xjwsforChrist

AGUEST SAID

I'm one who didn't care for the prequel trilogy, dear Char (peace to both you and EE!). They didn't move me like the first set. I don't know if it's because they were done so far after... or my inability to disconnect from the order (I can be pendantic and so the reversed order just didn't do it for me).

Peace!

SA, on her own...

LEANN SAID


We are huge Trekkies over here..

DS9 is a huge favorite and we love the feel of the orginal series. I like next generation especially around the time of the Borg. I never really got into voyager much.

Favorite Characters are Data, spock, I like the 'manho' kirk..lol and jadzia and odo. DS9 was fabulous for 'evil' characters like dukat and Weyoun.

JUSTMOM SAID

WELCOME

Chappy and EE......

wanted to say hello.....

Justmom

CHAPPY SAID




I don't think it is too much, because they are telling more than the Hobbit. They are including a lot of back story that happened during the Hobbit that was gleaned from other J.RR Tolkien writings. I love how they are pulling it all together.

Also, I really felt like we got a lot with the first Hobbit movie, and that one was really long. If we just want the Hobbit, one movie will do. If we want all the rest, it's gonna take a while.

YPPUPLLEH SAID

In DS9 I was a fan of the tailor
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

EE SAID

Ohhhh yea puppy! I remember him! the cardasian operative.... They did a lot with WW2 themes. The cardasians being analogous for the Nazi's and the bejorians being a stand in for the various countries they invaded... it was really very engaging and its why I liked it so much.

in a moment of complete and total internet honesty, because none of you know me in real life and cant hold this against me, ill confess that I cried during the original airing of the last episode when the bejorian woman who had become one of the main characters (kira) escorted her long requited love odo back to his home world so he could join "the link". She gave him up for his own happiness and so he could serve as an emissary and broker peace between bajorians and founders.... but it was their own love, so long spurned by Kira and then finally embraced but now sacrificed by odo that just got to me. I really connected with those characters in that show.

CHAPPY SAID

Filed!

AGUEST SAID

Oh my, now THAT could be a truly useful bit of intel, dear EE - LOLOLOLOL! I'll be sure to pass that on to our resident water-boarders ("Just play that episode of DS9, guys, and he'll sing like a canarwy!") - LOLOLOLOL!

Peace!

SA, on her own...

GLADIATOR SAID

Given the stern warning to our newcomer on USA copyright, there needs to be some clarification on what copyright means. For example rather than paraphrase what the copyright act entails, I have quoted below from Wikipedia, though there are many professionally sources freely available on line. Quoting in this way does not infringe copyright or require the permission of the author. Copyright protects the wholesale theft of lengthy works or quoting others work and pretending it is one's own work by not crediting the author. A quick web search will show dozens of explanations regarding copyright which do not in themselves breach copyright. UK copyright is much the same .

"The distinction between what is fair use and what is infringement in a particular case will not always be clear or easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Copyright protects the particular way authors have expressed themselves. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in a work." Copied from Wikipedia

AGUEST SAID

Thank you for that, dear Glad (good morning and peace to you!). Can I impose upon to clarify further, as to how such would... or would not... apply here? Although I know what our intent is in posting such a disclaimer I am not sure everyone here has either the legal or other sufficient education to understand the point you're trying to make and why understanding copyrighting can be important. I think it would be unwise of any of us to assume or presume as to what your point is, so if you could kindly expound on that, that would be great!

Thank you, in advance, and peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

GLADIATOR SAID

AGuest, Quite simply, there is nothing in copyright law to stop anyone quoting posts from this site provided they name the source reference. Forum rules set by administration may not allow this and could lead to a poster being barred.

Copyright law seeks to protect an author’s intellectual property. It is not designed to restrict freedom of speech or inhibit discussion of statements made on public forums.

AGUEST SAID



I am not so sure I agree, dear Glad (again, peace to you!). And so we've included the disclaimer and reserved the right... in case there is.



It could, yes. And since we have a right, do we not, to establish our rules, we have a right to establish this one, yes? Now, of course, any who don't agree with it can choose NOT to join/participate... and that's okay with us... but if one of the things we DON'T want is folks taking content from here and posting it elsewhere... then it would behoove us to take any and every precaution WE can to ensure that they don't. Right?



Yes. And some of what's posted here IS others' intellectual property. I mean, surely, you and those who, perhaps like you, don't believe I hear my Lord speak to ME... but rather, that I'm just "making stuff up" would agree that if that IS the case... then what I "make up" is MY intellectual property. Yes? And I don't want it plaguerized or posted elsewhere without MY permission. And I am sure I am not alone. But you folks can't have it both ways, dear one: either my Lord DOES speak to me and so these things are NOT mine... or he doesn't and it IS mine and so MY intellectual property. However you choose to see it works for me: either you have to acknowledge him... or acknowledge my rights.



See, this is where so many err: this is NOT a public forum, dear one. Not at all or by any stretch. It is a PRIVATE forum (I know, because I pay for it to BE such!)... and participation is subject to approval. While it is open to any to join, we ultimately reserve the right to say whether they can participate or not. That's what the ban feature is for. And we CAN restrict it as to any and every one we WISH to. Yes? We can even discriminate, if we wish (we don't wish, but we COULD).

Private discussion forums, which this is, dear one... are not subject to anti-discrimination laws. Since it is PRIVATE, however, its contents can very well be protected by copyright laws.

I am sorry if this doesn't sit well with what you THINK should occur here, or HOPE will... but it is what I have chosen. Since starting a discussion board is a relatively easy and inexpensive endeavor, no one HAS to join or post HERE, though. But they DO have to respect our rules so long as they do or risk banning... or perhaps worse.

I hope you understand... and I hope that helps. Truly.

YOUR servant (always) and a slave of Christ,

SA

GLADIATOR SAID

As far as I am aware, any forum or internet site that posts information that the public can read is not protected by privacy laws. People can for example quote from any Bible translation, Watchtower publication or website, provided they quote the source.

I am suggesting that if you rely on Copyright law to control what people discuss on other forums about this site, you may be disappointed. To seek punitive damages could be a costly mistake. To use copyright law as a threat could be counter productive, as it may cause people to put it to the test, knowing it will not be of assistance.

Anyway the direction this forum is moving in is not something I need to concern myself with. As a moderator it did concern me, and I expressed that concern when I resigned. I hope the forum is a success and it becomes all that you wish it to be.

Take care

Glad/ Trevor

TEC SAID

I think in the case of a copyright (as with other things)... better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

This one is solely in the interest of protecting whatever rights are due to the members of this forum.

Peace,
tammy

CHARIIKLO SAID

Nevertheless, Glad, there IS such a thing as copyright on the Internet.

I know this, because I too have websites, which I run under the auspices of a collective (sort of) of individually-owned websites. There, there's a very active and informative forum, on which Internet experts post frequently, and there is a whole section on the protection of one's copyright, and much extremely expert and professional information. Over the years there have been many posts there from people whose work has been plagiarised, because that's what we're talking about here. And additionally, abuse of privacy.

Now, a forum such as this is not a website, so it might seem that the thoughts expressed here fall outside that rule. However, I think Shelby has it perfectly right here. What is written here is the intellectual copyright of the writer, I suspect, arguably, in every case, but most certainly in the longer, reflective posts by her and others.

I am not a lawyer, but I do know the Internet and have been involved with website creation since 1999, and part of that afore-mentioned collective since, I think, 2001. I'm not naming it because I would never misuse this forum, or risk being thought of as advertising, though if anyone is desperate to know they can PM me.

That's how I see it, anyway. It's by no means authoritative, but it is informed.