View Single Post
Old 08-04-2008, 06:20 PM   #27
Patricia
Reader
Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Patricia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Patricia's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,504
Karma: 8720163
Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Wales, UK
Device: Sony PRS-500, PRS-505, Asus EEEpc 4G
Quote:
Originally Posted by haridasi View Post
Just stating: "illegal, link deleted" gives me a police state feeling (and it's the second time i've seen it done today). When I also couple that with HarryT's opinions regarding copyright infringement in the discussion "Book piracy, is ebook piracy on the rise", I get the shivers.

I believe that Haradiri may be referring to this thread:
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27295

Please let me explain my reasoning. I do not interfere with member’s posts lightly.

I was the mod who removed the link. It was to a 1972 book. I did a web search and found the book was in copyright:

"This electronic file is Copyright © 1972-2006 Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International Inc., 3764 Watseka Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90034, USA. All rights reserved.”

Moreover, the search threw up the notice that:

“You may not excerpt or reproduce more than five percent (5%) of this file in any other medium without the express written permission from the copyright owners."

Now, when I clicked on the link I was taken directly to a copy of the book. There was no way of telling whether it was the original, or whether the member who posted it had uploaded a copy (--which would have been a violation of the 5% rule). And the member had not explained that he had got permission to distribute copies.

Under these circumstances, what is a mod to do? I removed the link (--politely, I hope) and invited the member to re-post if I had made a mistake.

“We can't allow links that risk violating copyright, so I'm afraid that I'm going to delete it.
But if you have the author's permission, Pankaja, then repost it.”


I am very sorry that Haradiri has been worried by this episode. I actually feel rather upset at worrying both him and the original poster in the other thread. The last thing I want to do is upset our members. But we also want to stay legal and comply with Canadian copyright law. (Our servers are in Canada.)
Patricia is offline   Reply With Quote