Some basic guidelines

[sid21177]

 

"You are not allowed to post pics that you did not take, those have to be linked to the source."

given that this is exactly what the moderators blocked - linking image that anybody could see the source to by right clicking and "view image source", im not sure your explanation here is consistent with reality.

 

I've done it with no issues, but you are free to interpret reality to suit your perception

[Guest keio6000]

I've done it with no issues, but you are free to interpret reality to suit your perception

 

the fact that in the recent past the mods here have edited my posts exactly along the lines that i said is the current reality.   you seem to have confused the past and/or that the mods haven't noticed some obscure post of yours yet with current site policy.

 

and toni - you've been a nice guy more or less on this forum for a long time.  but you really deserve a kick in the nether regions for your gratuitous and intellectually cowardly "tl;dr' post.  if you disagree with my point of view, make an argument or at least have the human decency to note that i bothered making my point at all because i care about the viability of this forum.

Edited March 5, 2017 by keio6000

[Suica]

Didn't know the post delivers packages of rage and anger as well. :icon_scratch:

[kvp]

Keio6000, i think you don't really really understand the policy and how to follow it. The idea is to not have any images of copyrighted material on the disks of the forum servers. This can be avoided the most easily if you are only allowed to upload images that you own the copyright to. If you take a picture but it has someone else's copyrighted stuff in it, then it's also not allowed. Linking is only allowed if it's not embedded or linked directly, so you must link to an external readable webpage and not the image content directly. Then it's the owner of the other page to sort out copyright issues.

 

Personally i would disable external embedding altogether and linking to anything not text/html, so people could only add external page links. Even this should be limited to people with a set number of plaintext only posts as this would eliminate most spammers. Disabling youtube autoembed or at least making it viewer selectable would also help for people who have problems playing embedded videos. This would eliminate most images and other media from the forum posts, except external site links and locally stored legal images, the poster has full copyright. The result would be much less work for the admins, much less storage space required and a greatly reduced legal liability problem. Just like back in the days of the good old text only BBS-es. A side effect would be that talking about a single image on a japanese blog post would be next to impossible for those people who are not good enough in japanese to be able to locate the image from the base url of the site and some description on where to click after that.

 

ps: easy posting of images and links is provided on sites where anonymous posting is still allowed, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4chan for more info on how to get an image online so you can link to it

[ToniBabelony]

and toni - you've been a nice guy more or less on this forum for a long time. but you really deserve a kick in the nether regions for your gratuitous and intellectually cowardly "tl;dr' post. if you disagree with my point of view, make an argument or at least have the human decency to note that i bothered making my point at all because i care about the viability of this forum.

Nice way of showing intellectual intelligence by making physical threats. Bigly.

[cteno4]

Ok enough of the rudeness guys. Stop. You are welcome to express your opinions politely on the forum, but not attack each other and get rude. This is one of the main reasons we have guidelines. Folks are warned and the will go on moderated status if they can't comply,

 

Jeff

[cteno4]

Obvious sidestepping of the guidelines by folks copying others' photos to their own services to then embed in the forum are breaking the guidelines.

 

The media guideline is simple, it's fine to use your own photos any way you want, others use a link or embed from media OWNER'S site (or representative like wiki) if that site provides an embed system that works with the forum software. If you link to an image it's appreciated if you add a link to the page it's from to give the owner their due credit and respect and allow others to research further easily if they want to.

 

Thanks,

 

Jeff

[JR 500系]

Guidelines seems easy enough to follow. Thank Jeff!

 

Off topic, Toni san that Tobu Skytree train avatar at the bottom of your signature just looks really cool!  :)

[velotrain]

Can you show us some pictures to visualize the downsides? (Such as the handrails and the undercarriage?)

 

Having looked up the train on hobbysearch, it looks like it is much too expensive for what you get, even without considering the things you listed.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Is this somehow related to the thread?

 

I see no previous posts related to this here, so am mystified - despite keio6000 responding to your post.

 

Were some posts removed or relocated by the moderators?

[katoftw]

The last few posts have been moved from the 'what you ordered/delivered' thread.

[cteno4]

Sorry, should have made a note of that here.

 

Jeff

[kvp]

The media guideline is simple, it's fine to use your own photos any way you want, others use a link or embed from media OWNER'S site (or representative like wiki) if that site provides an embed system that works with the forum software. If you link to an image it's appreciated if you add a link to the page it's from to give the owner their due credit and respect and allow others to research further easily if they want to.

Imho this isn't really working. The embed compatible whitelist is really short, not easy to find and even wikipedia was ruled out recently due to copyright. Direct image linking was also problematic recently as a html page was not available. Also some sites allow embedding but opening the image in full size caused ad redirecting (a html page loading instead of a jpg), which is another problem unrelated to the forum, but brakes this forum's usability (use of that site for sharing personal photos is a pain for those trying to see them). Imho disabling external image embeds fully (while keeping internal ones) would at least make it consistent.

 

ps: starting new members on post moderated and auto erasing if posting links for the first post would eliminate most spammers automagically

[Pashina12]

wikipedia was ruled out recently due to copyright

 

I'm fairly active on Wikipedia so I have to chime in here... if it's on Wikipedia, there's a very high (95%+) likelihood that the image is free to use by anyone for any purpose - and if the image exists on Wikimedia Commons, then it is 100% free for use by anyone for any purpose - if it isn't, it's not allowed to be uploaded to Commons and anything that isn't 100% free to use is deleted from Commons pretty quickly. So, if *anything* should be on the whitelist, it should be Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons.

[medusa]

Thanks for that clarification. It's the main reason I select my layout backgrounds exclusively from Wikimedia Commons. That way I don't need to care about showing photos of my setup - which are, by all means of legal photo copyright, a "derivative work" from the original of the background photo.

[cteno4]

Medusa,

 

The decision not to split hairs on stuff like this like folks taking pictures of the covers of books or product they own to show or something like your personal (and derivative) use on your layout. It's the straight copying or embedding of others work that not allowed (unless their service provides embedding system that works with the forum software) and to just use links for that stuff. Other gray areas like wiki and manufacturer photos which may or may not be clear for use So just use a link as we don't want to get into determining what is cleared and what is not and keep it a clean line for everyone.

 

Cheers,

 

Jeff

[Pashina12]

If it's on Wikimedia Commons there's nothing grey about it - it's good to use. Another non-grey area is - if it's a photo that was taken under the jurisdiction of Japan before 1946, it's public domain, i.e. free for anyone to use for any purpose. And if something's passed into public domain it can't be re-copyrighted unless it's a derivative work that *significantly alters* the original.

 

I don't have a horse in this race, I'm perfectly fine with doing the linking thing, actually I prefer it over having a huge thread with 69 pics embedded each at 1 GB in size that makes the page take three days to load.... I just want everyone to be clear on the wiki stuff. If it's on Wikimedia Commons, it's fair game. If it's on Wikipedia and it's an image, 95% chance it's fair game. If it's on Wikipedia and it's text, it's fair game. You could, if you wanted, copy text from Wikipedia and publish it in a book, as-is, and try to sell it. But you wouldn't be able to claim copyright on a book like that.

[cteno4]

Sorry I was referring to the differentiation of from Wikipedia vs commons etc, s some users don't grok the difference and we don't want to have some in some out (other than systems that provide rights to embed with their embed system.)

 

Jeff