Announcement by Philip Moos - Copyright Infringement

[Alex]

Deafie News (from Canada), Deaf Today (from USA) and Deaf Newspaper (from USA) were never authorized to copy USA-L News on their websites.

USA-L News, through an attorney over six years ago, legally obtained copyrighted permission from various news sources. The disclaimer at the bottom of all said news indicated you must obtain copyright permission from the publisher. Yet, these people ignored and removed the work disclaimer) of said news sources and USA-L News.

This must end immediately and show support and respect the work of USA-L News and Creative Designers. Advertisers need to be made aware of their dollars being wasted by people who has violated the copyright laws. When a site gets shut down, advertisers lose dollars.

The three (3) websites mentioned above are forewarned not to copy any work of USA-L News onto their websites.

-Philip Moos @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USA-L_News

 

[Banjo]

Actually, I was in a conversation with the owner of DeafToday the other day. He mentioned that USA-L News made an accusation against him about stealing materials from the newsgroup.

Deafie News, I was told that they may be stealing from USA-L News, but not Deaf Today. What Deaf Today use to obtain news stories has something to do with Google technology, I'm not exactly sure what it is.

Feed Crawler or RSS Crawler, or something like that. USA-L News probably use the same technology as well. It's perfectly legally as long you cite the sources.

I'm sure the owner will come here to explain what is happening. I believe USA-L News is jumping the gun, and possibly lying about it.

This isn't the first time USA-L News did this.

 

[VamPyroX]

Umm... I'm lost. Am I missing something here?

 

[bree]

I have a quicky FAQ explaining why 'cut and pasting' of news isnt a good idea. It seems that some deaf publications disregard this fact.
And no, citing sources does not let you off the hook unless you are only quoting it. Its still 'publication', which only the copyright holder can give. 'Feeds' should just quote some text, THEN link you to the articles. Full text of the articles still remains at the copyright holder's site.

I'm honestly not sure how USA-L got permission from ALL the various media organizations to copy their articles. But this permission should mean that the copyright still remains with the publishers, so anybody copying usa-l news articles are stealing from media sources, and it would land them in much more hot water with large media companies than with USA-L alone. (If you follow the RIAA's music 'thief' lawsuits, you will realize just how much you can be charged for copyright infringement. Thousands for each infringement.)
The advertising statement that Moos gives is funny, though. Yahoo groups, where the USA-L mailing list is hosting, has a 'no resale of service' clause in their terms. I assumed it means you can't sell advertising services through Yahoo groups?

 

[Banjo]

I have a quicky FAQ explaining why 'cut and pasting' of news isnt a good idea. It seems that some deaf publications disregard this fact.
And no, citing sources does not let you off the hook unless you are only quoting it. Its still 'publication', which only the copyright holder can give. 'Feeds' should just quote some text, THEN link you to the articles. Full text of the articles still remains at the copyright holder's site.

Oops, I forgot to mention the word, "quote". That was what I was supposed to mention in my previous post, but forgot to.

But, yes... you are right.

 

[Banjo]

The advertising statement that Moos gives is funny, though. Yahoo groups, where the USA-L mailing list is hosting, has a 'no resale of service' clause in their terms. I assumed it means you can't sell advertising services through Yahoo groups?

That's what I was thinking, why is this guy selling advertisement on Yahoo! Groups when it is obviously against the rules?

Some people are just dumb.

 

[Neverask]

Two things I want to comment regarding USA-L News.

1) It was stated "through an attorney" etc. etc. etc. Why are you guys giving your opinion when the matter has been worked out previously with his attorney? Let it go and accept the fact USA-L News knows what they are doing.

2) What makes you guys think USA-L News was selling advertisement? Any of you ever took the time to ask them that question?

All you do is waste your time because all of your opinions were incorrect except for a small portion from Bree. Banjo is really the dumb one himself.

USA-L News does not sell advertisement. According to them, it is a processing fee to cover the cost of using an ISP. There are no profits from this.

Legally, USA-L News can not sell advertisements. This is how USA-L News was able to obtain advanced blanket agreement from various news sources. Point here you people need to understand the business aspect.

This may sound to you that I support the functions of USA-L News. The answer is yes. I happened to know Mr. Moos and he is one of the most honest people I've ever met. I have trusted him with his judgements and knowing he has used legal advice from a well known attorney in New Jersey, USA-L News operates within the realm of the copyright laws.

You folks need to stop coming up with opinions that gets you nowhere.

 

[Neverask]

I forgot to add one other item and that USA-L News has received awards for its work. Two years ago, the National Association of the Deaf awarded Mr. Moos the Flying Fingers Award.

He may be up for more awards which would not surprise me. What I do know is Mr. Moos has spend many volunteer hours for more than six years doing USA-L News (and he also operates NJ-L News). There has been articles and the last one came from SIGNews.

No matter what opinions you give, there is nothing you can take away for the accomplishment Mr. Moos has done.

He quoted me something a few years ago "all the negative publicity has given me new subcribers because people wanted to know what I do."

 

[Nesmuth]

Dont let this old bull scare you

Deafie News (from Canada), Deaf Today (from USA) and Deaf Newspaper (from USA) were never authorized to copy USA-L News on their websites.

USA-L News, through an attorney over six years ago, legally obtained copyrighted permission from various news sources. The disclaimer at the bottom of all said news indicated you must obtain copyright permission from the publisher. Yet, these people ignored and removed the work disclaimer) of said news sources and USA-L News.

This must end immediately and show support and respect the work of USA-L News and Creative Designers. Advertisers need to be made aware of their dollars being wasted by people who has violated the copyright laws. When a site gets shut down, advertisers lose dollars.

The three (3) websites mentioned above are forewarned not to copy any work of USA-L News onto their websites.

-Philip Moos @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USA-L_News

Basically this guy is trying hard to be the king of deaf news. I see like about a dozen other websites carrying what Phil claims to be his work and he aint done anything to those sites so he's just whining out of his backend.

I actually taught Deaf Today how to search for news articles and theyre pretty much the same methods used by both me and Phil Moos himself.
You can refine search engines and then drag and drop the pages to your desktops and just click on them for an instant listing of news articles. Mighty easy for anyone to do it these days.

Besides USA-L has like 4636 subscribers whilst my own Deaf Watch Newsletter has like 16251 subscribers and Deaf Newspaper has like 20000 subscribers and im sure Deafie News has an impressive subscribership.

You dont need to listen to or even be afraid of this old bull called Phil Moos.

Richard Roehm

 

[bree]

2) What makes you guys think USA-L News was selling advertisement? Any of you ever took the time to ask them that question?

The statement from Moos can be misinterpreted. I did misunderstand that statement myself.

Advertisers need to be made aware of their dollars being wasted by people who has violated the copyright laws. When a site gets shut down, advertisers lose dollars.

The entire statement from Moos really is too brief, and too much on the 'attack', without clarifying the legal issue is being violated. I feel that by posting this Moos perhaps stepped beyond reasonably dealing with the issue and instead made a personal attack on a public forum. Stating that copyright should not be violated, and explaining why WITHOUT naming violators would do the job equally. Talking to infringers directly would likely be a good idea, But publicly identifying them can too easily become a personal attack.

And Ummmm... Nesmuth, the 'dragging and dropping' of an article for your own use is 'fair use', but if you are going to 'share' the article on a website or email list, you are breaking copyright rules. Too easy to do today, which is why we need to be careful.
A good explaination of copyright is available here

 

[Nesmuth]

And Ummmm... Nesmuth, the 'dragging and dropping' of an article for your own use is 'fair use', but if you are going to 'share' the article on a website or email list, you are breaking copyright rules. Too easy to do today, which is why we need to be careful.
A good explaination of copyright is available here

I said I refine news search queries and drag and drop these things like the example below:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/?querytext...ulltext&searchfromtoc.x=15&searchfromtoc.y=21

onto my desktop and i just click on it for an instant listing of deaf news. I do that with over 300 news websites all around the globe.

What were doing is not copyright infringement of Phil's work.

And besides why should Phil be limiting deaf news to USA-L when it has like 4636 subscribers whilst my own Deaf Watch Newsletter has like 16251 subscribers and Deaf Newspaper has over 20000 subscribers. Shouldnt deafness news be shared with more people than Phil's little subscribership?

Richard Roehm

 

[bree]

What were doing is not copyright infringement of Phil's work.

Indeed, it isn't. That might be a copyright infringement of MSNBC's work.
You do have a point in that collecting deaf news is rather easy in this day and age. I often use Google news alerts with deaf related keywords.
BUT.. and this is the big, hairy, ugly BUT(t).. reprinting any of this is copyright infringement. You cannot send these article through email, nor post them on a website without permission. As far as I can tell, you can only LINK to them.
For example... unless deaftoday got permission from the salt lake tribune, then this article is breaking copyright laws. And considering the number of posts deaftoday does, and the fact that they accept advertising, they could be looking at suits totaling hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars. Although Moos brought up the issue, it really has nothing to do with Moos, and everything to do with the media companies whose articles are being reprinted.

 

[Nesmuth]

And considering the number of posts deaftoday does, and the fact that they accept advertising, they could be looking at suits totaling hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars.

Thats already happening as I heard they just lost a big one few months ago!

The folks at Deaf Today in the past like 5 yrs ago were good kind folks when they let me stay with them while I attended the Governor's meetings. Thats where I showed them the tricks of news gathering.

Now theyre mighty different and I'm not proud of them anymore.

Richard Roehm

 

[Nesmuth]

Deaf Today

I just learned that Deaf Today has new owners and I'm mighty pleased by that fact and I'm going to emphasize that my negative comments to Deaf Today be directed to the previous owners, NOT the current owner as he's cleared things up for me yesterday. Most likely they could still be suffering from ill effects from the previous owners.

I want to congratulate the new owners of Deaf Today for taking the gargantuan task of informing as many people of deafness related news and to ignore the old buzzard that's trying hard to be the king of deaf news.

I look forward to positive relations with Deaf Today again since the old owners were on a bad power trip.

Richard Roehm

 

[eternity]

Hey nesmuth -- it has been long time no hear from ya.

I remember that I used to work for DeafToday as webmaster. We had same problem with Phil Moos. He sent the news to everyone. He allowed webmaster (me) to add his Usa-L news. He emailed and accused about his usa l news. that was a couple years ago. Which wasn't very nice. I never replied back. I let the owner know and have him to handle it with him. Phil Moos seems not being honest.

I talked to the owner and gave me advice that I should be discontinued to copy any news of his. I find other way to get the news and most of people who send the news.

I never understand why Phil Moos accused everyone. All he cares that he wants to sue somebody so he can get the money? He forgot about deaf community.

 

[Nesmuth]

Hi there eternity! Looooong time no seeeee! Im a free person again!

Richard

 

[VamPyroX]

Hi there eternity! Looooong time no seeeee! Im a free person again!

Richard

"Free person again"? Hmm... sounds like you've been chasing after her for a while?

 

[eternity]

Vampy, ha no .. I know him in real life.

Nesmuth, Yea it has been a while. Last time I saw you when I was in california.

Alex, know what? Phil Moos has been threated several people that he will sue them. The fact is... it has been like 5-6 years?