alas, the temptation of ctrl+v was all too strong.
What happens when Evilore deletes a thread, does he need legal permission from the original poster for that?Originally Posted by Xanathus
What happens if Kotaku decides to "republish" a post but they do not have consent from the original poster? Apparently EvilLore and Crecente think that they do not need the permission of the writer? This seems to be a violation of copyright law, and I do not see anything in NeoGAF's TOS that states that anything we write here becomes property of Neogaf/EvilLore.
I just noticed a typo in my original post, which was copy/pasted into the article on Kotaku. Would you mind having it corrected? I would have proofread if I new people other than my fellow Gaffers were gonna be reading it. ;)
Second-to-last paragraph: tint that and icy haze than accompanies should be tint and icy haze that accompany.
I know it's nitpicking, but I hate having errors in a published write-up.
.........Originally Posted by teiresias
Given the current TOS say NeoGAF disavows any all responsibility for the content of posts, I'm not sure anyone but a given forum poster has the right to grant reprint rights of their own posts outside the use of quotation within a forum discussion.
In any case, I'll be adding the following "signature" to every post I make on the forum from now on, unless I'm informed not to do so by an admin.
*Kotaku is not granted reprint permission to this post, unless I am contacted via PM by a Kotaku representative and both parties enter into an ad revenue sharing agreement with regard to said content*
It's against the ToS to post full articles here.Originally Posted by Lyphen
Because NeoGAF threads never copy and paste articles verbatim, right boss?
And yeah, it doesn't appear gaf even has ownership over user's content to do this in the first place. (Or, more accurately, even tries to lay claim to it in the terms of service). It's not GAF's content to give.
(Sites have tried to enact terms like that for much more benign reasons but they've never gone down well with their users.)
Even if it DID have the legal right, it's just good manners to ask the poster involved.
Originally Posted by 2 Slice Toaster
What happens when Evilore deletes a thread, does he need legal permission from the original poster for that?
GAF has the right to host or not host content. But the copyright for that content belongs to the user, as far as I can tell.
Dammit, keep it pure!Originally Posted by ScOULaris
Hey Crecente,
I just noticed a typo in my original post, which was copy/pasted into the article on Kotaku. Would you mind having it corrected? I would have proofread if I new people other than my fellow Gaffers were gonna be reading it. ;)
Second-to-last paragraph: tint that and icy haze than accompanies should be tint and icy haze that accompany.
I know it's nitpicking, but I hate having errors in a published write-up.
Well, the OP of the thread or post never gets money from it. And most of the time, they link to the website in question for the whole news article.Originally Posted by Lyphen
Because NeoGAF threads never copy and paste articles verbatim, right boss?
And it's not even the same thing. I'm not complaining about journalism or anything, it just seems un-ethical to use content from another source like that. I know there might be holes in my argumentation, but there has to be a better way to do that.
It's not like we're Kotaku's message board. In the end, I think interesting discussion threads are just that, discussion threads.
My problem is that the person doing most of the work gets rewarded with exposure while the person who does the least amount gets rewarded with $$$.Originally Posted by TwinIonEngines
It's not really that shady. Your average Kotaku post is going to draw far more hits than your average NeoGAF thread, so EviLore is essentially trading content for whatever traffic clicks through to the forum. Kotaku gets traffic, NeoGAF maybe gets a little piece of that too, and the thread author gets more exposure for his post.
As long as it doesn't bother the person making the thread, its not a big deal. Either way, Evilore is cool with this, so that'll be that. Im not the biggest fan of the idea, but I see its benefit, not a huge deal.
Instead, the editor gets to laze around and do nothing while profiting off what another person wrote on a forum.
It's the other way around: Kotaku pretending they are.Originally Posted by ShaneB
Does this mean we're all game "journalists" now??
It would be fine if it were a new break or a big rumor we jumped onto first, but to take someones actual written content, and repost it as such, is just lazy. The writer who reposts that is just as capable, why can't he put the time in (which he is getting PAID for) to do it?
My biggest argument about the whole ordeal. It'd be great if people would quote us for our awesome rumor busting/news breaking, but this isn't that.
I think they mentioned there that it was written by Scoularis. They gave him credit and stuff.Originally Posted by Littleberu
Well, the OP of the thread or post never gets money from it. And most of the time, they link to the website in question for the whole news article.
And it's not even the same thing. I'm not complaining about journalism or anything, it just seems un-ethical to use content from another source like that. I know there might be holes in my argumentation, but there has to be a better way to do that.
It's not like we're Kotaku's message board. In the end, I think interesting discussion threads are just that, discussion threads.
Kotaku sent me here, back in the day. : (Originally Posted by Josh7289
I don't think we need Kotaku users flocking here (assuming they're similar to Kotaku writers), but oh well.
Originally Posted by Daniela Rocker
What makes this forums so great is the community, and I think EviLore should at least ask most of the members of this community first about this. Sure, you are the owner, but the site is great because of everyone here.
I don't think most of the members here would like to be related with Kotaku.
Uh...Originally Posted by K' Dash
what. da. fuck.
Do you really want to be asociated to that POS site? even if it is free publicity, I don't support it.
That's awfully close minded of you. All they're doing is opening up a discussion they found interesting on GAF with their readers. It's not like they're some poisonous well that is going to slowly kill off the forum. If anything, it could bring in new people for discussion and some interesting new members.
Kotaku isn't the plague or something.
You must be joking. Where should I start?Originally Posted by Typographenia
Kotaku isn't the plague or something.
1. Bad grammar.
2. Lousy articles.
3. Copy/paste from GAF and other places.
It's more of the fact that they get money for someone elses intellectual property, that they posted illicitly to share with "only" the readers of neogaf.Originally Posted by Typographenia
Kotaku sent me here, back in the day. : (
Uh...
That's awfully close minded of you. All they're doing is opening up a discussion they found interesting on GAF with their readers. It's not like they're some poisonous well that is going to slowly kill off the forum. If anything, it could bring in new people for discussion and some interesting new members.
Kotaku isn't the plague or something.
If someone on here wanted to make news, they'd go apply for a job at Kotaku or somewhere else. I think that's the big deal.
Dunno if that will be that.Originally Posted by Raging Spaniard
Either way, Evilore is cool with this, so that'll be that.
Nowhere does any poster on GAF grant Evilore/Neogaf the copyright to their posts.
The closest reference to a relationship between your content and NeoGAF in the TOS is this:
Which in fact, is NeoGAF washing its hands of your content.You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold GAF harmless with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s).
I'm amazed how both Kotaku and Evilore could proceed with this without wondering about who in fact owns the content in the first place.
(And like I said earlier, even if GAF did own the content, asking a poster first would show a bit of respect for people.)
I believe the TOS was just updated to address this.Originally Posted by gofreak
Dunno if that will be that.
Nowhere does any poster on GAF grant Evilore/Neogaf the copyright to their posts.
The closest reference to a relationship between your content and NeoGAF in the TOS is this:
Quite dramatic...Originally Posted by teiresias
Given the current TOS say NeoGAF disavows any all responsibility for the content of posts, I'm not sure anyone but a given forum poster has the right to grant reprint rights of their own posts outside the use of quotation within a forum discussion.
In any case, I'll be adding the following "signature" to every post I make on the forum from now on, unless I'm informed not to do so by an admin.
*Kotaku is not granted reprint permission to this post, unless I am contacted via PM by a Kotaku representative and both parties enter into an ad revenue sharing agreement with regard to said content*
Because I'm sure as hell not going to give Kotaku hits constantly checking to see whether something I posted has been used without proper attribution.
What I want to know is if they paid him for it. Typically freelance writers who contribute to a news site are paid a commission unless they have an agreement otherwise. Since Kotaku is profiting off the Scoularis' work through ads, surely they are responsible for paying him a commission right? Otherwise wouldn't that be copyright infringement?Originally Posted by Meisadragon
I think they mentioned there that it was written by Scoularis. They gave him credit and stuff.
Good lord, you're right!Originally Posted by Castor Krieg
You must be joking. Where should I start?
1. Bad grammar.
2. Lousy articles.
3. Copy/paste from GAF and other places.

edit:
Crecente already stated that if this didn't work out they wouldn't do it again. It's not like this is all set in stone.Originally Posted by sersteven
It's more of the fact that they get money for someone elses intellectual property, that they posted illicitly to share with "only" the readers of neogaf.
If someone on here wanted to make news, they'd go apply for a job at Kotaku or somewhere else. I think that's the big deal.
As for the news part, why bother posting on GAF? It's pretty clear, perusing other gaming sites, that GAF gets mentioned on a fairly regular basis. It's not like we're some hole-in-the-wall forum that you have to hear about from some wrinkled man with a cane outside of the tavern on the edge of town. If you're uncomfortable posting on a site that gets enough traffic to require taking down avatars and an entire forum section during E3, perhaps it's better to lurk?
I know it's not entirely addressing the issue of being thrust into the spotlight without asking, but that's how the internet operates. If you don't want something to ever be seen by a large number of people, don't post it online.
It's a website about video games. Who gives a fuck? Some of you take this all way, way, way too seriously.Originally Posted by Castor Krieg
You must be joking. Where should I start?
1. Bad grammar.
2. Lousy articles.
3. Copy/paste from GAF and other places.
Exactly, I'd be more cool with it if they got his permission and listed him as the article writer...because he pretty much WAS.Originally Posted by Xanathus
What I want to know is if they paid him for it. Typically freelance writers who contribute to a news site are paid a commission unless they have an agreement otherwise. Since Kotaku is profiting off the Scoularis' work through ads, surely they are responsible for paying him a commission right? Otherwise wouldn't that be copyright infringement?
Then at least he could use it in a resume or something.
Originally Posted by Wallach
I believe the TOS was just updated to address this.
yup. just went up.C. By registering an account at NeoGAF.com and participating (including but not limited to submitting replies or private messages), you hereby grant NeoGAF LLC and our licensees, distributors, agents, representatives and other authorized users, a perpetual, non-exclusive, irrevocable, fully-paid, royalty-free, sub-licensable and transferable (in whole or part) worldwide license under all copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, privacy and publicity rights and other intellectual property rights you own or control to use, reproduce, transmit, display, exhibit, distribute, index, comment on, modify, create derivative works based upon, perform and otherwise exploit such submissions, in whole or in part, in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised, for any and all purposes including entertainment, news, advertising, promotional, marketing, publicity, trade or commercial purposes, all without further notice to you, with or without attribution, and without the requirement of any permission from or payment to you or to any other person or entity.
Terms of service explicitly gives the staff permission to edit or delete a post. It does not explicitly give staff permission to otherwise reuse it.Originally Posted by 2 Slice Toaster
What happens when Evilore deletes a thread, does he need legal permission from the original poster for that?
In any case, I would think that copyright for the content of a post automatically rests with the poster, whether or not NeoGAF decides to continue to "publish" it on their web space.
However, I can't find anything definitive on the issue either way, and Kotaku's use of your post for commentary, criticism or reporting would almost certainly fall under Fair Use in any case.
But its a website that presumably thousands upon thousands of readers flock too, looking for something more presentable than your standard web forum or message board fare.Originally Posted by commish
It's a website about video games. Who gives a fuck? Some of you take this all way, way, way too seriously.
When you're entire pitch is being a journalist, something that has always prided itself on its "professional" writing styles and more official means of presenting the news/information, NOT doing that is a sticking point.
I personally don't see anything wrong with Kotaku, they do have their own certain flair to them, but the issue at hand certainly isn't a fun one.
Amazing...Originally Posted by Wallach
I believe the TOS was just updated to address this.
Too late for the post in question here though. They should really roll back on this, apologise, and try again while asking posters (for politeness' sake). That would be fine IMO.
Eek.Originally Posted by Wallach
I believe the TOS was just updated to address this.
You say that as if video games are still some niche hobby with no standards.Originally Posted by commish
It's a website about video games. Who gives a fuck? Some of you take this all way, way, way too seriously.
How the fuck is it entitled when someone else is getting paid for your work?Originally Posted by Infernodash
Knowing how GAF entitled rolls, will be seeing a class action lawsuit now. I wish some people on here would stop with this bullshit.
Yup. Here it is:Originally Posted by Wallach
I believe the TOS was just updated to address this.
That makes it sound pretty bad, I have to admit.Originally Posted by TOS
C. By registering an account at NeoGAF.com and participating (including but not limited to submitting replies or private messages), you hereby grant NeoGAF LLC and our licensees, distributors, agents, representatives and other authorized users, a perpetual, non-exclusive, irrevocable, fully-paid, royalty-free, sub-licensable and transferable (in whole or part) worldwide license under all copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets, privacy and publicity rights and other intellectual property rights you own or control to use, reproduce, transmit, display, exhibit, distribute, index, comment on, modify, create derivative works based upon, perform and otherwise exploit such submissions, in whole or in part, in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised, for any and all purposes including entertainment, news, advertising, promotional, marketing, publicity, trade or commercial purposes, all without further notice to you, with or without attribution, and without the requirement of any permission from or payment to you or to any other person or entity.
pretty sure they only reason they got unbanned was because they broke some huge story about Sony (which also violated an NDA?)Originally Posted by Jax
didn't Kotaku leaked the MW3 stuff and then spoiler some other title - I think it was batman AC? Personally don't read kotaku here but everytime I read about kotaku, its always something negatively attributed as a result of whatever it is they're doing.
time for #OccupyGAF? :-POriginally Posted by ScOULaris
Yup. Here it is:
That makes it sound pretty bad, I have to admit.
