ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL. ALL USERS PLEASE READ

[maize 77,043]

:iagree:  I see copyrighted pictures on Facebook and Pinterest and all sorts of places. My dd says that the rules are probably different for the big social media giants. I just don't get all this. As someone once said here on these boards (a long time ago), if a photographer doesn't want their pictures to be used, why post them on the internet? It completely baffles me. Then again, most human behavior does these days. 

 

 

The internet is just another way of publishing things. I know a professional photographer who also runs a very popular blog and posts many of her pictures on her blog. The fact the the pictures have been published does not negate her copyright, whether they are published in a book, a magazine, or online--that is precisely why copyrights exist! Photography is a business, just as writing, painting, journalism, etc. are businesses, and without copyright laws there is no way to protect the intellectual property rights and income of people who put their time and energy into such work. Can you imagine if there were some easy way for other people to "steal" the work you or your spouse do, with every theft a potential loss of income??? If I made straw hats for a living and sold them at a farmer's market, the fact that a hat was displayed on the table would not make it available for someone to walk away with at will anymore than publishing a photograph on a blog makes it available for someone to snatch and use elsewhere.

 

I know the rules seem silly and frivolous at times and really a picture posted on a social networking sight or forum is not likely to have a significant impact on someone's profits, but the need for copyright protection is real, even on the internet (maybe especially on the internet given the ease with which things can be copied and distributed!) and is not something to dismiss out of hand.

[idnib 16,012]

Thank you. I tried to read this a few times, but given that the past few days have been completely taken up by my going through 40 pages of posts and deleting/editing lots and lots of them, I just can't seem to be able to read and comprehend your post. My brain is fried. My neck and shoulders are killing me. I'm not being snarky or anything. Trust me, I appreciate you posting this. Do you have a Cliffs Notes version? I can barely take all of this anymore  :lol:. 

 

Cliffs Notes version: 

 

Companies protect themselves from users posting copyrighted material by registering a contact with the copyright office. In registering that contact, they have provided an agent who can be contacted in the event a copyright holder needs something removed. If they receive a request via that contact to remove the content, they must do so and notify the user who posted it. If there's a dispute in which the user says they actually own the copyright, it's more complicated. Without a designated agent, the site's owner, individual or organization, is on the hook itself for the users' copyright violations.

 

 

Slightly-longer-but-not-as-long-as-my-earlier-post version:

 

When the web began, it was truly the Wild West when it came to linking and copying content. After a series of lawsuits against companies for hosting copyrighted materials, it was deemed important that companies have some kind of shielding from liability for what their users post. The alternative would be to allow users to post nothing on web sites, leading to a chilling effect on the growth of the web.

 

A law, the DMCA, went into effect in 1998. It's a large and complex law, covering everything from copyright infringement to DVD copy protection software. This law outlined a process in which a company hosting user's own posted content could pay $105 and designate an agent with the U.S. Copyright Office to be contacted in the event a person feels their copyright has been violated. This agent can be contacted using a "takedown letter" from the copyright holder and if the hosting company receives a takedown letter, their duty is to remove the content and notify the user who posted it. If the user says they actually own the copyright, it's more complicated.

 

Companies like Pinterest and Youtube have designated agents and get DMCA takedown notices all the time. They remove content and notify the user. It's just that there's so much infringing content that copyright holders don't pursue that it seems like the companies are getting away with it. If you saw your copyrighted photo or video on a site, you would have a right to contact their agent and have it removed. In practice, it's mostly the large media companies and professional photographers who request it.

 

If a company fails to designate an agent, they are liable for all the infringing content and on the hook for potential damages.

 

 

Susan, I feel terrible that I knew this and it never occurred to me to ask if you had designated a DMCA agent. I can't even say I assumed you had; the thought simply never crossed my mind at all.  :( I haven't slept well since this episode began; I wish I had thought to ask.

[Wildcat 1,439]

Well, I changed my avatar because I have no idea if my other one was 'legit' or not since I took it from a site that came up when I searched for 'avatars'.

 

The new me is a photo I took of dd's Petshop cats. That's allowed, right? It's the closest I could find to the orange & white cartoon cat I used to be. Hope everyone recognizes me!! :coolgleamA:

 

Susan, add me to the list of those who feel absolutely horrible for you. I hope whatever is going on goes away since you (and all of us) are doing everything we can to remedy the situation.

[Colleen in NS 1,205]

Guys, I really can't give you a lot of detail at the moment, but please take my word for it until I'm able to explain.

 

One thing I can tell you: At the time the image was posted, we had not registered an agent with the copyright office (required for safe harbor protection). Better believe we're registered now. But I'm not a professional web hosting company, I'm an educator and a writer, and it never occurred to me to register this forum. 

 

It's maddening and unfortunate. But not a single person ever, inside my company or outside, in the years I've been hosting this board, has ever pointed out that it might be necessary.

 

SWB

 

More hugs.  Saying prayers for peace for you.  Count me as one of the many who are EXTREMELY grateful to you for the books you've written and these forums you've provided over the years.  Eleven years ago I had no clue what I was doing with regards to educating my kids at home.  Yours was the only book practical enough for me to use.  I even bought a copy of the 1999 WTM a few weeks ago, just because that was the first version I had read when my son was three years old!  :D  I will NEVER forget your gifts to the world of home education.  And I hope that whatever is going on will get sorted out without a whole lot more hassle for you.

 

[creekland 41,102]

Guys, I really can't give you a lot of detail at the moment, but please take my word for it until I'm able to explain.

 

One thing I can tell you: At the time the image was posted, we had not registered an agent with the copyright office (required for safe harbor protection). Better believe we're registered now. But I'm not a professional web hosting company, I'm an educator and a writer, and it never occurred to me to register this forum. 

 

It's maddening and unfortunate. But not a single person ever, inside my company or outside, in the years I've been hosting this board, has ever pointed out that it might be necessary.

 

SWB

 

:grouphug: FWIW, I wouldn't have known either.

 

As a silver lining, I hope you can get a small sense just how much many of us appreciate you and all you have done both for homeschooling in general and with these forums as a bonus.  I could never express my gratitude adequately to be honest.  Thank you!  Without this annoyance, I'm not sure I would have THOUGHT to even try, but I sure am thinking of it now...

 

[Shannon in TN 180]

I know SWB said she would tell us when she could, but am I the only one dying to know what the devil is going on?  Who exactly got their panties in a twist that a homeschooling forum was targeted?   :grouphug: to you, Susan.

 

Jeepers....  Someone must've really not liked the paparazzi picture taken of them in a kilt, eating cupcakes, saying "hey, girl..."

[AmyontheFarm 3,079]

I know SWB said she would tell us when she could, but am I the only one dying to know what the devil is going on?  Who exactly got their panties in a twist that a homeschooling forum was targeted?   :grouphug: to you, Susan.

 

Jeepers....  Someone must've really not liked the paparazzi picture taken of them in a kilt, eating cupcakes, saying "hey, girl..."

 

Wait, did someone post a pic of the creators of Common Core wearing a kilt?  Maybe they were angry that homeschoolers didn't just jump blindly on board with it.

 

I went and googled "Common Core" and kilt not as bad of a waste of time, I thought it would be....

[Dolphin 392]

Ok, I have done all the searches etc.... and removed what content I could. However, whenever I search under my user name, nothing comes up, it is as if I had never posted.

 

I removed content under the manage attachments.

 

My dolphin and cow avatar is gone. However, I think someone on here's husband did that one. If so, would he give me permission to keep using it as my avatar?

 

Hi everyone!

[Stacia 81,983]

Ok, I've searched & deleted as much as possible for .jpg, .jpeg, .gif, and .bmp. Seemingly, that got me back to sometime in 2010.

 

However, if I search archived posts, I cannot edit or report those? Some do have pictures? What to do in those cases? Are there other earlier posts I need to check?

 

Also, some of my posts were in threads that have been deleted. But, when I search my posts, I can still see those posts with images, but I can't edit them and clicking on them just leads me to a page saying it doesn't exist. The photos are still showing in the search pages though....

 

Please help. Awaiting further instructions....

Bueller? Bueller?

[NittanyJen 650]

Susan, this can't be explained, but if ever there was a thread that you probably need to just delete from top to bottom, though we are very, very proud of that thread, it would be the Ken Ham Kerfuffle of 2011 (GHC, Peter Enns, Ken getting in trouble, a little while later putting the tsunami "cartoon" on his blog, etc.). I doubt you have forgotten that! It was the beginning of the kilt obsession and was over 2000 posts strong, so my guess is that there are a gazillion kilt photos in that thread.

 

Next would be the cupcake kerfuffle of Aug. 2012. That had a HUGE number of cupcake photos. I still haven't been able to use the advanced search engine to pull up anything older than April.

 

Anyway, if it says Ryan Gosling, Benedict Cumberpatch, or Cupcake in the thread title, it probably needs to go. We are rather obsessed that way! :blushing:

 

Oh no, that means we probably lose the photo of my brother-in-law in his kilt with the chainsaw!  (perfect photo for "this thread is kilt"  I only bring out the one of him wiping out on a snowboard in his kilt if the thread really, seriously needs to be kilt) :D.  Ah well, it's worth the sacrifice if it keeps SWB and my forum-mates free of difficulties!  It can always stealth-reappear later :)  Figuring out the famous from the only infamous right now seems like it's more trouble than it's worth!  Better safe than sorry and this sounds like it is one headache of a project :P

[NittanyJen 650]

Guys, I really can't give you a lot of detail at the moment, but please take my word for it until I'm able to explain.

 

One thing I can tell you: At the time the image was posted, we had not registered an agent with the copyright office (required for safe harbor protection). Better believe we're registered now. But I'm not a professional web hosting company, I'm an educator and a writer, and it never occurred to me to register this forum. 

 

It's maddening and unfortunate. But not a single person ever, inside my company or outside, in the years I've been hosting this board, has ever pointed out that it might be necessary.

 

SWB

 

So sorry you have to go through this in exchange for providing such an amazing service for homeschoolers everywhere :(

[Dreaming of Books 15,524]

Bueller? Bueller?

:lol:  :smilielol5:  :lol:

 

Always nice to see someone with a sense of humor :D. 

[aggieamy 19,064]

Susan -

 

Thank you so much for all you've done for the homeschooling community.  A few of the things I've gotten from you and this wonderful community:

 

Great suggestions for literature - before I read TWTM I was reading DD Disney princess stories at night.   :blushing:  Now we're reading the classics.  

Quiet time - An hour everyday and she can read or play while listening to an audiobook

Story of the World - DH and DD always listen to this in the car whenever they go anywhere.  I think DH enjoys it as much as DD does.  

 

Thanks again.  You've made me a better educator and parent.

 

Amy

[M.A. 857]

Ok, I have done all the searches etc.... and removed what content I could. However, whenever I search under my user name, nothing comes up, it is as if I had never posted.

 

I removed content under the manage attachments.

 

My dolphin and cow avatar is gone. However, I think someone on here's husband did that one. If so, would he give me permission to keep using it as my avatar?

 

Hi everyone!

That was my uncle, I will shoot him an email and ask if you would like Dolphin.

 

ETA! pm'ing you dolphin!

[BatmansWife 637]

Well....proof again that I am always the LAST to know anything!  This was posted 5 days ago and I'm just seeing it now.  :blush: Why didn't anyone tell me?!  Oh, well...I guess they did....in the announcement.  Problem is, I only ever go to the K-8 Curriculum board...and, even though I check it multiple times a day...I admit....I don't often look up.  I wonder how many other people have not seen this message??  I'm seriously considering starting a new topic to tell people to go read the announcement.  Would that be ok to do? 

 

I'm assuming my avatar of "me" has to go?  :crying:  It was a miracle that I even figured out how to get it on here...so hopefully I can figure out how to replace it with something else.  I wondered why lately there were so many silhouettes of faceless people....and I wondered why in the world Hunter had changed her avatar (it just seemed so out of character). 

 

I went to my "manage attachments" and it says I have 0.  Does that mean I have no pictures in threads?  I only ever posted a few...maybe a year ago, of our workboxes. 

 

 

How do we know if our avatar needs to be removed?

 

I'd like to know this too...I went to google and typed in "public domain pictures of batgirl"...but I still don't know if I'm allowed to use any of them. 
 

[Dolphin 392]

Yeah! I have permission for my avatar. :) I am doing a happy dance over here.

 

 

That was my uncle, I will shoot him an email and ask if you would like Dolphin.

 

ETA! pm'ing you dolphin!

 

[stripe 4,182]

Another reason not to take random internet images...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/life/Definitely-one-way-to-get-students-attention-30242979.html

[Scarlett 28,948]

Another reason not to take random internet images...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/life/Definitely-one-way-to-get-students-attention-30242979.html

That is nuts!

[dhudson 672]

I have been busy so I haven't been on the boards for a bit, but I have checked all my posts. I, apparently, am incredibly boring and didn't have even one picture. In real life, I am far more interesting, I promise!

 

SWB, I am so sorry for this mess and am grateful for what you do on our behalf. I will be praying for a positive outcome for you in this and that is stops affecting you and yours.

[AMJ 31,946]

I'll be able to answer this question as soon as the current situation is resolved...don't worry, I will update as soon as I'm able.

 

And to those of you who've offered to donate: Thanks. If it comes to that, you may end up seeing an optional donation button just to help us meet the costs of this specific situation. Only if necessary.

 

Onward, forward...

 

SWB

 

If it comes to that please do put out that donation button.  None of of intended such a situation to befall you.

 

I've been away from the forums again, but I followed the directions someone posted in an early response to this thread and deleted what I could find from mine (thankfully little).  I'll keep scanning through, just in case, and I'll keep scanning the 11 or so pages of this thread to see if you have any other posts with more info.  I noticed you have been able to give a bit more detail here and there.  Thank you, and sorry!

 

I don't think my avatar should be a problem since it's the Nanowrimo badge awarded to those who complete NaNoWriMo (they give these to us so we can post them on blogs or anywhere else).  If at any point you find I am in error in this, or you are just plain concerned, please quote this post and I'll see your response and remove the avatar.

[tabinfl 676]

I deleted the "Bob the Angry Flower" apostrophe comic I posted some time back, left the link to the site (shame on me, I should know better, though I've gotten the impression over the years that the creator doesn't mind as long as it's linked back to the site so they can sell posters & stuff).

 

I know SWB said she would tell us when she could, but am I the only one dying to know what the devil is going on?  Who exactly got their panties in a twist that a homeschooling forum was targeted?   :grouphug: to you, Susan.

Please let's be careful about painting a copyright owner as some kind of bad guy(/girl) for trying to protect their work.

 

As others have pointed out, someone taking the results of your hard work, things you or your family depend on to make a living, and distributing it without paying you stinks. The fact that it's so easy and happens so often on the interwebs doesn't make it right.

 

I know I'd get my "panties in a twist" over that (and have, when companies I've done contract programming work for didn't want to pay me). I'm sure many of us would have twisted panties if we ran across a website giving away e-book copies of TWTM without paying SWB. Describing it in derogatory terms like that isn't fair to the people who own the work in question.

[Susan Wise Bauer 100,170]

Well....proof again that I am always the LAST to know anything!  This was posted 5 days ago and I'm just seeing it now.  :blush: Why didn't anyone tell me?!  Oh, well...I guess they did....in the announcement.  Problem is, I only ever go to the K-8 Curriculum board...and, even though I check it multiple times a day...I admit....I don't often look up.  I wonder how many other people have not seen this message??  I'm seriously considering starting a new topic to tell people to go read the announcement.  Would that be ok to do? 

 

 

I'm assuming my avatar of "me" has to go?  :crying:  It was a miracle that I even figured out how to get it on here...so hopefully I can figure out how to replace it with something else.  I wondered why lately there were so many silhouettes of faceless people....and I wondered why in the world Hunter had changed her avatar (it just seemed so out of character). 

 

I went to my "manage attachments" and it says I have 0.  Does that mean I have no pictures in threads?  I only ever posted a few...maybe a year ago, of our workboxes. 

 

 

 

I'd like to know this too...I went to google and typed in "public domain pictures of batgirl"...but I still don't know if I'm allowed to use any of them. 

 

Sure, start a new topic!

 

And on the avatars...Guys, I don't know. If you can confirm that a photo is public domain, obviously it's fine, but if you aren't absolutely sure, keep looking. 

[kahlanne 721]

I can't find any photos I posted. Hope this works out quickly so that SWB is able to get back to her normal life making sure we posters "behave" in hot topics.  LOL. Seriously though, I am sorry this is happening especially to this board. I have benefited greatly from it over the years and would hate to see it change.

[Space station 646]

Please let's be careful about painting a copyright owner as some kind of bad guy(/girl) for trying to protect their work.

 

As others have pointed out, someone taking the results of your hard work, things you or your family depend on to make a living, and distributing it without paying you stinks. The fact that it's so easy and happens so often on the interwebs doesn't make it right.

 

I know I'd get my "panties in a twist" over that (and have, when companies I've done contract programming work for didn't want to pay me). I'm sure many of us would have twisted panties if we ran across a website giving away e-book copies of TWTM without paying SWB. Describing it in derogatory terms like that isn't fair to the people who own the work in question.

 

My grandfather spent his life running the photojournalism company called Blackstar.  One of his main roles was to protect his photographers' work from being used in print without compensation.  It was a tremendous amount of work then (20-60 years ago), and I can't imagine how much worse it is now for journalists to protect their work on the internet. 

 

While I understand, I hate that SWB is going through this.  My grandfather would have handled the situation with grace and respect, not intimidation and threats.  

[BatmansWife 637]

Sure, start a new topic!

 

And on the avatars...Guys, I don't know. If you can confirm that a photo is public domain, obviously it's fine, but if you aren't absolutely sure, keep looking. 

 

Thank you for your reply Susan.  I will go over to the K-8 board and start a new topic, if one hasn't already been started.

 

My old avatar was in the public domain images afterall...but I found another one that I like even better.  I must say...I do like the new and improved me (everyone loves a makeover now and then).  But, all kidding aside....thank you Susan for this forum, thank you for all you do.  I'm sorry you've had all of this trouble. 

[Cheryl in CA 173]

I took my avatar (a hummingbird in my back yard), so it's safe until I feel like changing it.

 

ETA that I changed it to a miffed hummingbird (also from my backyard) to reflect my feelings (that this happened, not that we have to check our posts).

[Targhee 3,452]

Updated avatar :-(... My old one had special meaning for me.

[Forget-Me-Not 3,957]

When I view this board/my profile on my PC, my new avatar (that I took myself) shows up.

 

When I view on my iPad, my old avatar (that I took down per SWBs request) still shows up. 

 

So. . . now what?  I even signed out of WTM and re-logged in, thinking maybe it would update.  Nope.

[Catwoman 74,049]

I loved doing the birthday threads, but can't see myself doing that anymore. Part of the fun were the nice, classy images. It's sad. [/size]

I always loved opening the birthday threads to see what e-card you had chosen!

 

Of course, my favorites were always the ones you did for me. :001_wub:

[Dreaming of Books 15,524]

I always loved opening the birthday threads to see what e-card you had chosen!

 

Of course, my favorites were always the ones you did for me. :001_wub:

You're so sweet :grouphug: . I'll miss the birthday threads most of all. When I was deleting the ones from your birthday, I actually got teary-eyed. Deleting all these images was quite depressing :(. Your birthday images were a blast - Grumpy Cat and all :D. 

[Shannon in TN 180]

I deleted the "Bob the Angry Flower" apostrophe comic I posted some time back, left the link to the site (shame on me, I should know better, though I've gotten the impression over the years that the creator doesn't mind as long as it's linked back to the site so they can sell posters & stuff).

 

 

Please let's be careful about painting a copyright owner as some kind of bad guy(/girl) for trying to protect their work.

 

As others have pointed out, someone taking the results of your hard work, things you or your family depend on to make a living, and distributing it without paying you stinks. The fact that it's so easy and happens so often on the interwebs doesn't make it right.

 

I know I'd get my "panties in a twist" over that (and have, when companies I've done contract programming work for didn't want to pay me). I'm sure many of us would have twisted panties if we ran across a website giving away e-book copies of TWTM without paying SWB. Describing it in derogatory terms like that isn't fair to the people who own the work in question.

I get what you're saying. I used to have a blog (it might even still be out there on the interwebz somewhere) and I would watermark all my pictures so people couldn't just take one and claim it as theirs, and link to the owner for those I used from Flickr's Creative Commons. My frustration is that - it seems - they're being particularly harsh. Threatening an educator/educator's forum with penalties and legal action when 1) it wasn't even her posting the pics and 2) obviously no one here is out to make a buck off said picture, seems over the top (hence the "panties in a twist" remark).

 

Now, we don't know what specifically happened (yet) but the tone of the event isn't nice. It doesn't seem like they're saying, "hey SWB, you have this forum, and they're posting copywrited/trademarked images that they shouldn't. Here's why (insert legalese here). Please stop and ask them to stop." Maybe I'm being a little Pollyanna about it, but jumping to the threat of legal action in this particular situation seems extreme to me. It's also possible that I'm misunderstanding the tone of things (silly black/white words on a screen don't have a "tone"), and the bully-ish-ness behavior of the offended isn't there and they actually are being nice about it. If that's the case, I retract my "panties in a twist" statement from earlier.

[Sebastian (a lady) 9,582]

When I view this board/my profile on my PC, my new avatar (that I took myself) shows up.

 

When I view on my iPad, my old avatar (that I took down per SWBs request) still shows up. 

 

So. . . now what?  I even signed out of WTM and re-logged in, thinking maybe it would update.  Nope.

 

There was a suggestion upthread that the images might be cached.  I'm not sure if that means you have to clear cookies in order to not see these old images.

 

fwiw, the avatar I see for you now is of a lovely rocky seacoast.

[Kareni 62,694]

FYI, all of my "kilt" posts are of my brother-in-law and are a-okay :).  Well, in terms of copyright, anyway :)  But good heavens . . . though I'm pretty sure I never posted more than 5% of anything anybody wrote, or unattributed.  If I come across anything that could be dicey, I'll kill it.

 

Did you mean to say that you'd kilt it?

 

 

My sympathies, SWB, for all you're dealing with.  Your books and this board have had a great and positive impact in my life.  Thank you for all you do and have done.

 

Regards,

Kareni

[curlgirl 94]

Well I looked under setting and attachments and there was nothing to delete.  :blushing:

I did take down my avatar of pink high heels. So I think that covers it?

So sorry about this Susan. I appreciate this forum so much! Thank you for all your hard work. Hope you can get it all worked out soon. :grouphug:

[AMJ 31,946]

I know SWB said she would tell us when she could, but am I the only one dying to know what the devil is going on?  Who exactly got their panties in a twist that a homeschooling forum was targeted?   :grouphug: to you, Susan.

 

Jeepers....  Someone must've really not liked the paparazzi picture taken of them in a kilt, eating cupcakes, saying "hey, girl..."

 

Cute tomato in your avatar!

 

I'm sure SWB has not been at liberty to disclose who requested what be taken down, at least not yet.  I'm assuming it is a professional individual or business, requesting the take-down of something he/she/they either created or bought.  I don't think they are intentionally being mean in picking on a homeschooling forum -- I think it's a case of having to hold EVERYONE to the same standard (not allowing for ANY exceptions) lest it later be deemed favoritism and used to argue that someone else (who knowingly violated copyright) be let off the hook, too.  Once precedent is set it's there to stay, pretty much.

[Forget-Me-Not 3,957]

There was a suggestion upthread that the images might be cached. I'm not sure if that means you have to clear cookies in order to not see these old images.

 

fwiw, the avatar I see for you now is of a lovely rocky seacoast.

Thanks! I'm guessing I just need to let the cache update on my iPad then. I'm too lazy to clear it and re-enter all my passwords, haha! The coastal pic is the right one!

[lots of little ducklings 17,514]

Exactly, I fully agree.

 

IMO, most of the images shouldn't be a problem because they are only linked, not hosted here. BUT, there is no sense in TWTM engaging in a legal battle over shirtless photos of Ewan McGregor, Viggo Mortenson as Aragorn or cupcakes decorated like kilts. Making an effort to remove them is the least the company can ask, given all that they provide, including tolerating moms releasing some steam now and then.

 

From now on, we have to draw our OWN pictures of shirtless Ewan McGregor.

 

blob-mapping ewan mcgregor! that's brilliant!  :hurray:

[Mandylubug 5,254]

it was probably the designer of the horrid avocado outfit from the yoga thread....

[Susan Wise Bauer 100,170]

My frustration is that - it seems - they're being particularly harsh. Threatening an educator/educator's forum with penalties and legal action when 1) it wasn't even her posting the pics and 2) obviously no one here is out to make a buck off said picture, seems over the top (hence the "panties in a twist" remark).

 

Now, we don't know what specifically happened (yet) but the tone of the event isn't nice. It doesn't seem like they're saying, "hey SWB, you have this forum, and they're posting copywrited/trademarked images that they shouldn't. Here's why (insert legalese here). Please stop and ask them to stop." Maybe I'm being a little Pollyanna about it, but jumping to the threat of legal action in this particular situation seems extreme to me. It's also possible that I'm misunderstanding the tone of things (silly black/white words on a screen don't have a "tone"), and the bully-ish-ness behavior of the offended isn't there and they actually are being nice about it. If that's the case, I retract my "panties in a twist" statement from earlier.

You're not misunderstanding. They're not being nice. No retraction needed.

[creekland 41,102]

You're not misunderstanding. They're not being nice. No retraction needed.

 

I probably shouldn't print my thoughts about them right now, esp since no income was being made off any of the pics on here.  :cursing:

 

IMO, they should have been flattered to know they were getting the publicity from so many. It should have been an ego boost!

 

I'll admit to having less respect for those related to the images right now (overall) and look forward to knowing who should be the target of that less respect rather than "in general" when you can share more info.

 

 

[Grover 1,739]

You're not misunderstanding. They're not being nice. No retraction needed.

 

:-(  I'm sorry we've caused you this trouble.  Put up that donation jar if you need to.  Make sure it accepts foreign currency. 

[ElizabethB 5,843]

I forgot, I also quote Geraldine Rodgers both here and on my web site. But, since her book is 1,000+ pages long, the length that you can quote before becoming problematic is quite high.

 

Also, she has given me permission to quote as much and as often as I want from her book in my website and on this forum. She thinks homeschooling, and especially classical homeschooling, is great!!

 

She is in her upper 80s now, so I email her only once or twice a year, but when she was in her early 80s I corresponded extensively with her and she had a lot of energy and extensive knowledge about phonics, spelling, and the history of reading instruction.

[Lang Syne Boardie 36,656]

My replacement avatar was removed but it was verified public domain. This one that I have now is also public domain. Any that I might upload in the future will be public domain.

[Unicorn. 2,474]

Thanks! I'm guessing I just need to let the cache update on my iPad then. I'm too lazy to clear it and re-enter all my passwords, haha! The coastal pic is the right one!

I see a forget me not flower.

[Unicorn. 2,474]

I assume what is going on is something just like this case:  https://gigaom.com/2013/07/15/goodreads-hit-with-copyright-suit-over-fan-photo/

[Susan Wise Bauer 100,170]

I assume what is going on is something just like this case:  https://gigaom.com/2013/07/15/goodreads-hit-with-copyright-suit-over-fan-photo/

 

YES.

 

Exactly in all details, including law firm and amount.

 

SWB

[maize 77,043]

YES.

 

Exactly in all details, including law firm and amount.

 

SWB

Susan, do you have an archived version of the forum from before people started removing images? It may make a difference if the images in question were hotlinked rather than uploaded to the site, but I expect you would need proof.

[Scarlett 28,948]

YES.

 

Exactly in all details, including law firm and amount.

 

SWB

Wow. Crazy world we live in. So sorry Susan.

[mommymilkies 8,920]

I've heard that courts are starting to catch on to this sort of copyright trolling so their money digging activities will hopefully be stopped soon.  Totally ridiculous. 

[BatmansWife 637]

YES.

 

Exactly in all details, including law firm and amount.

 

SWB

 

:ohmy:   :svengo:

 

ETA: I see my avatar got taken down.  I'll try to upload a photo that I take with my own camera.

 

ETA again: I just took a picture of my own JB with my own camera for my avatar.  Not that this is even important....compared to what poor Susan is going through.