ATT: GGaskill

speerchucker30x3 · Apr 22, 2014

ATT: GGaskill

Yah know.

You try to do a few people a favor, take and post some photos of setups and answer a few questions and some nipple wrench decides he wants to be a prick. Fine! If I get the impression that I have worn out my welcome, I get up and I fucking leave, which is exactly what I did. I gave Bullshit Bill this forum, he can have it all to himself. There are lot's of other forums, I don't need to park my ass here just to be harassed.

But now I am getting emails that he is stealing my photos and my text from other forums. Text and photos he has NO FUCKING PERMISSION to use. That, is just BULLSHIT! I want those photos and text taken down.

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/gunsmithing/dying-forum-283774/index2.html

In the same post he also posted photos which he stole from:

Pro Tram System - Edge Technology

Which he seams to be claiming as his own. Well, they aren’t.

Granted, the photos I post are not of state of the art equipment. But they happen to be of MY OWN equipment, in MY OWN SHOP! And it's real world. I do not borrow or steal photos off the web and write glorified tales about it. Some of the setups I use may be very basic. But they are setups I have been taught in my 35 years of working in gunshops and machine shops and they are setups that are currently being used in the field. If you don't care for the way I write or my Micky Mouse equipment well, I'm sorry, that's just to bad.

Thank you for your time in this matter

Rod Henrickson

MIBill · Apr 22, 2014

ALL works reproduced are protected by under the "fair use doctrine". See: 17 U.S.C. § 107

17 U.S.C. § 107

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. (emphasis added)

That the works of the complainant are "copyrighted" is a dubious claim in the first instance. However, assuming that they are, use for the purpose of comment, teaching and even criticism (although not my intended use) ARE protected under 17 U.S.C. § 107. For those reasons I will NOT edit and remove any of the content.

keydiverfla · Apr 23, 2014

Lets all start publishing nekkid pics of our exgirlfriends

Chazsani · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill:

Ivtake it as a sign of a disrespectful person that uses anything w/o prior consent. Use a tool in a persons tool box w/o asking... and I call BS on quoting some US code to justify the theft. In my eyes, you are a thief.

batw · Apr 23, 2014

i

Chazsani said:
MIBill:

Ivtake it as a sign of a disrespectful person that uses anything w/o prior consent. Use a tool in a persons tool box w/o asking... and I call BS on quoting some US code to justify the theft. In my eyes, you are a thief.

I second that!!!!!

N Sekulic · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill said:
ALL works reproduced are protected by under the "fair use doctrine". See: 17 U.S.C. § 107

17 U.S.C. § 107

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. (emphasis added)

That the works of the complainant are "copyrighted" is a dubious claim in the first instance. However, assuming that they are, use for the purpose of comment, teaching and even criticism (although not my intended use) ARE protected under 17 U.S.C. § 107. For those reasons I will NOT edit and remove any of the content.

Congratulations, you proved you don't know shit about tramming a mill and that you don't know shit about whats proper ... Douchebag ...

ahall · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill said:
ALL works reproduced are protected by under the "fair use doctrine". See: 17 U.S.C. § 107

17 U.S.C. § 107

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. (emphasis added)

That the works of the complainant are "copyrighted" is a dubious claim in the first instance. However, assuming that they are, use for the purpose of comment, teaching and even criticism (although not my intended use) ARE protected under 17 U.S.C. § 107. For those reasons I will NOT edit and remove any of the content.

I see nothing in the original posting about copyrights. So why digress into this defense so quickly?
Yes the term “stealing” was used, but jumping into copyright law as justification is a bit of a stretch.

A defense of this nature is rather weak in the context of our forum.
What does this tell us about an individual when legality is the first course of defense?

Legality is a proper defense for a court of law.
Simple legality is not a justification and it does not make an action right.
Laws are a boundary to define the limits at which a behavior becomes criminal or unjust.
They are not the standard for understanding the morality of an action.

When legality is the defense, I have to wonder if the actions or individual in question can rise to a higher standard.

MIBill · Apr 23, 2014

WTF!!! This has got to be the biggest bunch of hypocrites I have ever run across in my LIFE! I copy 56 words and an image from a non-copyrighted site, give credit to the author and suddenly I'm a thief... the scourge to of the Fing internet.

Do you realize that the person you are defending has not only ADMITTED to the theft of copyrighted material but has also facilitated others to do the same ON THIS SITE?

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/v...g-full-length-videos-now-free-youtube-270208/

That he wants to NOW take a piss about someone lifting 56 words a one image with no commercial value after ADMITTING to the theft of $1,000s in copyrighted works.... All I can say is WTF!!!

That anyone here would take up his side and defend him... WTF!!!

ahall · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill said:
WTF!!! This has got to be the biggest bunch of hypocrites I have ever run across in my LIFE! I copy 56 words and an image from a non-copyrighted site, give credit to the author and suddenly I'm a thief... the scourge to of the Fing internet.

Do you realize that the person you are defending has not only ADMITTED to the theft of copyrighted material but has also facilitated others to do the same ON THIS SITE?

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/v...g-full-length-videos-now-free-youtube-270208/

That he wants to NOW take a piss about someone lifting 56 words a one image with no commercial value after ADMITTING to the theft of $1,000s in copyrighted works.... All I can say is WTF!!!

That anyone here would take up his side and defend him... WTF!!!

Trying to claim the higher moral ground by saying the other party is worse is the type of argument I expect from my twin sons (age 3).
Hypocrisy infers that we as a group are guilty of the act you are accused of. Please support that claim if you can.

Are the original posters comments untrue or invalid?
Is the material plagiarized?

MIBill · Apr 23, 2014

ahall said:
Trying to claim the higher moral ground by saying the other party is worse is the type of argument I expect from my twin sons (age 3).
Hypocrisy infers that we as a group are guilty of the act you are accused of. Please support that claim if you can.

Are the original posters comments untrue or invalid?

I really wouldn't expect you to even begin to comprehend morality. However, lets give it a try... There is NOTHING immoral, improper, unjust or illegal about copying a snippet of text and an image for the purpose of comparing two different ideas. It is done every single day here, in academics, in journalism... How could one quote anyone or anything. It is accepted around the world and in every walk of life that ideas CAN quoted with credit given to the author... Which I did. Is there something wrong with quoting P.T Barnum when he said “Nobody ever lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public.” ? Or J.F.K. when he said "Ask not what your country can do for you..."? Of course not.

Theft involves the taking of someone else's property and since nothing was taken, he still has what he had before AND he was never deprived of what he had for a single moment. I copied 56 words... And there is NO harm to him in terms of injury to himself or his property rights... No theft has occurred. NOTHING was stolen. And his ability to use the image and text for financial gain has NOT been diminished. NO ONE has been given access to his words for free who could not have accessed them free of charge to begin with.

SO in this instance the OPs claims and your assertions are false, baseless and utterly absurd!

ahall said:
Is the material plagiarized?

"pla·gia·rism

noun
1. an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author"

Source: Plagiarism | Define Plagiarism at Dictionary.com

See how that works... Copy a part of something and call it your own... Plagiarism. Copy a part of something and credit the author... NOT plagiarism. So once again NO your assertion that I have done something immoral is baseless.

Butch Lambert · Apr 23, 2014

You don't understand the big picture do you.

Abeship · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill:

I never really saw you credit him for those photos, I just read "here is how I do the job"

ahall · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill said:
I really wouldn't expect you to even begin to comprehend morality. However, lets give it a try... There is NOTHING immoral, improper, unjust or illegal about copying a snippet of text and an image for the purpose of comparing two different ideas. It is done every single day here, in academics, in journalism... How could one quote anyone or anything. It is accepted around the world and in every walk of life that ideas CAN quoted with credit given to the author... Which I did. Is there something wrong with quoting P.T Barnum when he said “Nobody ever lost a dollar by underestimating the taste of the American public.” ? Or J.F.K. when he said "Ask not what your country can do for you..."? Of course not.

Theft involves the taking of someone else's property and since nothing was taken, he still has what he had before AND he was never deprived of what he had for a single moment. I copied 56 words... And there is NO harm to him in terms of injury to himself or his property rights... No theft has occurred. NOTHING was stolen. And his ability to use the image and text for financial gain has NOT been diminished. NO ONE has been given access to his words for free who could not have accessed them free of charge to begin with.

SO in this instance the OPs claims and your assertions are false, baseless and utterly absurd!

"pla·gia·rism

noun
1. an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, as by not crediting the original author"

Source: Plagiarism | Define Plagiarism at Dictionary.com

See how that works... Copy a part of something and call it your own... Plagiarism. Copy a part of something and credit the author... NOT plagiarism. So once again NO your assertion that I have done something immoral is baseless.

Yes, I do see how that works.
Now please refer to the link in the original posting and show us where you gave any credit to Pro Tram for the photos you used.

When I review the original post there are several grievances.
1) Photos were used without permission.

You do not state that you had his permission, only that you were not required to have it. Granted you may not need it, but that does not make his claims false, baseless, or utterly absurd.
Is the claim false?

2) Photos of a commercial product were used without permission, and presented as your own.

There is a bit of room for interpretation when I read the posting on the link, but I see no citation that would lead me to the source of the photos of the pro tram system.
What did it miss?

As to the concept of theft, you cited the copyright laws earlier. In doing so you acknowledged an understanding of the concept that unauthorized duplication of intellectual property can rise to an act of theft.
You cannot now claim that theft is limited to the act of physical removal to justify your moral position.

The OP's prior bad acts are not justification and are not in question.
The law is not what is in question.
The original postings use of the word “stealing” seems to be valid in the context it was used.

Is the original posters grievance valid?
Were the photos used with permission?

wesg · Apr 23, 2014

MIBill said:
There is NOTHING immoral, improper, unjust or illegal about copying a snippet of text and an image for the purpose of comparing two different ideas.

True. But my take on it was that you posted it with intent of slander. Or just to be a dick.

Mike H · Apr 23, 2014

good grief

keydiverfla · Apr 23, 2014

What happened to the girlfriend pics?

wesg · Apr 23, 2014

keydiverfla said:
What happened to the girlfriend pics?

Yeah, WTF?

If I could get one, I'd help you out with that. But, you know, small hands , small feet. It's really a horrible assumption to make based on those observations.

Even if it is true.

scojen · Apr 23, 2014

mibill,
Here is something new from the general forum.

-1

ahall · Apr 23, 2014

keydiverfla said:
What happened to the girlfriend pics?

Sorry guys, wrong forum

ButchC · Apr 24, 2014

Over on another forum I visit if you make mention of the forum moderation it gets removed and you get a stern warning. 2nd violation you get the axe. Never could figure out why they are so stern about it?

,,, between of this thread and the one going on over on the general forum I no longer have to wonder why?.

Thanks for solving one of life's mysteries guys!

ATT: GGaskill

Titanium

Hot Rolled

Cast Iron

Cast Iron

Cast Iron

Plastic

Stainless

Hot Rolled

Stainless

Hot Rolled

Titanium

Hot Rolled

Stainless

Titanium

Aluminum

Cast Iron

Titanium

Stainless

Stainless

Aluminum

Similar threads