Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 How about Yang v. Mic Network, Inc., No. 18-CV-7628 AJN, 2019 WL 4640263 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24 2019). Court Deems Screenshot Fair Game for Fair Use Defense in Copyright Action 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solar Legion Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 12 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said: Love it. Can your mom and I start the car again, now? Considering you've got that reversed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said: How about Yang v. Mic Network, Inc., No. 18-CV-7628 AJN, 2019 WL 4640263 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24 2019). Court Deems Screenshot Fair Game for Fair Use Defense in Copyright Action As I (actually already) stated, if you want to say that publishing screenshots with the intent of disclosing somebody's private information is covered by fair use policy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 They always find ways of dancing around the truth without ever admitting to being incorrect. 🙄 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said: They always find ways of dancing around the truth without ever admitting to being incorrect. 🙄 Are you blind? I mentioned fair use policy like 10 posts before yours But let me quote, maybe you are in fact not able to find it in a thread consisting of 3 pages. So here you go, you are welcome: "So you're saying that publishing screenshots with the intent of disclosing somebody's private information is covered by fair use policy, because this would be the only case where a screenshot does not impose a copyright infringement. Ridiculous." Edited August 11, 2021 by Noelle Delaunay 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: As I (actually already) stated, if you want to say that publishing screenshots with the intent of disclosing somebody's private information is covered by fair use policy. Which still has nothing whatsoever to do with copyright. That would be considered doxxing and could be considered a crime depending on several things especially if the information was obtained illegally. So again, it's NOT a copyright or fair use issue as far as LL is concerned. If someone is being doxxed, they need to contact law enforcement and not LL ETA..or contact the website where it is posted. Edited August 11, 2021 by Rowan Amore 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 10 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: Are you blind? I mentioned fair use policy like 10 posts before yours But let me quote, maybe you are in fact not able to find it in a thread consisting of 3 pages. So here you go, you are welcome: "So you're saying that publishing screenshots with the intent of disclosing somebody's private information is covered by fair use policy, because this would be the only case where a screenshot does not impose a copyright infringement. Ridiculous." No. Not blind. Not a child throwing a temper tantrum because I didn't get my way either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Just now, Silent Mistwalker said: No. Not blind. Not a child throwing a temper tantrum because I didn't get my way either. Well it's a bit silly to accuse someone of not knowing about fair use policy when they were the first ones to even mention fair use policy in this thread, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Just now, Noelle Delaunay said: Well it's a bit silly to accuse someone of not knowing about fair use policy when they were the first ones to even mention fair use policy in this thread, isn't it? No. Not when people do that sort of thing all the time and it turns out they don't know as much about it as they think they do most of the time. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 1 minute ago, Silent Mistwalker said: No. Not when people do that sort of thing all the time and it turns out they don't know as much about it as they think they do most of the time. I'm still waiting for the argument why publishing screenshots with malicious intend (for example disclosing private information) falls under fair use policy. But all there is is polemics. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: I'm still waiting for the argument why publishing screenshots with malicious intend (for example disclosing private information) falls under fair use policy. But all there is is polemics. You can take pictures of whatever the heck you want in SL and it's covered. You're allowed. The End. LLs reach does not extend to where you ultimately post those pictures. Fair use is taking the picture. Anything done OUTSIDE of SL and LL properties, is irrelevant in this thread. That has to be taken up with the website that is posting it or law enforcement. Not sure why you're having an issue with understanding that. If I take a picture of an IM I had with someone where they mentioned their RL name and address and I took a screenshot, I am forbidden by LL ToS from posting that in any LL property such as this forum or inworld. If I were to post that same screenshot on any other website, LL has NO control over that. I legally took the photo. Posting it on VS or some other website might be a legal issue but NOT an LL issue. Then, it needs to be reported to that website or legal authority. Edited August 11, 2021 by Rowan Amore 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Just now, Rowan Amore said: Fair use is taking the picture. No. Fair use would be about the process of publishing the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 7 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: I'm still waiting for the argument why publishing screenshots with malicious intend (for example disclosing private information) falls under fair use policy. But all there is is polemics. https://tinytake.com/screen-capture-copyright-violation-or-fair-use/ Quote Fair use only applies to works that are copyrighted. Generally, anything that is not copyrighted is considered fit for public use. To determine fair use of copyrighted works you must evaluate it against the four-factor balancing test. 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. Quote Moral of the story: It’s likely that if you are using a screen capture of copyrighted works to educate, comment, or criticize the topic the use of screen capture images are aptly deemed fair use. It generally comes down to money. If you are going to profit from the use of a screen capture image, you may be in violation of fair use. 1 Princeton University Press vs. Michigan Document Services 99 F.3rd 1381 (6th Circuit 1996). Cert. Den’d. 117 S. Ct. 1336 (1997). If the intent is to profit from it monetarily then you would be correct but in this case money is not the object. Harassment is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 4 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: No. Fair use would be about the process of publishing the picture. Did you read what I posted earlier? 38 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: And they aren't. From the Official Wiki. Copyright Licenses This is the legal permission that you can show the festival organizers or anyone else who’s interested: As long as you comply with the terms and conditions below, both Linden Lab and the Residents of Second Life (collectively, “we”) grant you the following copyright licenses: A License To Capture. You may take snapshots and capture machinima of the 3D content we created that is displayed in-world, and A License To Use. You may use the resulting snapshot or machinima within or outside of Second Life in any current or future media. “Use” means “use, reproduce, distribute, modify, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform.” For other definitions, see Definitions. Both the License To Capture and the License To Use (collectively, the “Licenses”) are non-exclusive and royalty-free. In addition, the License To Use is worldwide, sublicenseable, and transferable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Since you're confused, fair use only applies to copyrighted material and since screenshots in SL are NOT copyrighted, fair use has no bearing on anything. Fair Use Definition a legal doctrine that portions of copyrighted materials may be used without permission of the copyright owner provided the use is fair and reasonable, does not substantially impair the value of the materials, and does not curtail the profits reasonably expected by the owner 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 5 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: Since you're confused, fair use only applies to copyrighted material and since screenshots in SL are NOT copyrighted, fair use has no bearing on anything. "This policy gives broad copyright permissions for snapshots and machinima, but asks that you respect the privacy interests of members of the community. " (http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy#Copyright_Licenses) Do you think that a snapshot with a malicious intent to disclose private information respects the privacy interests of members of the community? Looking forward to hearing from you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: "This policy gives broad copyright permissions for snapshots and machinima, but asks that you respect the privacy interests of members of the community. " (http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy#Copyright_Licenses) Do you think that a snapshot with a malicious intent to disclose private information respects the privacy interests of members of the community? Looking forward to hearing from you. But asks that you respect... I've never once said it was right to post maliciously. Not once. I was merely responding to your misinformation about what is allowed by LL and what is not. Your comment that started this was that LL will disallow something from SL to be posted elsewhere. 1 hour ago, Noelle Delaunay said: If the platform is what I think it is (don't mention names or links please) then I would try filing a ticket with LL and make them aware. This is mostly about the fact that they do not take down personal information posted by someone else. Probably LL would be successful in having the site purged from google results at least. LL has NO control over what is posted on other websites. There is no copyright/fair use infringement. That, and only that, was what I was responding to. I also mentioned that doxing is illegal in some cases and something to be taken up with the proper authorities and NOT LL. Filing a ticket about something posted on another site is pointless. Edited August 11, 2021 by Rowan Amore 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Just now, Rowan Amore said: Your comment that started this was that LL will disallow something from SL to be posted elsewhere. No. That is NOT what I said. It can be almost impossible to purge information hosted on some shady server. What I said was that SL could purge the site from coming up on Google, based on copyright claims. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Just now, Noelle Delaunay said: No. That is NOT what I said. It can be almost impossible to purge information hosted on some shady server. What I said was that SL could purge the site from coming up on Google, based on copyright claims. Again, there is NO copyright claim. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solar Legion Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 Why is anyone even bothering with them at this point? 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: Again, there is NO copyright claim. "This policy gives broad copyright permissions for snapshots and machinima, but asks that you respect the privacy interests of members of the community. " I'm really not sure what is unclear about this. LL does not give copyright permissions unless you respect the "privacy interests of the members of the community." So YES there IS a copyright claim. What are you disputing here? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 I even spelled it all out for them. It got ignored. Imagine that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 1 minute ago, Silent Mistwalker said: I even spelled it all out for them. It got ignored. Imagine that. Join me? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelle Delaunay Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said: I even spelled it all out for them. It got ignored. Imagine that. No, you wrote an interpretation of fair use policy, but my reply was to "fair use only applies to copyrighted material and since screenshots in SL are NOT copyrighted, fair use has no bearing on anything." He says that Screenshots aren't copyrighted in the first place so this would not be about fair use, and I quoted LL saying that they grant copyright permissions as long as they respect the privacy interests. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 7 minutes ago, Noelle Delaunay said: No. That is NOT what I said. It can be almost impossible to purge information hosted on some shady server. What I said was that SL could purge the site from coming up on Google, based on copyright claims. No, they can not. LL has no jurisdiction outside of it's own servers. It has no legal jurisdiction outside of its own properties. LL has no influence with Google either. Copyright does not apply. LL doesn't own a copyright to images taken by other people. The only one that can get the info or images purged is the person whose info it is or the person who took the screencaps or digital photographs, as it were. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.