Difference between revisions of "File talk:Thermal Grease single tube.jpg"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(to clarify...)
(reply. We're cool.)
Line 19: Line 19:
  
 
::My statement of "[d]o I sound like a liberal?" was another poor attempt at humor.  I really shouldn't try doing that in text.
 
::My statement of "[d]o I sound like a liberal?" was another poor attempt at humor.  I really shouldn't try doing that in text.
::Anyway, you're probably right--copyright is best reserved for special photos.  However, I was surprised at the difficulty of finding a photo of Thermal Grease which was less that ten years old and not copyrighted.  It shouldn't be anything special, but it seems to be.  
+
:::I confess, it went totally over my head.  I guess I see so much stuff about "liberal Arrogance/Bias/Bigotry/Bullying/Class warfare/Cronyism/Deceit/Double standard/Denial/Hypocrisy/Journalistic malpractice/Propaganda/Race baiting/Stupidity/Style/Troll/Uncharitableness/Whining" (Yes!  Those are all topics in the liberalism template!), in other words, the use of the term "liberal" to connote anything a person doesn't like, that my sense of humor has dulled.  But now that we've cleared the air, fire away.  By the way, do I sound like a zombie? <small>(That's a joke.></small>
 +
::Anyway, you're probably right--copyright is best reserved for special photos.  However, I was surprised at the difficulty of finding a photo of Thermal Grease which was less that ten years old and not copyrighted.  It shouldn't be anything special, but it seems to be.
 +
:::Then you did exactly the right thing.  Bring out your camera, click, and upload.
 
::Still, you make a valid point.  I'll consider it next time I think about claiming copyright.  I do have a question about CC, which it seems should be self-explanatory.  If I want to copyright something under it, do I need to simply review the Creative Commons license and if I agree, state I am releasing it under those terms, or do I need to actually register it with them first?
 
::Still, you make a valid point.  I'll consider it next time I think about claiming copyright.  I do have a question about CC, which it seems should be self-explanatory.  If I want to copyright something under it, do I need to simply review the Creative Commons license and if I agree, state I am releasing it under those terms, or do I need to actually register it with them first?
 +
:::My understanding is that, unlike a patent or trademark, (which is very complex) a copyright is trivial.  You just have to say that whatever you wrote (or uploaded) is copyrighted.  Do not register anything with the CC folks.  All they do is provide the template that you put on your stuff.  They are not in the business of taking custody of 99 bazillion files.  Copy their copyright, which is itself (I assume) in the public domain, onto your work, and it's done.  My understanding from working at Wikiversity is that, when you upload an image, you can check a box, and one of the choices is GFDL.  I check that, and the wiki software does the rest.  Not having upload rights, I don't know what the process looks like at CP.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:07, 6 May 2016 (EDT)
 
::Thanks for the input! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 18:50, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
 
::Thanks for the input! --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 18:50, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
  
:::Just to clarify, I'm not trying to weasel out of anything.  CP prides itself on not restricting the use of it's content, while WP does put restrictions on theirs.  Therefore, looking at these two facts, someone could say that conservatives freely share information for the sake of informing, while WP restricts sharing with copyrights, for the sake of fame and referral.  Therefore, although this assumption would be largely incorrect, I was implying it in jest.  Anyway, moving on... --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
+
:::Just to clarify, I'm not trying to weasel out of anything.  CP prides itself on not restricting the use of its content, while WP does put restrictions on theirs.  Therefore, looking at these two facts, someone could say that conservatives freely share information for the sake of informing, while WP restricts sharing with copyrights, for the sake of fame and referral.  Therefore, although this assumption would be largely incorrect, I was implying it in jest.  Anyway, moving on... --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 22:35, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
 +
::::Not accusing you of any kind of weaseling.
 +
::::But:  Pet peeve of mine: remember that "it's" with an apostrophe, is a contraction for "it is".  If "it is" isn't what you want to say, don't say it.  Same for "who's", "they're", and so on.  So I've just committed a minor no-no by editing someone else's (that's a possessive; gosh I'm getting so pedantic and holier-than-thou, don't tell Cons; sorry :-) talk comment.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:07, 6 May 2016 (EDT)

Revision as of 04:07, May 6, 2016

I'm curious about your licensing restrictions to Conservapedia only. You are within your rights in doing that, but it seems to me that it would be more gentlemanly to allow use by anyone. The images that I have uploaded on Wikiversity are licensed under GFDL. -SamHB

In my memory, this is the only file I have uploaded here which I have claimed any copyright on. I understand that it is helpful to others not to do this, and I do want to aid them to some extent. However, perhaps I am over-thinking this, but here are my points of reasoning:
  1. Wikipedia is a huge project with many people working on it. In many ways, they are still better than CP.
  2. Conservapedia, therefore, should try to make itself distinctive as much as possible
  3. CP is not very distinctive if all we ever do is upload images from WikiMedia
  4. Since CP has such a generous "copy anytime, and attribute or not, we don't much care" policy, anything unique we do cave can be easily copied an plagiarized
  5. I'm generally okay with this policy, but if I think about this as a business (which perhaps I should not), shouldn't we have at least a little protected, unique content?
  6. If all of our images are from WP, then while our text may be different, there honestly is often a lot less of it, and it can be less descriptive than WP, and the images are the same. So why pick CP?

Am I making any sense? Do I sound like a liberal? I don't know, that's just what I'm thinking. --David B (talk) 09:15, 5 May 2016 (EDT)

Yes, you are making sense, but you are also overthinking it. Your concern over whether you sound like a liberal suggests that you have fallen into the trap of being intimidated by the all-too-common practice of attacking people by calling them liberal, or the equally-too-common practice of putting the word "liberal" in front of any negative personality trait one can think of. I recommend that you not worry about that, and concentrate on computers, operating systems, thermal grease, or whatever you want to write about.
Trying to outdo WP in any general sense is not a realistic goal. CP's Alexa rank is around 100,000, WP's is 7. While we want to have nice pictures (I'm currently in a brouhaha with Cons over that very issue, and he is right), they aren't going to make CP perceived as better than WP. It's the text that matters, and, as you point out, WP's text is more popular than CP's.
Anyone can buy a tube of thermal grease and take a picture. There's nothing to be gained from claiming exclusivity in a case like this. Now if you had a picture that is unique and valuable, like capturing the instant Mt. St. Helens exploded, or capturing the raising of the flag on Mt. Suribachi, or a picture that is otherwise of unusually high quality, putting an exclusive license on it would be a good idea.
SamHB (talk) 18:20, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
My statement of "[d]o I sound like a liberal?" was another poor attempt at humor. I really shouldn't try doing that in text.
I confess, it went totally over my head. I guess I see so much stuff about "liberal Arrogance/Bias/Bigotry/Bullying/Class warfare/Cronyism/Deceit/Double standard/Denial/Hypocrisy/Journalistic malpractice/Propaganda/Race baiting/Stupidity/Style/Troll/Uncharitableness/Whining" (Yes! Those are all topics in the liberalism template!), in other words, the use of the term "liberal" to connote anything a person doesn't like, that my sense of humor has dulled. But now that we've cleared the air, fire away. By the way, do I sound like a zombie? (That's a joke.>
Anyway, you're probably right--copyright is best reserved for special photos. However, I was surprised at the difficulty of finding a photo of Thermal Grease which was less that ten years old and not copyrighted. It shouldn't be anything special, but it seems to be.
Then you did exactly the right thing. Bring out your camera, click, and upload.
Still, you make a valid point. I'll consider it next time I think about claiming copyright. I do have a question about CC, which it seems should be self-explanatory. If I want to copyright something under it, do I need to simply review the Creative Commons license and if I agree, state I am releasing it under those terms, or do I need to actually register it with them first?
My understanding is that, unlike a patent or trademark, (which is very complex) a copyright is trivial. You just have to say that whatever you wrote (or uploaded) is copyrighted. Do not register anything with the CC folks. All they do is provide the template that you put on your stuff. They are not in the business of taking custody of 99 bazillion files. Copy their copyright, which is itself (I assume) in the public domain, onto your work, and it's done. My understanding from working at Wikiversity is that, when you upload an image, you can check a box, and one of the choices is GFDL. I check that, and the wiki software does the rest. Not having upload rights, I don't know what the process looks like at CP. SamHB (talk) 00:07, 6 May 2016 (EDT)
Thanks for the input! --David B (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
Just to clarify, I'm not trying to weasel out of anything. CP prides itself on not restricting the use of its content, while WP does put restrictions on theirs. Therefore, looking at these two facts, someone could say that conservatives freely share information for the sake of informing, while WP restricts sharing with copyrights, for the sake of fame and referral. Therefore, although this assumption would be largely incorrect, I was implying it in jest. Anyway, moving on... --David B (talk) 22:35, 5 May 2016 (EDT)
Not accusing you of any kind of weaseling.
But: Pet peeve of mine: remember that "it's" with an apostrophe, is a contraction for "it is". If "it is" isn't what you want to say, don't say it. Same for "who's", "they're", and so on. So I've just committed a minor no-no by editing someone else's (that's a possessive; gosh I'm getting so pedantic and holier-than-thou, don't tell Cons; sorry :-) talk comment. SamHB (talk) 00:07, 6 May 2016 (EDT)