I’ve read from time to time the little notice at the bottom of each page in SDMB stating that the Chicago Reader claims the “irrevocable right to re-use your posting in any manner it or they see fit without notice or compensation to you”
I was wondering. I can see this being necessary if Cecil wants to mine the message boards for answers, but what if I post copyrighted materials in one of my posts? Presumably the Chicago Reader loses its rights?
Now, what if the copyrighted materials are mine? What if I’m, say posting some snippet of a really clever algorithm, and place my own little copyright notice on the code at the bottom of the post? Could the Chicago Reader then sell it to Microsoft or could I make them pay for use?
Just curious since I’ve seen similar notices on other message boards.
You are not allowed to post material that is copyrighted on this board. This is one of the reasons that graphics are not allowed on the board. This thread addresses who holds the rights to your posts: Etiquette / legality / morality of quoting posts elsewhere
So much for my idea of GPLing everything.
And thanks for the link.
Bizaare about the graphics though. As far as I know, it’s not illegal to link to copyrighted materials.
In general, I would say that the SDMB is the private property of the Chicago Reader. Therefore, you have no rights except those the Reader cares to extend to you.
Read the notice at the bottom of each page. The SDMB is claiming the right to republish anything posted here. This means they can publish a book “Best threads from the SDMB” without asking permission or paying you anything.
However, they also give you the same right. If you make a post, you can republish it in “My Best Posts from the SDMB” without notifying or paying them. You don’t have the right to republish another author’s post, however.
It’s a little bit on the grabby side, but not offensively so.
One of Kyberneticist’s questions in his OP is what would happen if he posted something to which HE held the copyright. My semi-informed guess is that, if you post your own copyrighted material here, knowing of the SDMB notice, you are giving the gods of SD the right to reproduce your material.
'Course, I could be wrong, but, as a good attorney, I will never admit that.
You hold the copyright to anything you post here, provided it is your own work.
However, as “publisher” SD also hold a copyright, and as RealityChuck said, you can publish your work, and they can publish your work, although it’s not really without asking, as your permission has already been granted - it’s one of the conditions of posting.
Basically, everything you write is protected by copyright laws. So Kyberneticist’s OP on this thread is his copyrighted material. He wrote it, it’s an original arrangement of words, and he displayed it in a fixed form. This post, of course, is the copyrighted material of Little Nemo.
Now, by the terms of agreement of this message board, the copyright holders of these posts, by posting here, have agreed to allow The Straight Dope to use this copyrighted material within some very broad limits. This includes the right to publish these posts without payment or further permission (or to use the example Kyberneticist gave, to sell this material to Microsoft). However, posters have not surrendered their own copyright rights; they can still use or resell this material to someone else (so after Microsoft bought your algorithm from the SD, you could still sell it to another company).
As for the question of posting someone else’s copyright material here, that’s generally illegal. Let’s say I wanted to post an excerpt from one of Eve’s books. This material is copyrighted to Eve and she’s never given me permission to use it. If I posted it here I cannot grant the publication rights I mentioned above because those rights are not mine to grant. If Eve on the other hand did this, she would be granting The Straight Dope permission to republish this excerpt (assuming she has not surrendered her copyright rights to her publisher).
You CAN, but if we catch you at it we delete the plagiarized stuff and slap you upside the head. If you continue to do this after being warned about it, we ban you. Most people have trouble focussing for a few days after I slap them upside the head, though, so we rarely have repeat offenders.
Lame end user agreements don’t hold up in court, especially considering most people don’t bother reading them. You could start a class-action suit if Cecil or one of his keepers decided to sell books consisting of your work. Its going to be up to the court to decide whether the user agreement is fair. They can write anything in there, but that doesn’t mean its nice and legal. We own your house and everything in it.
I think eventually the legalities boil down to this being a public forum, like shouting into a crowd - something that isn’t terribly protected, but every case is unique so you might as well goto court.
