Stop posting articles for other GN'R fans to enjoy, it's stealing! (was Brain in Modern Drummer)

[jarmo]

Why won't you explain why the article was taken down?

I didn't take it down.


Why don't you explain why you hate GN'R fans and wanted to ruin this thread for them with your whining?  




/jarmo

[TAP]

Why won't you explain why the article was taken down?

I didn't take it down.

But it's your site, you have the ultimate say I would guess. I'm still not managing to process why the article has been taken down because of a few people who allegedly hate GNR fans. If this was my site, I'd ignore the few haters and leave it up for the many lovers..........just sayin'

Why don't you explain why you hate GN'R fans and wanted to ruin this thread for them with your whining?  

/jarmo

Why? Because neither of those things is true.

[Jim Bob]

i dont really think posting a couple pages from a magazine article is stealing.

i don't really think watermarking it is a big deal either because you are using your bandwidth to host it.

i dont really think streaming a song on a website is stealing either.

streaming a whole album or scanning an entire magazine - thats a different story.

streaming a song or giving a few pages, its just a sample.   its actually good for both GnR and for the drummers mag because it might lead someone to go buy the album/magazine.   

I sell porn.   I don't give away entire videos, but i do spread small clips and sample pics all over the place as a way to get signups. 

[lynn1961]

The answer would be: No and more no. You should not have the marking all over it. It's like if you wrote an article and I watermarked it with my website all over it.

Or if you posted pictures of a concert and I then watermarked it with my website.

It's LAME, just like you.

Hey!

Go fuck yourself!

Taken from Board rules and posting guidelines (2008 edition):

It's not cool to insult other members of this board!
Posts that only attack another poster without any contribution to the discussion aren't allowed. Anyone consistently attacking other board members will be banned.

Hmmm...maybe it's just me, but I would say that the words "Go fuck yourself!" would be considered an insult to another member.  It was also a post that attacked someone else without any significant contribution to the discussion.  I wonder what would happen if I said that to someone?  Think it would be allowed?  I think not. 

Unfortunately, I missed this one from the start so I didn't get to see the original scans and what started this whole thing, but from what I've been reading - what a bunch of shit!

So, why isn't the article just put up in the news section or on the front page?  Otherwise, if you want to read it you can find it other places, including gnrsyndicate.  Minus watermarks, of course.   

[dallasgel]

The scans shouldn't have been on here because they are a clear violation of copyright - much like putting up copyrighted songs, which Jarmo is so vehemently opposed to.  A link to the article and a brief blurb would have been fine.  Anything more than that and you are stealing from the publisher.  Oh, and putting your watermarks on it is a huge no-no.  That is you claiming credit for it, even if that is not your intention.
For a guy who was always so concerned with all these GNR fans stealing from the band by downloading unreleased songs you sure don't seem to practice what you preach.  Getting defensive about your hypocrisy seems all too typical.

[hitmanhart408]

this is retarded. who cares??? Its just a magazine article. The magazine is loosing what? 5 bucks? Im sure they dont care enough.

[dallasgel]

Of course they care.  The publishing industry is in the toilet; many magazines and newspapers have already closed operations or are on the verge of it.  I think the whole point was the hypocrisy of putting HTGTH watermarks on the scans when the founder of this site so vehemently argues for copyright.

[Death Cube K]

Of course they care.  The publishing industry is in the toilet; many magazines and newspapers have already closed operations or are on the verge of it.  I think the whole point was the hypocrisy of putting HTGTH watermarks on the scans when the founder of this site so vehemently argues for copyright.

Yep.

There are NO difference between scanning an article and posting it here than making the entire CD album free for download. If you think it's a difference you show A) lack of knowledge of copyright issues or you simply; B) add personal feelings, interest or your own copyright ideas and opinions into the matter.

What makes it even more interesting is adding your own watermarks on the scanned articles. That is like having sound clips infront of every CD song saying "heretodaygonetohell.com" before the song starts. Or add it in the middle of the song if you want. And we all know this would be out of the question to do. So why do it with articles when it follows the same copyright guidelines? Do you just make up your own copyright rules?

It is the hypocrisy of the matter which people address, not their personal feelings, ideas or opinion about copyright. If you are so hard on GNR demo songs for instance, it's double standards to not follow the same rules on articles. You can't just pick and choose what u feel like.

[DeN]

Hey Dexter, time to organise a remix contest to allow a fan to be on the remix album, what do you think ?

[jarmo]

Why won't you explain why the article was taken down?

I didn't take it down.

But it's your site, you have the ultimate say I would guess. I'm still not managing to process why the article has been taken down because of a few people who allegedly hate GNR fans. If this was my site, I'd ignore the few haters and leave it up for the many lovers..........just sayin'

#1: I didn't transcribe the article.
#2: I didn't post the article.
#3: I didn't remove the article.


I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand that I can't force people to post scans that they've uploaded themselves.

For a guy who was always so concerned with all these GNR fans stealing from the band by downloading unreleased songs you sure don't seem to practice what you preach.  Getting defensive about your hypocrisy seems all too typical.

Once again.

For all you selective readers out there.

Stealing from a magazine for the purpose of having a discussion among GN'R fans is different than stealing from the band you are supposed to support.

Why is it different you might ask? Well, one is taking from something you're supposed to support and the other is taking something so you can have something to talk about as a fan.

I guess it makes no sense whatsoever if you're not a fan and you don't care about GN'R articles. If you only care about how much you hate this site, me or GN'R, then it really doesn't matter. Then you can just repeat "stealing is stealing" and feeling good about yourselves.



Sorry if in your world everything is black and white. Not even the legal system sees it like some of you do. "Stealing is stealing" doesn't work in court. Maybe you think a guy stealing a Twix bar will get sentenced the same as somebody who robs a bank. As far as I know, they won't.



I truly suggest all of you who are offended by my so called hypocrisy leave right away so I don't have to answer for all the copyright violations I've made during the 12.5 years that I've had a GN'R fan site.

Then the rest of us can enjoy talking about what matters, GN'R.

Hmmm...maybe it's just me, but I would say that the words "Go fuck yourself!" would be considered an insult to another member.  It was also a post that attacked someone else without any significant contribution to the discussion.  I wonder what would happen if I said that to someone?  Think it would be allowed?  I think not. 

Why didn't you address SLCPUNK's insults?

Surprising? I think not.




/jarmo

[Death Cube K]

Stealing from a magazine for the purpose of having a discussion among GN'R fans is different than stealing from the band you are supposed to support.

No it's not, it's the same thing.
 

[jarmo]

Stealing from a magazine for the purpose of having a discussion among GN'R fans is different than stealing from the band you are supposed to support.

No it's not, it's the same thing.

Oh, my, God.

Nobody even tries to see where I'm coming from because I didn't let you post and talk about leaks. I get it.

This is the punishment.


I should be disagreed with at all costs because I'm such a horrible hypocrite.


Fine.




So you guys don't want us here to post any new articles because we condone stealing from GN'R?

Is this opinion of yours only valid at HTGTH? You just want us to go away? The day this site is closed is a great day for you?






/jarmo

[Death Cube K]

You speak of a moral issue and not a legal issue when u compare songs to articles. If that's your morale then that's fine with me.

So you guys don't want us here to post any new articles because we condone stealing from GN'R?

Like I said, my morality with copyrights ain't the best and I have no problems with it. I think the watermark is way over
the top and it is also downright illegal and for your own good, stop doing it. You're playing with fire.

By the way, some of your own artwork uses copyrighted GN'R logos but only credits yourself with your name and the year....

Maybe you should make it clear that the GN'R logo wasn't created by you?

I take it this is directed to someone else.

[jarmo]

You speak of a moral issue and not a legal issue when u compare songs to articles. If that's your morale then that's fine with me.

As I've been trying to explain.... But some of you just refuse to try to see it.

I'm aware that scanning an article for all of us to read and discuss is illegal.

I'm also aware that a a majority of fan sites do it. Not just for GN'R. If you wonder why, I'm sure somebody can explain it to you.



I'm also aware that a bunch of fan sites don't actually try actively to work against the thing they are fans/supporters of as much as certain GN'R fans.

Certain GN'R fans have an "Us against them" mentality. And "them" isn't the outside world, it's the band.



I don't see it that way. So maybe that explains why I let these copyrighted articles be posted for "us".

If you're part of the outside world, obviously you'll get offended.

It seems like some of you are since you openly say that you couldn't care less what Brain has to say.



I guess by this whole "stealing is stealing" logic, if we allow articles to be posted, we should allow people to openly post copies of all GN'R albums for all of us to enjoy for free.

No matter that this (and other fan sites) are essentially promoting the artist and therefore supposed to help the artist in question.

That doesn't seem to matter, stealing is stealing and some of you just want to be able to steal from the thing you're supposed to promote/support.


How is that promoting the band if we just keep stealing from them and going against them in everything?



What's even funnier is the fact that the handful of the most vocal opponents in this thread are all agreeing with each other over at some other site.

Maybe next time you should just let us do what we do, and worry about running your own site.

I think the watermark is way over the top and it is also downright illegal and for your own good, stop doing it. You're playing with fire.

Next time it'll be more clear that the watermark is not a claim for the copyright.

Unless that's not your issue.

Some of you are having issues with the confusion that we're claiming to own the copyrights while others are just having issues with the watermarks being there so they can't get nice clean high quality scans for free.




/jarmo

[PJ]

Jarmo, as real fan and logic person
I say you should lock this and start a new thread only about comments of the interview

[D]

Well shit, I wanted to read this.


Guess I'll go to barnes and nobles and read it.

[PJ]

the whole interview is posted in a GNR blog
(mods delete this if im breaking any rule)

[SLCPUNK]

while others are just having issues with the watermarks being there so they can't get nice clean high quality scans for free.

/jarmo

For the last time I already had the article, so you can quit lying about this shit.

[faldor]

Can't we all just get along?

I can't believe I just went through 8 pages of bitching, complaining, and arguing about watermarks, stealing, copyrights.  Seriously?  I think there are some pretty interesting things in the article, much more interesting than any of the ridiculous arguments going on here.  Give it a rest!

[Bandita]

Oh for crying out loud---

The whole point is that by watermarking it, you portray that the work is your own. 

If you post a link or direct someone somewhere else to see it you are showing that you are not taking credit for it.

WHY is this so hard to understand?

You can't prohibit one form of illegal behavior and then say another form is ok because you don't deem it to be quite as illegal as the other.

YOU don't allow certain things here.  That is your decision.  But you can't expect people NOT to say something when you allow one illegal behavior and not another.

...and you can take all the shots at me you like for saying this but it is what it is...