Banned

[bob turner]

I found it fascinating. It forced me to study arcane areas of copyright law.

I hold no grudge against OGR - I do not care for their censorship (moderation) but that is just one guy who clearly has issues.

All of my posting -here and elsewhere - is for entertainment. This is at least entertaining in the short run.

I may revoke/invalidate/terminate. If I do, it will be a friendly note allowing them to continue to use my images, and to note that I have never posted copyright material without permission from the copyright holder - there, or anywhere else.

It’s just that one guy . . .

[E7]

It only takes ONE guy.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

.

[bob turner]

The letter is ready. I would expect them to ignore it, and I have no intention to take any action unless I find out they are selling my images - I know they will not do that. And since the moderator who wrote that rather caustic and inaccurate sentence above is the Publisher (the head guy) he will get the letter and will most probably shred it before he reads it. But I will publish it here.

TCA-Western has been lifting images from OGR for a while now - but that is not OGR's fault. And there is a "safe harbor" even for that - the copyright owner must demand that the photos be "taken down", and if the site/ISP does that they cannot be sued.

I was only frosted because they wouldn't tag my photos with attribution (e.g., Model and Photo by Bob Turner). Had they done that, they could have used all my pictures - for free!

[robert.]

What happens when someone post a Lionel catalog on OGR.? I don't believe Lionel would complain. I do believe it would fall under posting copyrighted material.

[bob turner]

I think you can quote from the catalog. You cannot just post the thing without Lionel’s express permission.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

.

[bob turner]

And they, too, were convinced that one had to register and affix the circle c in order to own a copyright. That has not been true for over 40 years! At least they didn't tell me that 75 lawyers said so.

[E7]

At least they didn't tell me that 75 lawyers said so.

In my best Don Adams voice: Would you believe 74?

[bob turner]

Carey has posted a really intriguing set of photos of an Alexander GG1 with cast aluminum cars striped for the Fleet of Modernism. I have that catalog, but did not realize that the cars were cast. Now he has me lusting for some of those cars!
Well, I am pretty happy with the K-Line cars, but I have developed a taste for the FOM paint scheme. Maybe I shall repaint some Kasiner, or machine a few more blanks . . .

Posting here, because this is one thread I am sorry I cannot post to on OGR. The rest of it - kind of a relief, not feeling obligated to stick my opinions everywhere. Way to go, Carey. You are indeed a preservationist.

[MartyE]

What am I missing?

You posted photos you took and they want you to supply a copyright for them? I post a lot of photos in the way of "Weekend Photo Fun" and such and never had an issue. Maybe I 'm just too thick to understand what you are saying. Type slower because I'm not a fast reader. LOL!

Dave is correct though someone did come after them for copyrighted photos that cost them money which most likely why they are overly concerned with what gets posted.

[bob turner]

No - I said my photos are in fact copyright - all of them - and that they could be used elsewhere with my permission, but that I did not want them repeated in the same thread.

Arnold said that my asserting copyright status violated their terms of service (it doesn't) and that my photos had to be registered to be copyright. He said he had 75 lawyers who told him that a photo without the circle c was not copyright.

I told him I was a registered patent attorney, and assured him that photos are copyright the instant the shutter clicked. He then banned me.

I rarely miss being able to post. I bet my opinions are not missed.

I cannot make it any clearer than that.

[MartyE]

Thanks Bob. I just wasn't understanding.

[Chris Rock]

Bob,
So you gave the OGR Forum stipulations for use of your photos on their site that they did not even solicit and that you volunteered to put on their site.

If I were from OGR I'd have told you not to post your photos or kicked you off the site as well. Good grief.

I thought you were just squabbling about what constitutes a copyright.

[bob turner]

It is a little more complicated than that, but yes. You do know that posting a photo on a forum does not waive your copyright? It does not assign it to the forum owners?

For exactly one day I posted on all my posts a legend that said my photos could be used with attribution so
long as they were not repeated in the same thread. I took it down within 24 hours - I hadn't realized it would propagate to every single one of my past posts. Then a week later Arnold came after me. Apparently for that legend.

I never much cared for those legends - and a pet peeve of both mine and Arnold's is the endless, mindless repetition of photos.