[Webrunner]

I think in the real world, photo issues amount to a hill of beans. Just my opinion. With all the photos posted on VS web sites, I doubt they have a team of lawyers tracking every photo.

There are automated crawlers that can do that. I have had many problems with users posting copyrighted images of famous people...

Also i want to point out something here (as a former forum founder/owner).
No matter what VS says, the content is still yours and you can post it on other places if you want.
What you can not do is ask them to remove it, they as forum owners have the right to use it in their website(s).

Also, if the terms are changed over time, the rules that where in effect at the time of the post/image placement prevail.
So any existing content can not just be " stolen" from you.

That is, according to dutch law...

 

[WatchSeekr]

There are automated crawlers that can do that. I have had many problems with users posting copyrighted images of famous people...

Also i want to point out something here (as a former forum founder/owner).
No matter what VS says, the content is still yours and you can post it on other places if you want.
What you can not do is ask them to remove it, they as forum owners have the right to use it in their website(s).

Also, if the terms are changed over time, the rules that where in effect at the time of the post/image placement prevail.
So any existing content can not just be " stolen" from you.

That is, according to dutch law...

I have been trying to say they content is still yours, we just have the right to publish it here since you put it here we are allowed to keep it published here. Please continue to post and share your unique content anywhere you like. Don't take other peoples content and post it elsewhere as your own since that is in violation of the law in just about all countries.

 

[John MS]

GinGinD is correct, we own nothing but the rights to your content. You own the copyright. We can not use your image anywhere but on our own network. So we can use it in a monthly newsletter, for example. This was explained many a time on the site wulf is speaking of. We post up the policy and TOS to protect ourselves. Since unlike Ernie we manage a number of communities. Like the mom and pop shop down the street from your wont put a sign up saying you are on camera, but the chain store will, because they have had to deal with an issue like that in the past.

Helena

Sounds reasonable and is probably very similar to practices on other watch collecting websites that are run as businesses.

 

[HOROLOGIST007]

I have been trying to say they content is still yours, we just have the right to publish it here since you put it here we are allowed to keep it published here. Please continue to post and share your unique content anywhere you like. Don't take other peoples content and post it elsewhere as your own since that is in violation of the law in just about all countries.

unless you give full acknowledgement.
adam

 

[270778]

Nice... one of my posts already disappeared without a trace. Please have the decency to leave an explanation why content is deleted for all to see.

As the mods will tell you, soft delete is on the site, so if we did remove anything it would show to the action will show to the moderators. So they can tell you if we touched anything. Also i see you removed your own content.

Helena

 

[iinsic]

"the limited rights to use", to be more precise. And in the case cited below, the sentence should stop at "is protected by copyrights.". Copyrights for the most material published here are NOT owned or controled by watchuseek.com.

While the VS TOS could be worded more clearly, both Helena and Philip have confirmed that WUS only claims a license to maintain the publication of original photos and content posted by members. As they have pointed out - and as my IP attorney has confirmed - assignment of an original copyright is a bit more involved than simply making a passive concession to a site's terms of service. Rights to original content remain with originators of that content. Some websites - Facebook comes to mind - assert a much broader license to posted content, including their ability to use that content in advertising or other promotional activities of Facebook. WUS is being very conservative by comparison: They are protecting themselves as a publisher of original copyrighted material, and they are warning those who might expropriate that material to other sites of a de facto copyright infringement. In other words, WUS is looking out for themselves and for their members.

Perhaps it is time to give this issue a rest. Continuing to attach dark motives to a misreading of the VS TOS is starting to look like this:

 

[Wulf]

As the mods will tell you, soft delete is on the site, so if we did remove anything it would show to the action will show to the moderators. So they can tell you if we touched anything. Also i see you removed your own content.

Helena

Admins can physically remove posts or threads without a trace so soft delete does not apply there.

 

[270778]

Admins can physically remove posts or threads without a trace so soft delete does not apply there.

I will let the staff answer this one, since we had a chat about soft delete.

Also Ernie can still see what we do, by going into the admin logs, so you can ask him to confirm that if you like.

No account owned by VS or used by VS i should say has touched any of your posts. The staff can also confirm that you are the one removing your own content.

I will let you contact them to investigate this matter, we have no interest in removing your content. What ever it is you would like to say about us can stay here, the forum users are educated enough to make their own conclusions.

Helena

 

[ShaggyDog]

GinGinD is correct, we own nothing but the rights to your content. You own the copyright. We can not use your image anywhere but on our own network. So we can use it in a monthly newsletter, for example. This was explained many a time on the site wulf is speaking of. We post up the policy and TOS to protect ourselves. Since unlike Ernie we manage a number of communities. Like the mom and pop shop down the street from your wont put a sign up saying you are on camera, but the chain store will, because they have had to deal with an issue like that in the past.

Helena

I'm pretty sure that I've seen the Watchuseek Facebook page using pictures posted by members to illustrate links...

 

[270778]

I'm pretty sure that I've seen the Watchuseek Facebook page using pictures posted by members to illustrate links...

Currently or in the past?

Helena

 

[ShaggyDog]

Currently or in the past?

Helena

Ok, this is just to show you an example.

 

[270778]

Ok, this is just to show you an example.

WE currently don't run that page, I can find out who posts that content though?

Helena

 

[CMSgt Bo]

Thank you Helena, I'll take it from here.

First of all, until instructed otherwise we're still operating under our established rules and guidelines here: Forum Rules and Guidelines - Watchuseek

Let's say you violated our rule number 2 (which you did), we'll either unapprove the offending post and place it back into moderation or soft delete it outright. Either way, it's history.

Let's say you post private correspondence on the forum without the senders permission (again, which you did); in doing so you are violating our rule number 3. In this case we'll either unapprove the offending post and place it back into moderation or soft delete it outright like we did for the rule 2 violation.

Let's say you are unhappy with the Mod actions and want to vent (which you are doing); in doing so you are violating rule number 11, which can result in an Infraction, temp-ban, or perma-ban.

So before you take this to the next level I suggest you refamiliarize yourself with our rules and guidelines so there'll be no more surprises on your end.

Knowing is half the battle, and now you know.

 

[thekody]

View attachment 1720962

Amen!! lol

 

[lexvil]

So it's like North Korea ?

Thank you Helena, I'll take it from here.

First of all, until instructed otherwise we're still operating under our established rules and guidelines here: Forum Rules and Guidelines - Watchuseek

Let's say you violated our rule number 2 (which you did), we'll either unapprove the offending post and place it back into moderation or soft delete it outright. Either way, it's history.

Let's say you post private correspondence on the forum without the senders permission; in doing so you are violating our rule number 3. In this case we'll either unapprove the offending post and place it back into moderation or soft delete it outright like we did for the rule 2 violation.

Let's say you are unhappy with the Mod actions and want to vent; in doing so you are violating rule number 11, which can result in an Infraction, temp-ban, or perma-ban.

So before you take this to the next level I suggest you refamiliarize yourself with our rules and guidelines so there'll be no more surprises on your end.

Knowing is half the battle, and now you know.

 

[John MS]

So it's like North Korea 

Hardly. Those rules and consequences have been around for a long time. I suspect longer than I've been a member. I've seen the consequences applied in rare instances and each time the action was appropriate. Thoughtful moderation and application of rules are an absolute requirement for a site as large and active as this one. I've seen forums dissolve into chaos because the owners took a laissez faire attitude toward member decorum. It would be nice if we didn't need a volunteer group of moderators to keep things from going astray but that's just wishful thinking.

 

[lexvil]

I think North Korea has been around longer, while you may post a lot you aren't aware of everything that has happened here.

Hardly. Those rules and consequences have been around for a long time. I suspect longer than I've been a member. I've seen the consequences applied in rare instances and each time the action was appropriate. Thoughtful moderation and application of rules are an absolute requirement for a site as large and active as this one. I've seen forums devolve into chaos because the owners took a laissez faire attitude toward member decorum. It would be nice if we didn't need a volunteer group of moderators to keep things from going astray but that's just wishful thinking.

 

[CMSgt Bo]

Unlike North Korea, you're free to leave anytime if you don't like how things are run around here.

 

[Rallyfan13]

Many thanks and congrats to Mr. ER. This forum was a great source of info, particularly as TZ hadn't been the same at all this century. It's a shame to see it sold off but very few things last forever and a forum isn't one of them (hatred and death come to mind as examples, but I digress). Thanks again and good luck.

 

[Strange]

Anytime you hear someone protesting that their legalese is more innocently intended than it sounds get ready to fire for effect.