Re: Announce: A2Command 1.0 - Full Release

[Stavros Karatsoridis <skaratso@gmail.com>]

On Feb 25, 8:33 am, Steven Hirsch <snhir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/25/2011 05:46 AM, A little note for Google wrote:
>
> > Dr. Ken B.
>
> > Stripping peoples PDF's and copyright notices does not make them
> > yours.  You have stripped all of Brian Wiser's messages from the
> > Applied Engineering documents and still claim that you did them.  The
> > only problem is the AE Brochures are not an AE Product.  They were
> > produced by Brian specifically forhttp://AE.AppleArchives.com
>
> > Not crediting people for their work is sad and removal of copyright
> > messages is a crime.   Those items were produced in 2010 by Brian and
> > you have been asked to remove them numerous times.  Since that has not
> > work, we will shift this to a public arena.  Many people put in a ton
> > of work to make these items available.  QUIT CLAIMING THEM AS YOURS.
>
> I'm just an onlooker with no dog in this fight, but I'm fuzzy about the exact
> creative work that you're claiming copyright on.  Unless you have had the
> rights to the original AE documents granted to you by AE (Dan and Ann Pote) or
> its successor, I assume you're speaking of your copyright claim to an
> aggregation or presentation of these documents.  If so, I can appreciate the
> amount of work that went into such an endeavor and can certainly understand
> your annoyance at having another party simply lift it whole.  But if you in
> fact do not have a license grant to reproduce those original documents, then
> your presentation of them on your website would in itself be a copyright
> violation.
>
> I'm not going behave like a certain (thankfully) long-departed denizen of csa2
> and preach about the immorality of copyright violations against entities that
> either no longer exist or if they do could care less.  I am not offended and
> to the contrary find both sites to be helpful and useful.
>
> But, can we be careful about calling each other criminals?  This entire
> situation seems primarily a matter of common respect and courtesy.

I think that the big issue is that someone is taking a work produced
by another and changing it to make it look like their own.

Scanning old documentation is a HUGE undertaking. It takes a lot of
time and effort to do properly. Now, I personally don't care if
someone takes a scan that I made and uploaded for the community at
large to enjoy and posts it to their own distribution site. Many of
the documents in question have been posted to multiple sites anyway.

The issue is someone else taking credit for that undertaking. The
heavy work is in the scanning itself. For someone to go in after the
fact and remove notices that say, "scanned by so and so" and then
adding a "Downloaded from site x" to every page is a slap in the face
of the person who actually did the hard work in the first place.
Because when people visit the freeloader's site they think it's the
freeloader who did all the work.

I don't mind if a scanned work gets picked up by multiple sites, but
IT IS NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT *NOT* okay to alter that scanned work IN
ANY WAY! Not to remove credit placed by someone who actually did the
work, and not to advertise the site it was downloaded from.