Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieTigger
Except you could have spared us a lot of theoretical mumble jumble.
|
All that I initially said was
"Maybe the original artist never claimed copyright? (it's not automatic)"
Everything else after that was me trying to explain that enforcement is not automatic, when it appeared that others were proposing that it was.
I thought this statement I made would serve to clear up any different interpretations of "claim copyright",
"I think we may have different definitions of the word "claim". You appear to be using is as a synonym for "register" (e.g., do some paperwork to make it official in the governments eyes). I am using it as a synonym for "give notice" (e.g., announce to the world that, [b]"Hey, that's my work they are copying!"[/b[)"
...but apparently it didn't, as what I said was rebuffed again.
As the thread continued I realized that maybe some countries don't interpret the expression "file a claim" as it is normally used here in the US. "Filing a claim" is synonymous with "taking a person to court".
Whatever. I originally made a simple statement. That was pounced upon. I tried to clarify what I intended to say, realizing there may be different regional interpretations of the words I used. Then I was pounced upon for attempting to clarify. Tough crowd. Like water off a duck's back though, no harm, no foul.
p.s. - Another possible regional difference is the use of "mumble jumble". That is not common (in the US). "Mumbo jumbo" is how it is commonly written in the US. Now I think we should get on to discussing my newly introduced topic of contention, "water, ducks, and fouls ('fowls'?)"
