Magic Castle Larsen Legacy

[mrgoat]

Anything I write is protected by my copyright. It is illegal to reproduce it in any form, copy it, and so on.

Has that been tested in a court?

[Bob Cunningham]

I am not aware of any case that has been successfully or unsuccessfully tried for any situation like you have described.

Most e-mails are probably exempted/excluded from copyright protection under the "fair use" exception. The US gov. website lists 4 general exceptions to copyright (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107):

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work

Notice point 4. You would have to show that your e-mail had some commercial value. Without commercial value there is no copyright infringement.

It seems that this exemption was specifically designed to address the type of situation we are discussing here.

Whether you agree with current copyright law or not, to claim copyright for an e-mail seems to conflict with the intention and goals of copyright law.

[Magic Newswire]

Anything I write is protected by my copyright. It is illegal to reproduce it in any form, copy it, and so on.

Based upon the law as I am familiar with it with regards to email specifically, you would have to be able to prove damages. Given the nature of most email, that would be difficult. You MIGHT be in a unique position, but from what I have dealt with over the years as one of the founding partners in an ISP serving the business community since 1994, it would be very difficult. Most of the content in an email can be shown to have no recoverable value with regard to copyright. Outside of that, general email communication can be distributed at will without your permission. The lesson to be learned? Do not post anything on the internet or send it in an email it you do not want to see it publicly posted. There just isn't as much protection as many people assume.

I am not trying to stir up a debate on this as much as I am trying to share my experience and help people reconsider assumptions that they may have made erroneously. Don't post it to Facebook, Twitter, here or anywhere else.. or email it to someone, assuming that you have some sort of privacy protection.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Perhaps we'd be better off treating it as a rule at the genii bbs that it's not condoned even if legal?

[Magic Newswire]

As I said.. legality has little to do with ethics or good taste at times. I've never done so, nor been in a circumstance in which I would as yet. That said, Richard's house, his rules. Whatever he says here works for me when I am here.

[Alan Bursky]

Richard,
I promise never to post any of your emails anywhere.

[Alan Bursky]

From Terry Ellet.

Terry,
Before I address your response let me remind you that the revisions to the standing rules have come from the BOD, not Dave nor myself, and as guests in the meetings we do not have a vote.
Making the announcement and asking for input from the members is a good thing. Yet this was when you chose to be disrespectful to Dave and attack him, inappropriately on the forum that is owned by the AMA.

Thanks for the explanation regarding the "accomplice". I am relieved to some degree but I must ask, to whom were you referring?
I appreciate your kind words about our management team being the linchpin that has kept the AMA and Magic Castle alive, with the opportunity to flourish.
Saying you are "working very closely with prominent members" sounds conspiratorial, at best.
If these members are incensed and want to voice their feelings they need to come to me, not you. I do not mean this as a slight. Forgive the analogy but this would be much like a person concerned about a pothole in the road going to the guy who sold him his car.
Saying that Dave Clement "seized control" is not only completely inaccurate, it is malicious and inflammatory. Making such a false statement to wrongly defame and vilify an AMA employee; is every shade of wrong and completely unacceptable.
I am also very concerned that anyone would make a reference to " burning down the club".
The removal of certain postings have been collective decisions and these posts were found to be inappropriate due to there inflammatory comments regarding AMA employees, some of which boarder on slander and/or touch on personal and personnel issues that are also inappropriate.
"Getting my attention" on a matter is as easy as, "Hey, Mark..." to say that you used "tactics" sounds very subversive and rather sophomoric.
Direct communication is of utmost importance and to use tactics only fosters poor and tainted exchanges.
This is America, I don't fear people talking on our forum or going elsewhere.
But inappropriate topics and attacks on empolyees will not be tolerated.
You stated, "this is how the members feel".
Terry, are you serious? Don't you think you have painted with too broad a stroke? Are you saying you are the spokesmen for the entire membership?
How many individuals actually post on the forum with any regularity? How many have weighed in on this subject? If 50 people have posted that is still only 1% of our membership. Those "angry members" are a very small percent of our membership. This doesn't mean their view point is not important, but it is a far cry from your exaggerated statement and even smaller than the "pitchfork & torches" mob to which you have eluded.
I am sure of your love for this club. But it seems that you have put your personal feelings ahead of the process and have taken those feelings and attributed them to the membership.
Any discussion going forward has to be about the reality, and fact, of the matter.
Thanks.


M

[Alan Bursky]

From Terry Ellet.

Terry,



I like you very much, and I value all your contributions to our Club. You are always willing to raise your hand and help out.



I am, however, a little perplexed lately at the very negative tone you have taken on the forums.



Why not be excited about the new Library hours? Why go so negative and suggest that Bill Goodwin has been silenced?



You are now quoting Bursky? Why not quote the National Enquirer also. Come on Terry, Bursky has no credibility to any objective observer.



As a moderator on the forums, your conduct should be above the fray.



Im open to a chat at any time.







David Clement | Controller

[Alan Bursky]

It was the National Enquirer that exposed John Edwards.

The next B.O.D. election will prove either me or Henry D. Clement right. If I am wrong nothing in my life changes. If I am right H.D.C. goes on unemployment.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Triple spacing!
I'm loving it.
Typarodographics

[Alan Bursky]

16 more months new Board of Directors election of the Academy of Magical Arts. Then there will be change we can believe in!

[Richard Kaufman]

Alan, are you going to make the same announcement every month for the next 16 months? It will become tiring rather quickly. Why don't you wait a year and then give us a six-month warning. :)

[Terry]

Richard - that would be a year and 4 month warning.

[Alan Bursky]

Richard,

I will compromise with you. I'll do it quarterly. Just to fill you in a few weeks ago, either George Juarez, Clement, and Mark F. wanted to send me to the Ethics & Grievance committee for posting Heidi Hoff's phone number here. Heidi gave me permission to do so. They never even bothered to check with Heidi. To be fair it was George, Dave or Mark I'm not sure which one. It could have been one of them, or any combination of them. or all them. Just proves if you do not agree with them they are out to get you. The B.O.D. voted 4 against 2 not to send me.

[Richard Kaufman]

Alan, don't compromise with me--it's my board! People will just grow tired of you and your complaints. Save it for when you have some actual news to report.

[MagicBilly]

Alan, don't compromise with me--it's my board! People will just grow tired of you and your complaints. Save it for when you have some actual news to report.

Good point Richard...and on that note.

With respect to Alan's opening post, which infers AMA's control over Milt's ability to improve the Castle interiors, the AMA Management and BoD have agreed to the improvements presented by Milt and Joe.

While contention probably remains among some with respect to an apparent "strong-arming" of Milt's changes (he has had full reign on changes since the Castle's inception), there is positive movement on the proposed improvements.

FWIW

[Richard Kaufman]

Now that the matter which started this brouhaha has been resolved, this thread is closed.