 |
| Found on Facebook. Link takes you to the original. |
Showing posts with label I'm Not A Lawyer But. Show all posts
Showing posts with label I'm Not A Lawyer But. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
WTF?!?!
I'm skimming the news and perusing the internets, as I'm wont to do of an evening, and I see this:
In other court action, an Auburn stay-at-home dad pleaded for leniency at his sentencing for possessing hundreds of child pornography images on his home computer....
[He] got a break from [the judge and] was sentenced to four months in county jail on the felony child pornography charge and 10 years post-release supervision...
[He] could have been imprisoned up to four years on the charge, [but] asked for leniency so he could continue watching his children at home while his wife worked.
Am I the only one that sees something terribly, terribly wrong here?????
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Banned Books Week
It is banned books week. While I think the freedom to read is always important, I like Banned Books Week because it shines the spotlight on the issue. I encourage everyone to read a banned book this week; there are no shortages of titles to choose from!
Have a look at the "Frequently Challenged Books" page at the American Library Association website; by clicking about in the sidebar, you can see banned and challenged books by year, author, books by authors of color, by decade, and classics on the list.
11 Banned Books I have Read and Was Surprised to Find They've Been Censored (in no particular order):
Have a look at the "Frequently Challenged Books" page at the American Library Association website; by clicking about in the sidebar, you can see banned and challenged books by year, author, books by authors of color, by decade, and classics on the list.
11 Banned Books I have Read and Was Surprised to Find They've Been Censored (in no particular order):
- The Color Purple, by Alice Walker
- The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain
- Beloved, by Toni Morrison
- Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck
- Harry Potter, by J.K. Rowling
- Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
- The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
- A Wrinkle in Time, by Madeleine L’Engle
- James and the Giant Peach, by Roald Dahl
- Where’s Waldo?, by Martin Hanford
- Farenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury
Friday, September 11, 2009
The Labyrinth of Copyright, Continued
This is a follow-up to my post a bit ago regarding Orphaned Works.
The Copyright Advisory Network (sponsored by the American Library Association) has a handy tool online that gives quick-and-dirty copyright information based upon date of first publication and whether copyright is asserted. Worth bookmarking, y'all (requires Javascript):
Digital Copyright Slider
[h/t BookofJoe]
The Copyright Advisory Network (sponsored by the American Library Association) has a handy tool online that gives quick-and-dirty copyright information based upon date of first publication and whether copyright is asserted. Worth bookmarking, y'all (requires Javascript):
Digital Copyright Slider
[h/t BookofJoe]
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Orphaned Works... What do you do if you can't find the copyright holder?
One of the things I'm working on with The Book is wrangling permissions. This, I think, is almost harder than writing, as it involves not just my own weirdnesses, but those of other people as well.
To be fair, I have been in contact with extremely helpful people, who corresponded with me, sent digital files, copies of reports, and happily signed and returned the permission to publish form required by my publisher. Others have been happy I'm interested in publishing their materials, and promise to make the experience smooth sailing (once I decide which images I want to publish...) To those people, I am increasingly grateful.
Others responded positively up front, then vanished *poof* when the permission to publish form was sent their way. They may respond favorably to a nudge; I am planning some nudginess this weekend. There is one image in particular from this category that I *really* *really* want.
Other folks, surprisingly (to me) associated with large organizations in the heritage field, have been entirely and completely non-responsive. Verily, black-hole-like in their non-response (NPS and APT, I'm looking at you). The APT can go jump; their stuff's already out there anyway. But the image from the NPS? Another one that I *really* *really* want. For The Book and an article, really. Yeah, it's Federal, so I should just be able to take it... but that would be rude. And, I'd like to be sure to give correct attribution. And, I love the NPS, so this wall-of-black-hole-silence is driving me.
So, yeah. Enough winging about Fun With Photo Permissions, and to my point. There is a lot of stuff that I'd love to incorporate into The Book, but which falls within copyright limitations and the corporate authors of the works are long defunct (I'm not really working with much stuff that would have individual authors/creators). What to do, what to do....
This rolled through my RSS feeder today, courtesy the Blog of the American Historical Association: It is a .pdf Statement of Best Practices in dealing with Orphan Works (things in copyright where the copyright holder no longer exists or cannot be found), published by the Society of American Archivists. There is some good stuff in here about deciding whether to publish what you think are Orphaned Works or not (risk assessment), how to determine who is the creator, how to determine who is the copyright holder (they are often different), copyright heirs (yikes), Reproduction Rights Organizations (international and domestic!), how to cover your butt, and additional reading.
It sounds like a mess; or on a good day, like a boat-load of work. But it doesn't need to be; it's mostly just methodical. And probably, in certain cases, quite worth the effort. This certainly gives me a framework to consider Orphaned Works and in approaching their use. I'll also have to check with my publisher; they may prefer to steer entirely clear of Orphan Works.
To be fair, I have been in contact with extremely helpful people, who corresponded with me, sent digital files, copies of reports, and happily signed and returned the permission to publish form required by my publisher. Others have been happy I'm interested in publishing their materials, and promise to make the experience smooth sailing (once I decide which images I want to publish...) To those people, I am increasingly grateful.
Others responded positively up front, then vanished *poof* when the permission to publish form was sent their way. They may respond favorably to a nudge; I am planning some nudginess this weekend. There is one image in particular from this category that I *really* *really* want.
Other folks, surprisingly (to me) associated with large organizations in the heritage field, have been entirely and completely non-responsive. Verily, black-hole-like in their non-response (NPS and APT, I'm looking at you). The APT can go jump; their stuff's already out there anyway. But the image from the NPS? Another one that I *really* *really* want. For The Book and an article, really. Yeah, it's Federal, so I should just be able to take it... but that would be rude. And, I'd like to be sure to give correct attribution. And, I love the NPS, so this wall-of-black-hole-silence is driving me.
So, yeah. Enough winging about Fun With Photo Permissions, and to my point. There is a lot of stuff that I'd love to incorporate into The Book, but which falls within copyright limitations and the corporate authors of the works are long defunct (I'm not really working with much stuff that would have individual authors/creators). What to do, what to do....
This rolled through my RSS feeder today, courtesy the Blog of the American Historical Association: It is a .pdf Statement of Best Practices in dealing with Orphan Works (things in copyright where the copyright holder no longer exists or cannot be found), published by the Society of American Archivists. There is some good stuff in here about deciding whether to publish what you think are Orphaned Works or not (risk assessment), how to determine who is the creator, how to determine who is the copyright holder (they are often different), copyright heirs (yikes), Reproduction Rights Organizations (international and domestic!), how to cover your butt, and additional reading.
It sounds like a mess; or on a good day, like a boat-load of work. But it doesn't need to be; it's mostly just methodical. And probably, in certain cases, quite worth the effort. This certainly gives me a framework to consider Orphaned Works and in approaching their use. I'll also have to check with my publisher; they may prefer to steer entirely clear of Orphan Works.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Torture is not funny.
Torture is absolutely not funny. And it is a horrible thing when you become what you once despised.
However.
This "leaked torture memo" posted over at Progressive Historians is VERY funny. I laughed my [redacted] off.
However.
This "leaked torture memo" posted over at Progressive Historians is VERY funny. I laughed my [redacted] off.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Random Snark: Confirmation Hypocrisy
Re: Sotomayor's confirmation. I know, I know... politics isn't about consistency or anything. But seriously ... for all those insisting that Supreme Court Justices shouldn't be influenced by their political views, experiences, or upbringing... why the H-E-double-hockey-sticks, then, do you get your knickers so tied up in knots about making sure Justices share your political views about things like gun control and abortion? PICK ONE!
Saturday, May 9, 2009
More about Johanna's Murder
Historiann has a post up about the murder discussing the shift in focus from the tragedy of Johanna's death to fixation on the murderer, and analyzing what's wrong with this picture.
I'm just pissed off about the whole thing; the rationalizations, the fact that she'll likely get dragged through the mud, and somehow he'll be "misguided" and she'll be at fault (you know, for not pressing charges in '07, or "dating" him in the first place), and the lawyers will make a fortune, and she's still dead.
Did you know in CT, if you're abused by someone who doesn't live in your house, is not a family member, and whom you haven't dated (by whatever definition they have of dating), you are NOT eligible for for a restraining order? Did you know in CT that victims of stalking are not eligible for restraining orders? Did you know that in CT, emotional and mental abuse doesn't (necessarily) rate as abuse worthy of a restraining order? Did you know that restraining orders are state-specific, and enforcement across state lines is not guaranteed?
Link to womenslaw.org page on Restraining Orders.
I will say, this makes me less fearful and more angry. Which is a much more useful emotion.
I'm just pissed off about the whole thing; the rationalizations, the fact that she'll likely get dragged through the mud, and somehow he'll be "misguided" and she'll be at fault (you know, for not pressing charges in '07, or "dating" him in the first place), and the lawyers will make a fortune, and she's still dead.
Did you know in CT, if you're abused by someone who doesn't live in your house, is not a family member, and whom you haven't dated (by whatever definition they have of dating), you are NOT eligible for for a restraining order? Did you know in CT that victims of stalking are not eligible for restraining orders? Did you know that in CT, emotional and mental abuse doesn't (necessarily) rate as abuse worthy of a restraining order? Did you know that restraining orders are state-specific, and enforcement across state lines is not guaranteed?
Link to womenslaw.org page on Restraining Orders.
I will say, this makes me less fearful and more angry. Which is a much more useful emotion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)