Discord

[Graaf Statler]

All the best Arb, both here and on Discord.

[Abd]

Here Abd, about commercial use.

https://www.charlotteslaw.nl/auteursrec ... l-gebruik/

Allereerst: in Nederland doet het er in de basis niet toe of je een werk commercieel gebruikt of niet

Again, nothing surprising there. In some contexts, whether a use is commercial or not can affect both the legitimacy of an exception and possible penalties for violation. An aspect of this is judicial discretion. Graaf denied that there is any such thing as judicial discretion in the Netherlands, and I pointed to clear evidence to the contrary. He dismissed that as having to do with criminal law, but in the actual discussion, the issue was a misdemeanor and thus "criminal," at the low end. Exactly how judicial discretion plays out in civil cases, I don't know, but as I pointed out, discretion can cut both ways, and that one court awards high damages is not evidence that all courts will.

Here, Graaf is quoting Charlotte Meindersma, and he has quoted her before. He does not read carefully. The article is about "when is their commercial use" and her answer begins with "First of all: in the Netherlands it does not matter basically whether you use a work commercially or not." What I notice immediately is the hedge: "Basically." What does that mean? It means that there can be exceptions, but the general rule is as stated. And then she mentions some exceptions. But I have really been talking about something else. One would think from Graaf's rants that I've been claiming you can disregard copyright in Holland, which is far, far from the truth. I often mention the U.S. situation and always note that it's different in the EU. However, how different?

There is an absence of cases applying to the relevant situation for noncommercial usage: a user adding copyrighted content to Wikipedia, without permission. Happens all the time. So, where are the cases? Who has been prosecuted for adding copyrighted material to Wikipedia? We have to assume that it's a Dutch user, otherwise, where is the jurisdiction? But surely it's often happened. Graaf often claims the authority of his friends, lawyers, but hasn't pointed to what they have actually written, if they wrote on this topic. It's all Graaf Says So, It Must Be True. Except that he is not actually arguing clear points, just more or less You Are Wrong. I'm interesting in copyright as it impacts academic and other critical usage. We already know that parody can be an allowed use, and, in fact, Meindersma mentions parody and how the parody defense is weakened by the taking of profit for the use. Quoting from Meindersma:

Often creators are told as a copyright claim that the work has not been used commercially and that there would therefore be no infringement or, in any case, no right to compensation. Unfortunately that is not true.

Correct. It depends on details.

Even with non-commercial use, the maker is entitled to compensation if the work was used without permission or without the use of a legal exception.

This is Dutch law and may or may not apply elsewhere. Notice "without the use of a legal exception." Those exceptions vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

If non-commercial use did not infringe, it would mean that everyone could use everything just like that, even without permission. Even the Fair Use exception in the US does not go that far.

Again, correct. Not "just like that." There are details to be examined with each case. It's complex, in fact. Graaf treats the matter as if it is open and shut: used without permission? BANG! Enormous fines! I rather doubt it, but there is a risk. I take the risk, sometimes. So far, no real problem. In the US, if I host copyrighted material on my blog, and the blog is non-profit, there is no problem *unless the owner complains," and if I take it down immediately, there is no problem. In this case "noncommercial" does matter. But it may matter much less in Holland, but it still matters in a way. Graaf does not know how to read carefully and throughly.

In the case of commercial use, claims can also be demanded and the damages may be higher.

Wait! Didn't she say that "commercial" didn't matter? No. She hedged the statement. She's a lawyer, and smart lawyers are aware that there can be exceptions. They do not think like Graaf, in black and white and extremes, or in the center with no exceptions.
My actual opinion on the case of a user submitting copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission. First of all, it is immediately published. The upload is a violation of Wikipedia policy, unless it fits certain exceptions. The effect of these exceptions and how they interact with Dutch law, I don't know. The dramatic situation that Graaf posited, that "decades later" a teenager (when posting the material) could be bankrupted by the damages seems radically unlikely, though, for many reasons. In other words, his response and position was doubtless considered an hysterical over-reaction, even if technically correct as to a possibility. Lightning could strike, and meteors occasionally injure people.

The presence of many violations over, say, fifteen years, and the absence of prosecutions, indicates that the risk is extremely low. In other words, if some Dutch kid does what one of those bloggers or Facebook users did, unknowingly upload a copyvio, it is very unlikely to cause the sky to fall on them decades later. Nevertheless wiki practice is to educate users on copyright and caution them against uploading copyvio, and users are even sanctioned if they do this repeatedly. So the point would be what?

[Abd]

All the best Arb, both here and on Discord.

I think he meant Abd. Good health, Graaf, enjoy your life and your trains and your garden and your travel.

[Graaf Statler]

What the point is mister Abd? What the point is? You want to know what the point is?

The point is Copivio detecting has grown out to a complete industry in Holland, because the license fees are so high. There are, and also in Belgium and Germany by the way, law firms and photographer who have made of hunting copyright there core business! And not one or two, but many!
They use modern bots and other technics only because the high license fees. But that is something Abd doesn't know, no but still he has a very strong vision.

I said all the best Abd, we have duscussed enough, it is a total waisting of time. You know so much more than all Dutch experts together, all those warnings for copyvio in Holland are nonsens, yes, you know anything even better than all the lawyers and judges, because they are all one by one prutsers and I, yes I am complete confused!

Have a nice day I said, Mister Abd!

[Graaf Statler]

And why I have left Dysk his Discord is altough I had a really nice conversation with the princess because of the ridicules behaving of Abd.

Dysk had made me unblockable, but still Abd did anything to get power over me and was constant censuring my postings.
A normal discussion is there impossible. What not fits in Abd's mind setting or what proves he is wrong is worthless and he remove it.

See the example here, it is absolute clear I am 100% right, only Abd simple doesn't accept that.
And he called me a fascist and my country a fascistic nation. The bloody limit and unacceptable.

[Abd]

What the point is mister Abd? What the point is? You want to know what the point is?

The point is Copivio detecting has grown out to a complete industry in Holland, because the license fees are so high. There are, and also in Belgium and Germany by the way, law firms and photographer who have made of hunting copyright there core business! And not one or two, but many!
They use modern bots and other technics only because the high license fees. But that is something Abd doesn't know, no but still he has a very strong vision.

That's Statler's point, and it is correct, except for one thing. He claims I don't know this, and firmly believes, apparently, that I have a contrary opinion, and he rants and raves about this at great length, and pays no actual attention to responses pointing out my actual view and providing evidence, just posts more sarcasm about my "expertise." This is trolling per excellence. Or insanity, that is, he may believe what he writes. He attacks what he does not understand.

I said all the best Abd, we have duscussed enough, it is a total waisting of time. You know so much more than all Dutch experts together, all those warnings for copyvio in Holland are nonsens, yes, you know anything even better than all the lawyers and judges, because they are all one by one prutsers and I, yes I am complete confused!

Have a nice day I said, Mister Abd![/quote]I will, even if Statler continues with blatant lies and denial. It's up to moderation here if they want any of this to continue, but to answer a question raised in another topic, no, I have never received any warnings about my postings here.

[Graaf Statler]

I think this is the most sad example of the rigid copyright laws in Europe, Abd:

https://www.telegraaf.nl/entertainment/ ... 75-euro-op

The best friend of Andre Hazes, a what we call a volkszanger, a singer of the peeps had taken a few pictures on the wedding of his friend and had published them years later in some shitty free local newspaper. A pensioner.

1700 euro. And if he had been unlucky again 1700 euro for his passed away friend. For his own pictures. Portret right. Commercial use.

I am glad they have helped this man, and I am glad article 13/17 at least protects private persons as long they post on a licensed platform.
Because in that case the platform is responsible in the future..

But this is of course absurd, even a publication of a church or club is commercial use in Europe!

[Abd]

And why I have left Dysk his Discord is altough I had a really nice conversation with the princess because of the ridicules behaving of Abd.

Dysk had made me unblockable, but still Abd did anything to get power over me and was constant censuring my postings.
A normal discussion is there impossible. What not fits in Abd's mind setting or what proves he is wrong is worthless and he remove it.

See the example here, it is absolute clear I am 100% right, only Abd simple doesn't accept that.
And he called me a fascist and my country a fascistic nation. The bloody limit and unacceptable.

I did not ask for the unique tool given, the one that, used, apparently blew Statler's fuses. He was allowed complete freedom in the topic that was actually set up to confine disruption coming from Sucks, Flame Wars. Statler apparently believes in complete freedom for himself, to exercise when and where he chooses, and resists strongly any moderation, and believes that moderators must follow "rules" which he invents.

He had been claiming there was nothing I could do to stop him from ranting in the more public channels (and revealing private information from the more secure channels.) If anyone wants more information about what actually happened, ask. But this is all very well-known Statler behavior.
It was apparently much easier to stop him than I suspected it would be. After warning, Graaf posts in the L1 channel, The Smithery, were deleted without further comment. First time, I kept a copy, but all deleted messages show up in the Logs, which any of the 11 Mods can see. So I stopped that. I notified moderators as to my intention as well, this was community-supported, and obviously could not have been done without support from site ownership, and at least one of them was aware of it all along.

The Audit log (again, all Mods can see that) show that the first deletion was at 13:00 GMT yesterday. That message was one with privacy issues. Graaf was warned, and continued to flood the server, and so, at about 16:00 GMT, I deleted 8 messages, and at 16:40, 6 more. All from L1 The Smithery. Aside from that first deletion this was, then, over a period of 40 minutes, hardly "continually." But, yes, it would have continued, if he had continued to flood that channel.

Meanwhile, at 14:46, Graaf's special role was allowed to post to L2 Flame Wars (which should have been allowed before, and it was allowed because I and another mod pointed out the problem.) At 16:18 Graaf posted to Flame Wars, complaining about me. I posted this response:

Abd:Reminding Myself [Graaf] and this channel that I have no obligation to respond to his rants. He is allowed full freedom in this channel, at least so far. Expect most of his posts to be ignored.

That comment was upvoted by a moderator, and another agreed.

He responded with 5 posts, the last at 18:46 GMT, which were not touched and to which nobody responded. He left the server at 19:08 GMT.

A couple of button pushes, and he left the server, which erased that special role he had been given that made him unblockable by mods, coming here to whine about it -- deceptively. He, himself, with his extreme reactivity, trashed his access. While I have no crystal ball, I rather doubt he will be given another chance.

Statler picks a point where he is right, claims that his target is wrong, and shows "proof" of what he is claiming. And it does prove what he is claiming, if we squint and only look at part of it. But he tosses in much that is not actually shown in the evidence, ignores the parts of the evidence that weaken his claim, and misrepresents what his target has stated, as if the target has a firm -- and incorrect -- belief. Trolling. Straw manning.

As to fascism, I have on occasion used the word based on the original definition by Mussolini, who coined it. It refers to strong central control (allegedly in the public interest) and exists in a polarity with what he called "liberalism," which is, in the extreme, libertine. So my action was fascist. Obviously, it was not National Socialist, White Supremacist, or any of the other isms that have come to be associated with fascism. The present opposite of this original fascism is anarchism. And all "isms" make us stupid, if blindly followed or avoided.

I salute the owners of the Discord server for making this demonstration possible. Statler could not tolerate one thing more than any other: that nobody cared about what he was writing. Most Wikipedia critics are anti-deletion and anti-banning. Yet there is a proper place for it, and particularly after warning. Deletion without warning, I have always considered terminally rude, to be done only if absolutely necessary.

[Graaf Statler]

>>O. First about that fascism,

Dysk wrote a blogpost about the term fasism and I have given a reaction what was according to you out of line:

Fascism special in what you should call the Rheinland, the country’s where the river Rhein is flowing, is still a highly charged term. The wounds of the second world war are fresh, and the cicatrice are still anywhere.

You must be very extreem careful to use the term Fascisme in these country’s. This Volkskrant article (in Dutch) shows those cicatrice very well.

https://www.volkskrant.nl/cultuur-media ... ~b04a0fc9/

EOT for me, Abd, Fish.



>>And for the rest, I consider Discord as a gamers tool, a game in the games, not to take serieus as a discussion medium.
I will not return there anymore, Abd.

Also EOT, Abd, fish.

>> Here and now.

The mods, owners have every right to run a Discord, a site, a wiki, a forum in the way they want.
But I have a other right what is just as important, Abd, I simple don't have to be a part of some communty, what ever that might be.
And here it is now up to the management what they want with this side and till that time we are grateful for the fish we got till now.

Because for me at least this Sucks experience was a eyeopener and gave me a deep inside view in the kitchen of Wikipedia.
And I think to the other too and I thank you all therefore.

And a explanation for the EOT's. One of the reasons why I will not react or responce anymore is because I have a Eric style lot of work to do and I don't think any further discussions will brings us closer to each other.

So I bid you all for now farewell.