Thread deletion

[Ecurb]

Why was the thread on the "Religious Texts" board deleted? Maybe it was because Country Doctor's unattributed quotes violated board rules. Maybe it was because we were discussing political issues (although with a literary bent, we were talking about copyright laws).

If the moderators don't give their reasons, though, how will we ever know?

It's mildly frustrating to spend some time and effort posting, and then have your posts disappear, like members of the political opposition in Pinochet's Chile.

[Logos]

To remove all of the copyrighted material it contained, music lyrics by Bob Dylan, would have rendered the thread nonsensical and would have taken a lot of time.

Thread OP was informed of reasons as to why their thread disappeared :)

For anyone who wants to start complaining, please see Forum Rule #5--



5. If you are going to refer to or use content from other sites, authors, or entities, you must include a link or citation for it. You cannot copy and paste entire articles, stories, poems, or etc. from other sites or entities as that is copyright infringement, and contributes nothing to discussion. You should not need more than a few lines, sentences, or maybe a paragraph, to make your point in reference to the topic/discussion. From Copyright.gov (http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html); “Under the fair use doctrine of the U.S. copyright statute, it is permissible to use limited portions of a work including quotes, for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports.” Passing off others’ work as your own, whether unintentionally or purposefully, is copyright infringement, and the Literature Network abides by the Copyright Laws of the United States of America and of other countries where applicable.

[Ecurb]

I figured that was the reason and was merely curious. I suppose my brilliant and timeless arguments about the nature of intellectual property have vanished into the void along with the Bob Dylan lyrics. Good riddance to both, I suppose!

However, I continue to think that intellectual property rights should be as limited as feasible, while encouraging inventors and artists with potential financial rewards. I don't see how Country Doctor's quotes prevent Dylan from cashing in on his lyrics -- in fact, they might encourage people to buy his albums.

If Literature Network wants to forbid such cribbing for other reasons (to prevent spam, for example), that's fair enough. However, I plan to continue singing in the shower without paying royalties or citing the songwriter, copyrights or no copyrights. I also intend to continue to believe that "owning" a series of words (because you somehow "invented" them) is a philosophically shaky notion. I'll grant that freedom of speech is often abridged in business (advertisers can't lie, for example), but to extend the abridgement of freedom of speech copyrights constitute to speech which has no financial rewards is dangerous, in my opinion.

[AuntShecky]

ecurb, please read this:
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1031997#post1031997

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

So, if we get lyrics or a poem that is still under copyright from the artist's website and we cite/link the website, is that cool? I'm 99% sure this is the case, just clarifying for sure.