PTP going after Brass Eagle

[Lohman446]

Well, any company I have worked for, either as a purchaser or supplier cant get away without paying their bills for very long. 30 days, pay your bill or else.. and 'else' all depends on how often previously they didnt pay on time.


Im sorry PTP is in the situation they are in, but I guess they must have saw this coming now for a while.

Yes and know. I am certain that any contract between the two companies was not one sided. Hunting different purchasers may have put PTP in violation of said contract and totally nullified any gains they expected from it. Obviusly I'm not involved and don't have all the information but I am almost certain it was not as easy as "looking for a new job" if one wants to continue that analogy.

[Foxworthy]

The whole copywrite thing doesn't hold water. Sure you can copywrite it but as it's a news article it can't be enforced since it falls under fair use.

You'll notice that reproduction for news reporting is not an infringement. Sure you could argue that reproducing the whole thing is a problem (number 3 above) but it is a press release it is intended to be released, it's free to read would make it rather obvious that reprinting it falls under fair use as long as you give credit to the source.

It's also weird that the article has a copyright from 1997-2007. Or how they have a copyright for an article they did not even write. It seems like 68calibur wants to try to force everyone to go there for their news.

[Lohman446]

The whole copywrite thing doesn't hold water. Sure you can copywrite it but as it's a news article it can't be enforced since it falls under fair use.



You'll notice that reproduction for news reporting is not an infringement. Sure you could argue that reproducing the whole thing is a problem (number 3 above) but it is a press release it is intended to be released, it's free to read would make it rather obvious that reprinting it falls under fair use as long as you give credit to the source.

It's also weird that the article has a copyright from 1997-2007. Or how they have a copyright for an article they did not even write. It seems like 68calibur wants to try to force everyone to go there for their news.

The AP routinely copywrites, and enforces said on news articles. Its not abnormal for an organization to hold a copywrite for someone else. If PTP states its intent was to release it only to 68c caliper you would have a hard time making a convincing argument of other intent.

[Foxworthy]

The AP routinely copywrites, and enforces said on news articles. Its not abnormal for an organization to hold a copywrite for someone else. If PTP states its intent was to release it only to 68c caliper you would have a hard time making a convincing argument of other intent.

I haven't seen one press release with a copyright. I've seen the AP articles have a copyright.

Here's another problem with 68 calibers copyrights. They haven't registered their copyrights which means that they can't even get court fees if the sued. All they could get are actual damages. This on top the fact that they have to prove that PTP legally transfered the rights to 68 caliber.

AP copyrights their articles cause they charge for people to reproduce them. They can prove what the actual damage from a stolen article is. All 68 can do is say claim that a certain number of people didn't go to their site, but if the source if mentioned then they can't even prove that.

Not only that when you post copyright dates you post it for the date that the item was created not ten years in the past. I'm sure lying about copyright dates won't go over very well.

Edit: Also nothing on 68 caliber's terms of use don't even mention their stance on reproduction. That maybe because they don't have term of use but still. They aren't on stable legal ground. They have to prove fair use wrong, prove that even though they are a free site they lost money and the actual amounts and then pay for court cost. I understand they want traffic but being dicks about it is wrong.

[RRfireblade]

Don't think it was really "Press Release" , it was an article submitted specifically to 68Caliber for their exclusive use.

[RogueFactor]

Let's go over it one more time:

the LINK is ok and legal.

COPYING the entire article is copyright INFRINGEMENT.

Since AO complied immediately with a request to remove the offending material, no more needs to be said or done about it.

The article is, I believe NOT an article, but a press release given exclusively ti 68caliber.com

Press Releases by their very nature are BIASED.

I can tell you though that while the tone favored pro-team, all of the facts are accurate.

From page 1 of this thread. rabichihauhau states it is a press release. Given his past and/or current relationship to both PTP & 68caliber.com, one would consider it true---whether it was a 'belief' or not.

[RRfireblade]

From page 1 of this thread. rabichihauhau states it is a press release.

Well there you go then. Written more like an article tho.

[Foxworthy]

Actually press releases are typically written with a bias as well. Here's the quote from wikipedia for what that's worth.

A press release is different from a news article. A news article is a compilation of facts developed by journalists published in the news media, whereas a press release is designed to be sent to journalists in order to encourage them to develop articles on the subject. A press release is generally biased towards the objectives of the author.

[RRfireblade]

What I meant was a Press Release is 'usually' more of an announcement or statement or something along those lines to generate overall interest or follow up as opposed to a single highly detailled story.

Just my opinion , no need to search the internet for a contradicting opinion.

[Foxworthy]

I apologizes I thought you meant the bias in the article. Though the press release did read as a detailed as some press releases I've read in the past, but it was far more detailed than the usual Internet only type press release.

[RogueFactor]

Well there you go then. Written more like an article tho.

You think so? I find that Press Releases are usually more biased/one-sided than articles. Which is why I took rabichihauhau's statement at face value, since it seemed to be more of a press release from how it was written, and who it was written by.

[Lohman446]

Whatever you have all beleived it to be it was published in a publication and is probably protected. Copying it, verbatim in its entirety, is not likely covered under the "fair use" act.

[Foxworthy]

Of course 68caliber themselves steal articles and claim copyrights on them.

Here is a NPPL release on their page

http://www.nppl.tv/site/articles/251/1/San-Diego-to-host-NPPL-Event-%235%21

Here it is on 68

http://www.68caliber.com/news/tournament/nppl/story042543.php

notice the copyright at the bottom.


It be nice if they took the copyright off pages they didn't create.

[RRfireblade]

You think so? I find that Press Releases are usually more biased/one-sided than articles. Which is why I took rabichihauhau's statement at face value, since it seemed to be more of a press release from how it was written, and who it was written by.

Wasn't talking about bias, Anything put out by any one side is going to be biased of course.

[rabidchihauhau]

Foxworthy,

you're understanding of copyright and what you are reading on that site is obviously skewed.

First of all, YOU DO NOT NEET TO PUT THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE ON A WORK IN ORDER TO HAVE RIGHTS TO THE WORK.

The mere act of creation now confers copyright. Period.

Second - items that appear on 68Caliber with a copyright notice from another entity were printed with permission - those are not copyright violations but proper usage.

Third - as was said before - the PTP press release was given to 68Caliber AS AN EXCLUSIVE. PTP owns the copyright and gave 68Caliber permission to run it - as well as the right to decide who else can run it.

Whether 68Caliber REGISTERS their copyrights with the Feds or not does not diminish their rights in any way - with the exception that if they sue, they can not claim statutory damages. It doesn't mean they can't sue, it doesn't mean they can't enforce and it doesn't mean they can't stop others from reprinting their material.

Finally - you don't know how to read the fair use doctrine so I wou;dn't rely on your interpretation of it; as someone pointed out, AP copyrights all of their stories and enforces their copyright. Why in the hell would another news service PAY them for a story if it were free?

Get off the issue. There were good reasons for the requested withdrawal of copyrighted material from automags - PROOF is to be found in their immediate compliance. You don't see them complaining, do you?

Go ride your hobby horse somewhere else.