoted information was a defensive reaction to predatory and severely misguided web site(s).

To banish from ATS any mention/quotes/links to the site(s) in question was something of a offensive, retaliatory measure, likely with the goal of making a point about access to information in this age and the futility in overly commoditizing it.

SO said there was a significant amount of traffic provided to the site(s) from ATS. It seems to me a logical and appropriate response.

It is not a response designed to limit or block free speech. The vast majority of anything linked to can be found elsewhere and still used. And the subject matter can certainly be discussed with or without a specific link to any site.

The site under scrutiny, however, is limiting information flow and can be interpreted as a blight to open communication and certainly the "spirit of the Internet." For this reason, I imagine the image of the scales of justice seemed appropriate for this type of post-removal symbol.

[edit on Jul 31, 2010 by Hadrian]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
The irony in this is that it looks like the Las Vegas **** Journal got their story from Las Vegas **** News. It wasn't even their story to start with from what I can see.

Is there any media out there on the internet that can exist without reference to others on the internet?

I don't think so. This is absurd. It spoofs the nonsense that is the realm of lawyers. At least it aught to.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Hadrian
 


"spirit of the Internet."

I can see the ethical argument.

It's not a very agreeable set of circumstances all in all and I'm sure the people involved will be much hated by a considerable number.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
The whole scenario just seems silly to me.

So, we link to other articles and stories.

If we didn't who would read the stuff? You would think these places that are complaining about copy infringement would be happy that people are directed to an article in it's entirety!

When you click on a link, or a snippet, you are visiting the people complaining, anyway!

I could see a problem if somebody complained about a person who uses the work of another person as their own, but, come on!



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I am getting automatic warnings from ATS! I use a spell checker and copy paste.
all these words are in the dictionary. does that mean they are copy righted?
just give it time...



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddha
I am getting automatic warnings from ATS! I use a spell checker and copy paste.
all these words are in the dictionary. does that mean they are copy righted?
just give it time...





You might want to quote only a small snippet of your own words and link back to your own page, just in case you might otherwise get the idea to sue for copyright infringement in the future.

Link to source

Edit: Add source link

[edit on 7/31/2010 by EnlightenUp]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Will there is another one to go with that one. I copied just one word of a post from a post here on ATS to paste into a reply and I got this pop up window



I got it just then again when I paste the link to the photo I uploaded here. And it seems to not have work quit right.


I fear that ATS days are numbered as well as the rest of the net. It was fun while it lasted. Just think you will be able to tell your grand kids of the day when the Internet was open to every one for everything. I bet they will find it hard to believe.

[edit on 7/31/2010 by fixer1967]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
“Would it have been better if we’d have never invented the Internet?” - Cybersecurity Act John Rockefeller


I just read this article that I thought was interesting.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I wonder how much he paid for newspapers copyright...like a penny. More so, I wonder how many newspaper articles had their first origins from the internet, like breaking news, for instance. Maybe anyone on ATS with first hand news should copyright it to ATS so the newspapers can't use!



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventytwo
 



I just read this article that I thought was interesting.


I also thought that article was interesting. It was alarming to see what the parties involved were up to and who they were. The author was a smart guy.

I hope I was vague enough to avoid any copyright infringements in this. Whew!


Edit to add: We could be in for a spate of boring conversations on here for a while.


[edit on 7/31/2010 by wayno]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
reply to post by Seventytwo
 



I just read this article that I thought was interesting.


I also thought that article was interesting. It was alarming to see what the parties involved were up to and who they were. The author was a smart guy.

I hope I was vague enough to avoid any copyright infringements in this. Whew!


Edit to add: We could be in for a spate of boring conversations on here for a while.


[edit on 7/31/2010 by wayno]


I kinda felt the same way when posting the link


I hope I'm not doing something wrong


This a bad state of affairs we're in now..

I think ATS should post something to the board and tell us whats going on, I appreciate that they want to be silent on the situation but a statement is necessary I feel.

All the best.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join