Thats cool.

Good job wade.

The ability to delete, is exactly that which makes this temporary, and exactly that which makes the TOU null and void from the onset.

I appreciate your affirmation that yes, tribe.net must profit from our content.

I appreciate your affirmation that yes, these things are temporary, and subject to deletion or change at any and all times.

I appreciate yoru affirmation Mr Wendel that you think you have your shit together... Last I checked you arent Ted Turner in disguise. So when you get over to Hasting Law library and go to RTFM on internet "broadcasting", in the annual congressional report on copyright law in technology, call me on your cell, before you enter the building I will poke my head out of my apartment window and give you a thumbs up. Until then stop thinking that book, and photo laws apply directly to the internet because they don't. Furthermore the disparity between the law and the common practice is far and wide.

Stop genitals, not some random idea of appropriate.

Any effort to censor text is strictly forbidden by our constitution, if you want to be part of the forefront of the DOJ's book burning and information control campaign, to support the new emergence of the old Nazi pimps, then be my guest, Ill be here describing in detail every word you erased.

If you would write just a single line that you have no intention of making profit on these images, even while they are on your servers, except for the purpose of growing the tribe network, then you would be much better off, and you would stop these feelings of distrust from proliferating.

Write that line in the TOU, so that we can have in the "contract" that you have stated that you dont intend on conducting business of that matter and that any business of that kind is purely accidental. You would make a lot of people happy. You would be the saviors of the internet community.

Make a distinction between the ways that you intend to profit on this content, and you have a legal representation of your due diligence in an effort to protect the rights of your user base.

That is what I suggest.

I am sorry if my logical arguements, steeped in metaphorical, fondue, have offended anyone. I am playing devils advocate, not because I advocate the devil, but because I want this community to be strong. You cant have a strong community without trust.

This clause exists on many of the sites we reviewed as benchmarks.

sorry for the duplicate - i got signed out and there's a lag in posts appearing

This is not fight club.

This is not Wall Street.

Legally speaking, you are the clothes you wear, the car you drive, the house you pay the mortgage on and the check you get at the end of the month.

Legally speaking there is no, broker to client relationship, no account growth, no holdings, no money.

Generally speaking people who use tribe for monetary gain are of one category and one category only, those who dont have the money to promote through means that cost money.

These are the same people that will be judged in a court of law, to be, lacking in the tools required by there trade.

In some specific cases, established pros use this service to show thier work and gain clients.

These are the people who might have a difficulty here. I would say that generally they are here to socialize, and the work is already copywritten. Already protected by law.

Come to think of it I did work in an active case law, law firm for three years, ah good times... Back on subject.

That being said I can move on to the way copyright law sees internet distribution. The annual report on copyright law regarding internet technologies, has only one technology to analogize, the internet, that is RADIO. In a radio station you have a broadcast system, DJ's and the FCC. The broadcast system in the case of the internet is the computer, or more specifically the server. When an image of yours is on tribes server, they have broadcasted your image.

In radio, there are many laws regarding the copyright of what some one spontaneously creates live, while on radio. I would argue that much of what goes on here is LIVE. it is ON AIR at all times and being recorded, by the server.

In a court of law, pretty much all internet evidence is considered circumstantial, meaning, it may not be the center of a case, the deciding factor, but it can be used to eleborate on an arguement. Emails in particular have the same legal strength of phone calls, they are not written docs, in the sense of our legal definitions. That what the PDF was "invented" for. A legal, unchangeable, electronic transfer medium.

Again this all leads to the idea that this is a live broadcast. That tribe has yoru content and they have been broadcasting it to gain listeners (subscribers) and make advertising sales. They must do what they do to make advertising sales and put dinner on the table.

Until tribe grows a dick and tries to do someone, they are just doing what any broadcaster must do to avoid getting done. They are trying to use blanket terms to describe how they are pimpin the internet. Terms as generic and benign as these, with out any specific rules or detailed descriptions of thier meaning are meaningless. They are torn up in court. They are actually preparing themselves to get done by using garbage language like this.

There is no way a broadcaster would ever state something as stupid as this.

> However, you hereby grant, and agree to grant as
> an effect of posting or otherwise providing
> content, to the public for non-commercial
> purposes and to Tribe, a perpetual license to
> use, copy, distribute, display, perform, and
> modify any and all content that you post on the
> Service.

this is intentionally misleading.

"to the public for non-commercial
purposes and to Tribe"

this sentence means in legal speak.

to the public for non-commercial purposes and to Tribe (for all purposes)

written properly it would read.

to the public and to tribe for non-commercial purposes.

They have left themselves at the end of the sentence in a childish attempt to avoid stating what they really mean to state. I am a big old butt head meany, gimme all your home made porn pictures grandma.

Get over it, this is just silly.

This would show up in a court case, just as I have described it above, as intentionally misleading.

The fact that they have to rewrite the TOU every night, would also discount its legal credit.

All yall mofos are scared little girls, with peanut butter between your toes, jerkin off with barbie, under daddys kiddy porn collection.

This is a radio show, so everything we say is being witnessed, and recorded. Tribe is broadcasting and they can choose what and who they broadcast at anytime.

If they contribute to a violation of the rights on something that you own that is genuinely of value then they have stated that they want to look carefully at the case.

Other than that, yes you must trust them, you have to trust that they are going to act in your best interests. You have to trust that they arent going to steal your images.

And even if they do, "steal" there are a million ways to argue that they had to do it as a part of thier normal business function. Because they are already broadcasting everything we do here for money. They are already doing things for commercial purposes. You have to accept that fact.

Copyright law is understood on a cultural level in my experience by New Yorkers and HolyWood folks. You have to acheive a certain amount of rep, you have to be big, and bad to warrant a legal representation.

Further more license infringement settlements are different for every industry. Many industries settle thier disputes internally our otherwise outside fo court.

What Shatter was saying about, POW, you suck. Is pretty much an accurate description of some of the ways these problems are handled. In otherwords, in industries where your reputation is all that matters, (including Social Networking Applications) like mass market consumer products, companies will generally not defend themselves from what might seem to be an obvious attack on the quality of thier product, because they would look even more pussy whining there lawyers asses off in court. They just have to come up with a campaign that can beat the pants off of the last one and that is that.

I happen to be an artist, who turned away from advertising because of the laws involving the relationship between the agency and its contractors or employees. Bottomline, they own you, and your work, it is an industry standard, to remove the any rights from the employee while he is in employment with the agency. Unless he has specifically contracted otherwise. This has to be true, because the idea guys throw countless hours into a ridiculous amount fo creative work that never leave the agency office. That stuff they produce was stuff they were paid to produce, and there is jsut so much stuff no one can ever remember who did what and when ,and why and how good it is going to be as a film trailer next week.

Point being we have all chosen to be the fateful girlfriend fo tribe because we are too poor or lazy to distribute our own pictures.

All you have to do is serve your media from another source. Then they arent broadcasting it any more.

All you have to do is serve your media from another source. Then they arent broadcasting it any more.

All you have to do is serve your media from another source. Then they arent broadcasting it any more.

The reason why I exclusively use tribe, is that they use hyperlinks, and I can hyperlink to my server to give you guys what you want, my salty hairy sweaty emotions on a silver platter.

I can track the webstatistics and find out who got what from my site and why. I have learned what people like and under what conditions they like it through linking me media to links on tribe.

That is the way, in my aproximation, tribe should be used.

It is an internet, network for internet savvy people.

They are broadcasting your media only if you leave it around on thier computers.

I wonder what the new TOU will look liek in the morning.

Time to go collect from my hoes.

"Thu, December 22, 2005 - 10:27 PM
Re: clause five: Tribes ability to use our content.
"Do I need to retain an attorney to keep posting here? "

Not a bad idea.

I'm sure I could find the appropriate one, along with perhaps start a fund to pay the bills. Seems that would be in everyone's interest.....

Email me."

rapture203@yahoo.com

(I dont trust Tribe email, ** Place TRIBE in the subject **)

Rapture

HAHAHAHAHA...


and the truth comes out...


We now see your real intent. Solicitatation.....


bravo.

--S

This is good! Thanks Paul for some needed clarity.

"In legal terms, they are saying that while they don't "own" it, they have the right to sell it and to modify it in any way they like."

I want to make certain I really grok this one. Let's see, they don't "own" it but they can sell & modify it, hmmm, wonder if anyone can do that to my home, car or dog? Not in America I'm certain.

Citizens of any nation whose lexicon nurtures the phrase, "war is necessary to make peace," or "You need to be bombed to teach you violence is not proper!" ("Shutup or I'll give you reason to cry"???) should easily comprehend this nixonian notion.

So then, I post something on my blog, someone wants to purchase it & I then delete it from the blog and instead point a link to the folks who purchased it? I still am uncomfortable with anyone using my art to increase their bottom line. How is this service then "free" if it costs artists possible revenue? Is that like the "health benefits" we gain by eating at McDonald$.

Is it legal or illegal to use those 7 words George Carlin used to speak of and that got Lenny Bruce busted in several jurisdictions? I thought it was legal to post items of a sexual nature or even porn. My god, if the govt closed down all those porn sites on the web, where would the right wing go to jerk off? Jus wondering. My dog needs to take a shit! - xoxoxo Phoenix