All of the comments about possible legal issues were in response to calls for Vinnie to post “the poem.”
Anyway, Vinnie has wisely said he won’t, so it’s a moot point.
Bullshit. You just don’t think it would be nice to mock the kid and I happen to agree with you.
As I understand from the article, legally it doesn’t matter if the tone is academic or scholarly and it doesn’t matter that the writer is under eighteen. If the article was printed in the student paper or handout such that vinnie had a copy, it was published.
Copyright isn’t “legal” or “illegal.”
May means allowed in this context, not “maybe.” Copyright laws do not allow anyone to post the whole work without permission. The whole work may not be posted without permission. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created and it belongs to the author. The author isn’t here and hasn’t given permission for the work to be reproduced. The conversation involved people talking about posting “the poem.” I took that to mean posting the whole poem, which I already explained.
Posting excerpts is another matter, though I think it would be unkind and unreasonable given that the author really hasn’t put himself up as a public figure who should be mocked by a bunch of strangers on an internet message board. Is it a violation of copyright? No. Is it uncalled for? Yeah, I think so.
Uh huh. Next time do better research.
I disagree, since fair use also includes satire.
It would be jerky, in my opinion, but small excerpts wouldn’t violate copyright in any way.
I didn’t get that the first time. Now I see what you meant.
How about, instead of getting into the whole copyright issue, take a picture of the newspaper?
However, that doesn’t address the other part of the equation. Sure, the guy is a self-obsessed punk tart, but that doesn’t mean we should mock the hell out of his work. Even if it is for satirical purposes, that’s kind of bad. I mean, he might just write a poorly structured, inane, grammatically incorrect piece on the woes of the Straight Dope. Do you’ns want to really be collectively harassed in front of an entire student body?
What indicates poor research on my part?
I told you I was low on caffeine!
My mistake. Next time do some actual research in the first place.
Your assumption here is that if you don’t understand something from skimming a wikipedia article, it must not be part of the law. This is a radical shift in position from presuming one must by a copyright lawyer to have an opinion on the topic.
There are four tenets to fair use. The first is “the purpose and character of the use.” This use must be for “purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.” Hence my reference to the tone of this thread. That tone speaks to the character and use of the quoted material.
If the “author” is a minor, the one posting the “criticism and commentary” is a fellow student, and the nature of the “criticism and commentary” is prefaced by personal attacks, I think you’d have a hard time arguing that this is merely critical commentary and not some brand of online bullying. That speaks to the “purpose and character” of the use.
Personal slights are a poor substitute for providing textual evidence from my earlier posts that are clearly inaccurate.
There’s no mention of satire in the fair use language, but even if there was, it isn’t exactly satire to use quoted material to mock its author. In any case, I didn’t say it was illegal. I said it was risky.
I should have said parody instead of satire, actually. I bring that up only because you do not have to be respectful of the artist in order to be adhering to fair use.
As for risks, like what? The SDMB attempts to honor copyright holders, which is a great thing. That means that I suppose a thread could “risk” being shut down by a moderator. But as for external risks, there really are none. Even if someone posted the whole poem (which would be wrong), and even if the author found it, and even if the author wanted it removed, and even if the SDMB refused (which they wouldn’t), and even if the author could find a lawyer to take the case (which he wouldn’t), and even if he sued, and even if he won, the result would be that the SDMB would have to take down the poem. He wouldn’t be able to show damages. I’d defy any poet to show damages. I’ve had poems stolen dozens of times and there is no recourse beyond asking people to take it down.
To recap:
Posting the whole poem? Violation of copyright.
Posting short excerpts? Within fair use which doesn’t require anyone be nice about a work or artist.
External repercussions for violating poetry copyright? Essentially “Stop, or I’ll yell stop again.”
Internal repercussions for violating poetry copyright? Bitchslapping by mod.
I think that about covers it.
Well, I think you raise some good points, but “what’s the worse thing that can happen to us?” isn’t exactly the best form of moral reasoning.
My original point was just that it isn’t nice, which most people seem to agree with, and I should have left it at that.
As a practical matter, we’re probably better off anyway not having to reboot our synapses after reading the poem.
The student he spouted some crap
And a poster came and said “it sucks”
This poem don’t rhyme
'Cuz I’m artsy and stuff
And don’t have to follow rules - not even for line legnth in the lymrik form.
Yep, I pretty much intended for this thread to become a discussion of copyright law.
Mods, close at will.
freedom of expression vs. proper context?
think the poets get short shrift in this culture, and ideas are less important than things. I mean for fcksake 1/3 of the world cannot read!!! much less write.
Cite: UNESCO
At the very least you are talking about the ideas this young poet, who had either courage or hubris enough to express himself in an increasingly repressive age.
Verlaine who was 18 when he wrote “destroy all knowledge”?
vinniepaz - You’re new? And currently in high school. Right. Okay, Vin, lemme explain something to you…
For a great many students, high school represents exactly one thing…the last blast. The last chance ever to act with no responsibility, no maturity, no restraint, no humanity whatsoever, and suffer absolutely no consequences. The one final, burst of absolute, unfettered, repercussion-free freedom before college or a job and all that entails (managing money, following rules, showing respect to other people, learning useful skills, working, etc.).
Now, they can use this valuable time a number of ways. A very few descend into the most unspeakable criminal behavior imaginable. Some are content with garden variety misdeeds…graffiti, vandalism, little slapfights, and the like. Most common, in my experience, is plain old making life utterly miserable for a single carefully-chosen victim (or maybe a handful of victims). This is especially popular because the folks who theoretically are supposed to have a handle on things invariably think it’s absolutely wonderful that it hasn’t risen to the level of life-threatening violence. (Honest to god, I heard that crap all the time in high school.)
And occupying the very low end of the scale are the self-centered blowhards who think they’re smarter than everyone else, a space the pretentious poets you describe occupy.
See what I’m getting at? They’re doing this simply because they can. And believe me, if this is the worst you have to deal with, you have it great.
Don’t sweat any possible negative consequences. There are none. Nobody with half a brain takes the ravings of a high school student seriously. You know what happens if something like this hits the media? Everyone has a good laugh and forgets about it in a week. Ultimately, and invariably, they’ll pick up a sheepskin and make way for the next bunch of droning hacks.
It’s high school. You do your time, you graduate, you move on. It’s not supposed to be a life-enriching experience. Try to relax.