Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 81 of total 81 in this topic |
Levy
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Apr 17, 2019 - 01:49pm PT
|
I must express my dismay at the new format here in which images do not appear and you have to click on a link to view them(if still available). This ruins the flow of trip reports and other useful information that used to make this site great.
Now it sucks! Thanks for ruining this website, administrators & Chris. I for one will be a much more infrequent visitor to this site now.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:01pm PT
|
+1.
Managing this site is clearly beyond RJ's pay grade.
|
|
Ezra Ellis
Trad climber
North wet, and Da souf
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:01pm PT
|
+1
I really have appreciated this site.
I sincerely Thank Chris Mac for creating this place.
It seems like a sledge hammer has been used, where a scalpel seems more appropriate.
Many of my trip reports are almost unreadable, I have never posted a picture that wasn’t my own.
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:04pm PT
|
It is a little hard to figure out the new rules. Some photos remain, some have live links, some have dead links. I'm downloading the best threads and wish I had been doing so all along when they were complete with photos!
As many have noted, this is Chris' site, he can do what he wants and we can choose to participate or not.
But, it would be nice if he/the owners were a bit more transparent. In particular, when an announcement is made about new rules or a reminder of old rules, and 250 posts are made I response that include maybe 10 that have articulate requests for clarification, it would be nice to have responses to those requests!
|
|
Sierra Ledge Rat
Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:36pm PT
|
That's gotta change
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
Punter
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:39pm PT
|
But, it would be nice if he/the owners were a bit more transparent.
Would be nice if the hosts would let us know where this is headed. The lack of communication from the hosts leads to speculation. RJ has posted up a bit but in reality tells us nothing about where the forum is headed.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 02:59pm PT
|
self destruction on the part of RJ and C mac. When DMT is gone you know you killed the goose that layed the golden egg....
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
Punter
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:06pm PT
|
self destruction on the part of RJ and C mac.
Not quite right. CMac has many economic facets. The forum is a sideline. This forum probably cost him more than it is worth, both money and time.
If the forum evaporates, he won't take time to look back. You assume he cares about the forum. As I see it, the forum is a pain in the ass.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:13pm PT
|
Tell me it's not true. They deleted Bachar's pictures?
Sacrilege.
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
Punter
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:31pm PT
|
Tell me it's not true. They deleted Bachar's pictures?
Sacrilege.
Scorched earth.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:37pm PT
|
It may not be economic self destruction but it certainly is blowing up an iconic forum that he created....
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:52pm PT
|
It actually takes a ton of work to edit and contribute quality material to a site like this. DMT is one of the most respected voices on the internet. When DMT packs up and leaves you know you messed up bigtime....
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 03:54pm PT
|
Could not agree more ,Tradman.
|
|
jeff constine
Trad climber
Ao Namao
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 04:55pm PT
|
Super Chopo is slowly going down the tubes.
|
|
throwpie
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 05:13pm PT
|
A few years ago I started the “old camp four etc photos” thread. It became a pretty groovy little deal for some of us old stuck-in-the-past geezers . Now I see that because Mouse got the chop all his photos have been disappeared. That sucks.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 05:21pm PT
|
"You assume he cares about the forum. As I see it, the forum is a pain in the ass."
That gets at the root of motivations.
It seems that our fearless leader didn't use the forum much himself in recent years,
instead putting their efforts into the gear review website, so why would they care about this forum?
In the first 15 years, CMac posted at an average rate of 269 times per year.
In the past 3.4 years, he posted at a rate of 56 times per year, only about 1/5 as much.
|
|
klaus
Big Wall climber
6th and Mission
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 05:25pm PT
|
most of my photos are now gone even though I am the owner of them. I saw this coming years ago when you all said the internet is "forever"
Goodbye Supertopo
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 06:04pm PT
|
Ksolem:
Tell me it's not true. They deleted Bachar's pictures?
Don't believe the hype. No one deleted Bachar's pictures.
Bachar posted 2,582 times on SuperTopo.
He never uploaded a single image to SuperTopo.
He used the [img] tag instead and hotlinked to his images hosted elsewhere instead. They still work, just now with a link.
monolith:
You are misinformed. The article you linked to is out of date, even though it was a prominent view following Google's 2017 win on hotlinking. Subsequent 2018 case law decided that there is a separation between Google's particular hot-linking tactics as a search engine, which was ruled as protected from infringement, from the hot-linking/embedding of non-search engine sites such as news sites (and ST too) which are infringing when they display a hot-linked image (like our [img] tag used to function). I suspect that Yahoo and Gannett had some pretty smart lawyers, and yet they lost that battle. The likely cost in legal fees take on the good fight in hopes of overturning that ruling are daunting.
rj
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 06:13pm PT
|
However, let us not forget about dominio publico {}
Something that has been overlooked around here.
Forrest conceded that embedding specific copyrighted content, including the Brady photo, might still be legal. She said there were “genuine questions” about whether Goldman’s Snapchat post effectively put his photo in the public domain, and that there’s “a very serious and strong fair use defense” for using the photo to illustrate a related story. But that kind of case-by-case judgment would be very different from — and more ambiguous than — the blanket protection of the server test.
Public domain, permission, gift, purchase, trade, barter, inheritance ...
Ownership "rights" accrue in many ways
I just stumbled on this thread after people complaining on picture removal on another thread. I posted a lot of copyrighted pictures that I had permission from owner to use and they have been deleted from my folder, I believe due to a drop in number of uploaded pictures.
I guess I better go delete some pictures.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 06:27pm PT
|
That’s significant, Norwick said, because there’s a difference between embedding authorized tweets and those containing images never intended for publication. “There may be an overblown reaction because people may interpret the decision to mean any tweet” subjects a publisher to copyright liability. Norwick said that’s not correct: Copyright holders who post images on Twitter can’t turn around and sue for infringement when websites republish their tweets.
https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-otc-panic/n-y-judge-says-embedded-tweets-may-violate-copyrights-but-dont-panic-idUSKCN1G02L8
From Reuter’s.
Norwick was plaintiff counsel.
Again - so now we see what happens when high school reading comprehension meets pop infotainment rubbish and freaks the fuk out over nothing.
One might also casually notice twitter images appearing quite frequently these days - on every news outlet on the planet!!
Open a gofundme for some realz legal advice. I’ll chip in. Somehow I doubt your day job covers it.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 07:53pm PT
|
JLP:
With all due respect for your bold machismo, you are not paying attention to the details of the case law, even in the very article you linked to.
What Norwich said is true, but your broader interpretation is not. Norwich said:
Copyright holders who post images on Twitter can’t turn around and sue for infringement
This is true. What he is saying is if Jane Doe owns a photo, and Jane herself (the copyright holder) posts her own photo on her Twitter feed, she can't sue the Boston Globe for embedding her tweet on their website. That is all Norwich is saying. No more. No less.
But imagine a different case, where John Smith comes along, and John decides he really likes Jane Doe's copyrighted photo that he found in a google image search, and so John hotlinks to Jane's image in a manner in which Jane's copyrighted photo is pulled from Jane's server and yet displays on John's blog; that is copyright infringement under this 2018 ruling. John is free to link to Jane Doe's website, but if John embeds or otherwise displays Jane's copyrighted image on his site, he is violating Jane's rights as a copyright holder and infringing under Federal copyright law.
It is this use-case that is relevant here with regard to the [img] tag.
JLP, you are entitled to your opinion even if it is foolish.
And, I appreciate the bold and cavalier attitude you have expressed about copyright infringement, the kind of "bring it on" machismo of someone who is sincerely committed to applying unlimited resources to fight a legal battle of dubious ethics to serve your beliefs or interests. It is kind of fun to watch. I wish I had your presumably impressive financial resources to take on these kinds of dubious legal battles as a hobby, but I admit I don't have either the resources or the interest. SuperTopo LLC doesn't either.
But, I'd ask you to consider whether this bold battle you seem to relish joining into, to allow websites to freely display someone else's copyrighted work, is really grounded in a proper moral stance? Is this what you seek to do to make the world a better place before you die JLP, to lead the charge to give websites the right to use the copyrighted works of others free of charge or accountability?
Is it Moral to Use Other People's Copyrighted Work?
I personally don't see it as a right to use someone else's copyrighted creative property for display on a website without a license. I don't think that would be a good thing for our society or economy. I have very good friends who are professional photographers. They make amazing and beautiful work. Why should I, or you Mr. JLP, have the right to use their work for your personal purposes and public display on your website, without having to fairly obtain a license to their work (and thus, properly "own the rights")? Is your need to show that image on ST or other sites a greater good for society than the photographer's right to set a fair market price for their work and make a living? Is it your ethic that copyright law is completely wrong, and those darn artists can just pound salt if they are unwilling to accommodate your desire to do what you please with their work?
The policy that SuperTopo has always had, and that Chris posted a reminder about, is simply that, on this site, please post only images you own the rights to.
It isn't that complicated. It never has been. And, I really don't consider that long-standing policy as unreasonable.
JLP, you might do otherwise on your own site, and it is your right to choose a policy that differs on your own site. But, I'd ask you to respect Chris's reasonable policy here and quit with your ignorant and misinformed insults. If you don't agree with the policies here, that is your right, and you are free to go elsewhere; please don't hesitate to do so. Quite frankly, the policy on ST is not materially different in practice than the stringently enforced image upload rules on Wikipedia, which require you to prove you have the rights to post an image (try it: I think you'll find their rules and requirements of proof to be considerably more rigorous and cumbersome than the ST policy).
rj
|
|
A Essex
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 07:57pm PT
|
its like 1999, dial up speeds
retro is the new
soon Google will be alll 'bing bing bing
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 08:01pm PT
|
rj.. you could have led with these understandings. Instead you come across as draconian. Causing a number of good people to decide to leave, and pissing off others, one of whom you deleted. A person most of us appreciated.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 08:09pm PT
|
But imagine a different case Your confukulated example makes zero sense. It is a case no different than what’s protected.
Please open a gofundme to get legal advise. You’ve done incredible and deep damage to the community and it needs to be fixed asap. It’s much larger than your ego. Your ISP has backups, please preserve them.
Regardless of your interpretations - between your LLC, whatever insurance policies surround it and you two personally - IMO there’s just no way anyone ever will get a dime out you for copyright - nor would anyone even bother trying.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 08:48pm PT
|
SomebodyAnybody:
I think the situation is quite regrettable. There is no denying that deep damage has occurred. It hurts to lose valued content. But, if people upload images they don't the rights to and leave them on the site (in some cases hundreds or even thousands of infringing images), it creates a complex and unfortunate situation that begs the question of "what is the right thing to do now?"
...for reasons that are either being concealed, or alternatively because you have a profound lack of understanding of the law.
But, oh my, SA, that comment is a little bit dramatic.
Nothing is being "concealed."
The ST policy regarding copyright infringement is completely transparent and exactly the same as it always has been.
And, the ST copyright infringement policy is neither complex, counter-intuitive, nor conspiratorial.
A policy that says "please don't upload stuff you don't own the rights to" conceals nothing and is quite simple. Nothing, literally, nothing about the policy on uploading images has changed on this site in 18 years. The policy is moral. It is ethical. It is not even overly burdensome. It is a reasonable policy.
You may have a different interpretation of the law than the copyright attorneys that ST has engaged with. That is fine, and we respect the right to your differing opinion. Law cases are based on people with differing opinions. Disagreement is part of the magic that makes us human. But, your insults are not helpful, and I rather question whether your expertise and legal advice is better informed that the actual copyright expert attorneys advising SuperTopo.
|
|
throwpie
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 08:49pm PT
|
Someone built a really nice bulletin board, put it up in the public square and invited the public to put sh#t on it. So here you have it.
|
|
nah000
climber
now/here
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 08:58pm PT
|
RJ:
0. thanks for engaging.
1. you [and apparently your legal advisers] don't seem to accept that a major intent of the DMCA was to "limit the liability of the providers of online services for copyright infringement by their users." ie. if you don't feel like fighting about it or wasting your time, all you need to do when sent a DMCA notice is to delete the "offending" material.
2. your justin goldman instigated legal decision was a case where someone "shared a photo privately" and then when a DMCA notice was given to news providers, they chose to fight the notice. see how this doesn't apply to you [assuming you plan to comply with DMCA notices]?
3. your version of the internet ["I personally don't see it as a right to use someone else's copyrighted creative property for display on a website without a license. I don't think that would be a good thing for our society or economy."] is frankly and from my perspective, insane. in that version there is no reddit, there is no facebook, and apparently there is no supertopo. as someone who makes my living creatively, i completely agree that we need to find a way to make sure creative content providers are compensated. that said, that principle also needs to be balanced with a public's ability to have discourse. this is what the fair use principle allows for ["Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, and scholarship."] and the DMCA provides a way of navigating the grey between the black of privately owned and the white of publicly owned.
4. IF YOU ONLY READ ONE POINT PLEASE READ THIS ONE: while you and i aren't likely to agree on the above, that is ultimately fine. you [and supertopo] have the right as business owners to make whatever decisions you'd like and believe in.
as your recent actions seem like something you/supertopo are committed to i have only one request: PLEASE ENABLE LINKED/EMBEDDED PHOTOS FOR ONE WEEK. this would allow the folks who have poured countless uncompensated hours into this site, to backup the work they did, or that others did that they appreciated.
while you may or may not know, i for one, created a compendium of user nominated threads called "Supertopo Climbing Gold". i had started to back it up, but it was a lengthy job and i was unable to make it all of the way through before this happened. it would be a sign of good faith if you/supertopo would revert the code that enabled outside hosted photos to be displayed for one week so that folks could archive the work that a whole community contributed to.
again, thank you for directly engaging with us here... [even if i couldn't possibly more thoroughly and fully disagree with your fundamentals, your interpretation of supporting examples, and/or especially with your/supertopo's sudden and unnotified actions to a whole community that has contributed to your successes.]
edit: JLP: that works for many first pages of long threads. ironically i have backed up the entire list of trip reports that had been nominated and which are only one page long. unfortunately for threads that span multiple pages, most of the non-first pages are not on the wayback machine. sometimes, but not always nor usually. if i was given one week, i would do what i had started and click on "show all" before saving on the wayback machine... in that way entire threads could be archived. thanks for the suggestion below though.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:00pm PT
|
RJ, with a janitor’s wherewithal for law and business, not to mention common decency, has thus made it clear he is in charge here, and he has spoken.
It appears we’ll all have to accept this shameful and unnecessary loss.
It seems DMT figured it out quicker than the rest of us - as usual...
EDIT:
nah000 - I believe you can accomplish what you are requesting on the wayback site. It’s more tedious as search doesn’t appear to work - but it seems possible - utilizing a combination of google, this site and the wayback site.
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
Fresno/Clovis, ca
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:05pm PT
|
RJ I appreciate that you are at least still here, chiming in and dialoguing a little bit. This has really been a sad few days for Supertopo and I hope the owner(s)/Chris understand the damage they are doing to a unique and valuable online community. There is probably a reason most of us don’t understand, and that’s your business, but the fairly quick, insensitive broad brushstroke manner that the images were removed will have consequences to the forum and the way this has gone down is quite disingenuous to your users in my opinion.
Supertopo has been a wonderful platform for creativity for myself and others over the years.
I think I posted a total of over 40 trip reports over the years. Each one of them meant a great deal to me.
When I was out there climbing, I often took photos specifically thinking of the trip reports and stories I would share with the members here. I took hundreds of hours to write trip reports and post my photos with them because the process brought me joy in the creation and because I know people enjoyed and continue to them. I know others felt the same.
And the powers that be here at Supertop have literally ruined many of these little works of art..,,labors of love.... that so many of us worked so hard to create. I just want somebody to hear how hurtful it is. Life will go on, this is a first world problem for sure, but it’s sad to watch. I’ve met some fantastic friends and have now climbed and flyfished with many people I never would have had it not been for Trip Reports, and let’s be honest photography is the driving force behind these reports. Mark Hudon, Vitaliy, WTF, Stimbo, Limpingcrab....these guys have become great friends, their friendships borne out of Trip Reports and the way their stories and photography inspired.
Just hear us in the harm that has been done to this forum, its past present and future and the platform many of have truly appreciated over the years. I’ll never write another trip report here again, and thats a sad day if you ask me.
Again, thanks RJ for being somewhat present here this week. I hope Chris takes some time to think it over and engage just a little bit in the conversation with us.
Sincerely,
Scott
|
|
jogill
climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:05pm PT
|
This is an issue that is arising in various places at the present. For instance, the EU is instituting stricter copyright conditions:
"BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Google will have to pay publishers for news snippets and Facebook filter out protected content under new copyright rules aimed at ensuring fair compensation for the European Union’s $1 trillion creative industries."
In a twist and on a personal level, I was contacted a month or so ago by a German media firm that wanted to use a couple of my photos in a short historical video they are creating for a sponsor. I sent them a letter granting permission to use the photos specifically in that work, but that was not good enough. They sent me a lengthy and bizarre form that essentially gave away all rights to them to use the material in any way they wished. I refused to sign it, and have not heard from them since.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:26pm PT
|
Micronut:
I am confused by your comment:
...the powers that be here at Supertop have literally ruined many of these little works of art [trip reports]..,,labors of love.... that so many of us worked so hard to create.
Help me understand what you are saying, Micronut.
I just looked at a number of your trip reports.
They all seem to be perfectly fine and to be displayed as intended.
Why are you saying they are "literally ruined?"
I can understand and empathize with the frustration of those folks who used the [undocumented and unsupported] [img] tag for hotlinking since copyright law has forced us to change how that tag is handled. But, to be fair, that [img] tag is not a documented or supported way to add an image to a page on ST, and it hasn't been offically supported on ST for 15 years.
It appears your trip reports use the normal and fully supported photo facility, which works fine, and is the only image inclusion method that has been supported and documented for use on the site for many, many, many years. And, trip reports that use that method are unaffected.
rj
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:30pm PT
|
Public domain, permission, gift, purchase, trade, barter, inheritance ...
Ownership "rights" accrue in many ways
How was ownership assessed before the mass deletes occurred?
It would help immensely if ST would explain how it determined the ownership of the images it questioned.
Just so everybody knows the process.
|
|
10b4me
Social climber
Lida Junction
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:47pm PT
|
RJ, with a janitor’s wherewithal for law and business, not to mention common decency, has thus made it clear he is in charge here, and he has spoken.
It is interesting that Chris has not said a word about the fallout.
Maybe it's true, as others have said, that he no longer cares about the community he helped create.
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
Fresno/Clovis, ca
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 09:58pm PT
|
RJ thank you for taking the time to respond. I was talking about other guys here who have had their trip reports and thread content nuked of photos. I was also trying to point out how much it affects the nature of a trip report to have all those photos removed. I was pretty sure mine were safe because I only use my own photos, but I was letting you know how much trip reports meant to me and how much time, energy effort and creative juice creating them took.
My point was the way this has all gone down. It would’ve been really cool if some of those guys would have had the opportunity to slowly and thoughtfully remove what they needed to to keep their trip reports and contributions intact.
I think there’s a good chance some of the more prominent posters here, (several of whom I know in real life) will be leaving for good and that’s a real bummer.
Like many here, it’s the fact that many of these guys had so many their original photos removed so quickly because of having some of the “illegal” images in play. A more thoughtful and considerate approach would have been truly appreciated.
Scott
By the way, let me know if I’m mistaken. I thought those guys got a bunch of their photos whacked because they used or had other photos in their possession/trip report/content that were not theirs. Are we talking method of inclusion or the fact that they had photos posted for which they didn’t own permission? Maybe I’m confused. (and I just spent three hours going through nearly 4000 photos of mine to remove anything that I had innocently cut and pasted off the web over the years thinking it was OK as long as I didn’t claim them as mine in the credit.)
————————————————
One last thought while I have your ear here RJ. What it be possible for you maybe to post something letting people know how to properly post trip reports with their images intact? The Vitaliy just wrote an awesome one and all of the images are “clickable links” and it’s really lame. Lots of folks are complaining about it and I don’t blame them. I know you are busy but posting something up perhaps on that thread and starting a new thread explaining how to do it right might be really worth the time and would be really appreciated. Especially with all the knee-jerk reactions going on right now around here.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 10:12pm PT
|
I can understand and empathize with the frustration of those folks who used the [undocumented and unsupported] [img] tag for hotlinking since copyright law has forced us to change how that tag is handled. But, to be fair, that [img] tag is not a documented or supported way to add an image to a page, and it hasn't been offically supported for 15 years.
so you don't say anything or enforce the rule for 15 years, allowing things to build up. Then you decide to enforce the rule with virtually no warning, which messes up years of effort by people.. Then when people get upset you delete them. ( Tad )
And you delete entire photo porforlios wrecking peoples years of effort with nearly no warning. What was it? 1 or 2 days before you started deleting peoples files.
Don't you see how draconian this appears? Don't you see how people can start to not trust you to safe guard their efforts?
And then you don't explain your interpretation of what constitutes ownership. Its simple to you. Its not to many people here. Many people here posted photos that don't belong to them. Those photos belong to their friends. They often have unwritten permission to post those photos. But to you this is against the law and instead of giving people a thorough chance to adjust to the changes you planned, you just went through with it.
you messed up and instead of recognizing that, you keep saying that it was the rules all along.
If it was the rules all along, but you didn't enforce it, then was it really the rules all along? I don't actually have a problem with you not enforcing the rules, and then deciding that you needed to enforce them because of changing times. But how you handled it was poor. You owe Tad and the community an apology. You devalued peoples efforts here.
Edit:
By the way, let me know if I’m mistaken. I thought those guys got a bunch of their photos whacked because they used or had other photos in their possession/trip report/content that were not theirs. Are we talking method of inclusion or the fact that they had photos posted for which they didn’t own permission? Maybe I’m confused. (and I just spent three hours going through nearly 4000 photos of mine to remove anything that I had innocently cut and pasted off the web over the years thinking it was OK as long as I didn’t claim them as mine in the credit.)
Its both. Hot linking has been blocked messing up some threads AND some peoples entire photo files that were hosted here have been deleted. ( Fritz's for one )
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 10:19pm PT
|
Micronut:
Thanks very much for your reply and that additional background info.
Regarding:
It would’ve been really cool if some of those guys would have had the opportunity to slowly and thoughtfully remove what they needed to keep their trip reports and contributions intact.
There is nothing to prevent someone from switching from using the [undocumented and unsupported] [img] tag, to simply uploading those images they have the rights to use in the normal and documented photo upload manner you use. I can appreciate that is an unexpected hassle, and we didn't expect it either. But, we also have not encouraged, documented, or supported the use of the [img] tag for more than a decade.
The time it takes to upload images in the supported manner on ST, as you did in your own Trip Reports, is not terribly long, probably about 10 sec per image if converting from [img] tags to uploading, and thus less than 3 minutes of effort for a typical trip report. And, if that feels too much time, then do nothing and please understand that folks can still click on those externally hosted images to view them today.
I recognize that this is 3 minutes of unanticipated conversion work on only those trip reports that happened to use the undocumented [img] hotlinking, and thus an undesirable turn of events for folks who chose to use that method.
But, I object to the idea that the change in how [img] tags are handled amounts to more than a speed bump. And, for people who, like you, used the documented method of adding images to a TR, there is no work required at all. It is only those people who made a choice to use an undocumented and unsupported legacy [img] tag that find themselves with 3 minutes of work required to restore their TR to displaying images on the page instead of a displaying a link to see the image.
rj
John M:
I appreciate your thoughts.
Regarding:
Then when people get upset you delete them. ( Tad )
Tad asked to have his posts removed.
His request was acted on.
Regarding [img] tags being deprecated as a feature 15 years ago:
so you don't say anything or enforce the rule for 15 years, allowing things to build up. Then you decide to enforce the rule with virtually no warning, which messes up years of effort by people...
We continued to support the [img] feature, not because we wanted to encourage people to use an undocumented feature, but simply to honor the people in 2001-ish who used it as a documented feature. I don't think it is fair to suggest that we somehow encouraged the use of an undocumented feature more than a decade after it was replaced with the currently documented photo upload feature.
Furthermore, it doesn't mess up "years of effort". That is overly dramatic. All the content for an undocumented [img] tag is still viewable today by simply clicking on the image link (to comply with copyright law), and anyone who would rather have those images display in the page can take about 2 or 3 minutes to convert from using the unsupported [img] tags and use the supported photo upload method (which is the only supported and documented way to put photos in pages for the last 15 years).
I can appreciate and empathize with the frustration of someone like Fritz who had unfortunately uploaded more than 7,600 images that included many, many, many copyright infringing images onto SuperTopo in violation of copyright law and SuperTopo's long-standing policy. But, his situation is unique to what he chose to upload. When someone intermixes a huge number of copyright infringing images in a massive body of thousands of image uploads, it creates a situation. Most people have made different choices about what images they uploaded and either didn't have obviously copyright infringing images, or they took the time to simply delete their infringing images.
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
Fresno/Clovis, ca
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 10:33pm PT
|
Ok thanks for the clarification RJ. What are your thoughts on creating a quick thread to explain that so you dont lose some great contributors in the process?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2019 - 11:23pm PT
|
RJ,
Help me out here, please.
When I started out on Supertopo in 2006, the use of off-site photo linking services such as Photobucket was the only game in town, as far as I knew.
Maybe I'm off base here: but didn't Supertopo institute its own photo hosting function in late 2009 or early 2010?
Your statement:
It is only those people who made a choice to use an undocumented and unsupported legacy [img] tag that find themselves with 3 minutes of work required to restore their TR to displaying images on the page instead of a displaying a link to see the image.
I have 121 threads, many/most of them rich with historical photographs, mostly my own, and plenty which I now understand violate your terms. Sorry about the latter. I thought there was a fair use exemption. Apparently I am remiss there, and you make the rules. Understood.
I have 6100 photographs in my photobucket, all for the purpose of creating content for this forum. Most of my work, certainly my best work, occurred between 2006 – 2009.
Are you suggesting I had another choice in those years? I'm ignorant of this phrase undocumented and unsupported legacy tag.
Again, wasn't [img] the only game in town in those years?
The reason I ask this last question, is that I think I'm reading that you say we can convert [img] posted photos to your photo hosting function. But I think you are referring only to trip reports.
Can I really do that to all the threads I started that are NON-trip reports? I styled very few of my threads as trip reports, even when that became available in late 2006. In fact I only have 1 trip report that I established. You guys actually built, on your own accord in late 2006, presumably to encourage people to migrate to the trip report tab, 3 trip reports from threads which I had authored, making 4 total in my trip report cache. So if this convertibility only applies to trip reports, my 121 threads are sunk. Because I'm telling you: those were all photo rich environments and that is the strength upon which they stood. They were, in effect, quite a lot of them trip reports. And very few of the photos showed up in the first post. I built them over time over many, many posts to cultivate interest.
I thought changes to anything but the first post in a thread required the edit button to be functional, which by my lights is defunct after 11 days.
Even if I could go through my 121 threads and entertain conversion, can you imagine how much work it would take me to redirect 6100 photographs? Wouldn't that likely far exceed 3 min. per thread given the large number of photographs I have in each thread? Never mind that I am disabled and use voice control to do everything. Even by hand that would be monumental, no? And of course a good chunk of those 6100 photographs are linked to other people's threads. And a good chunk of them are linked multiple times to various threads. There is no way that I'm aware of to restore all of that. I suppose you guys could convert every one of those photographs to your photo hosting function, but then with the question of me trying to cull those photographs for infringements of your policy, forget about it.
And from my understanding, your point about convertibility only applies either to first posts of threads, or to the initial post of any trip report. So again, all the content I generated for this forum over those 121 threads is pretty much done. People just won't be using the click through option for every individual photograph. You can take most everything I built to raise the standard of this forum and stick a fork in it, as far as I can tell.
………………………………………………………………………
You are truly informing me that in those years in particular, 2006-2009, prior to your institution of a photo hosting option, and in the years thereafter where I continued to use photobucket, primarily because I preferred the quality and the ability to size my photos somewhat larger, I was somehow misbehaving?
Regards,
Roy McClenahan
|
|
ß Î Ø T Ç H
Boulder climber
ne'er–do–well
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 12:21am PT
|
─▄▀▀▀▀▄─█──█────▄▀▀█─▄▀▀▀▀▄─█▀▀▄
─█────█─█──█────█────█────█─█──█
─█────█─█▀▀█────█─▄▄─█────█─█──█
─▀▄▄▄▄▀─█──█────▀▄▄█─▀▄▄▄▄▀─█▄▄▀
─────────▄██████▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
─────▄█████████▄───────▀▀▄▄
──▄█████████████───────────▀▀▄
▄██████████████─▄▀───▀▄─▀▄▄▄──▀▄
███████████████──▄▀─▀▄▄▄▄▄▄────█
█████████████████▀█──▄█▄▄▄──────█
███████████──█▀█──▀▄─█─█─█───────█
████████████████───▀█─▀██▄▄──────█
█████████████████──▄─▀█▄─────▄───█
█████████████████▀███▀▀─▀▄────█──█
████████████████──────────█──▄▀──█
████████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▄──█──────█
████████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄──█──────█
▀████████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀──────────█
──███████████████▀▀─────█──────▄▀
──▀█████████████────────█────▄▀
────▀████████████▄───▄▄█▀─▄█▀
──────▀████████████▀▀▀──▄███
──────████████████████████─█
─────████████████████████──█
────████████████████████───█
────██████████████████─────█
────██████████████████─────█
────██████████████████─────█
────██████████████████─────█
────██████████████████▄▄▄▄▄█
─────────────█─────█─█──█─█───█
─────────────█─────█─█──█─▀█─█▀
─────────────█─▄█▄─█─█▀▀█──▀█▀
─────────────██▀─▀██─█──█───█
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 01:26am PT
|
hey there, say, RJ... say, thanks for sharing a lot of things here, on all this 'updated info' to remind us folks about...
i like it here... and, i am thankful for you and chris, and for
the use of your forum...
i had a few photos that i 'thought could be used' as, to leads, to lead others over to the 'articles' etc, where they came from and a few 'yahoo search' pics, too
which i WAS not fully aware if they were 'allowed to be used' (like free use, search-and-share info, etc...
SO--i just 'followed suit' with what 'seemed to be usual practice' on the
net and and forums...
i took them down, and i am happy to have learned more-- as to all this...
WOW, FROM reading all the new post,
i've seen that it has been HARD on a lot of folks...
(wrinkled the quilt-- though, time i hope, will smooth it)
:)
i wish us all well, here...
and, sure hope to see more good years, with these folks, and
new folks, of the climber community...
again, thank you, for all the info and and for
chris--
to, for providing this site for climbers all over the world...
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 03:53am PT
|
If you talked to a lawyer on this as you claim, you should go find a new one. Your explanations are so flat out wrong I doubt you actually engaged one. I think you’re lying to cover.
Your actions and justifications here are so low-end. It’s desperate, pitiful and sad to watch - this destruction
+1 to Roy - hosting photos on your own server is a newer feature.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 06:25am PT
|
Tarbuster:
Regarding when the obsolete [img] tag:
Are you suggesting I had another choice in those years [2006-2009]? I'm ignorant of this phrase undocumented and unsupported legacy tag.
I researched this and you are correct.
We introduced the [img] tag first in Feb 2003, and at that time it was the only option for embedding a photo on a page.
The photo upload option was introduced in 2005, but initially only for internal use by Chris and others on the ST internal team. It wasn't introduced for general use by Forum members until December 2008 when it replaced the [img] tag as the only recommended method of placing photos on ST. It was thus, Dec 2008 that the [img] tag became officially obsolete, was no longer documented, and no longer an officially supported feature.
So, bottom line, it has only been 10 years since the [img] tag was deprecated as a feature on this site, and replaced by the photo upload feature.
Unfortunately, the case law changes in 2018 with regard to hotlinking images makes the support of the [img] tag in the way we used to a significant copyright infringement risk, which is why it is now just a link. If the case law changes in the future to once again allow hotlink/embedding of images without incurring copyright infringement liability, we'll gladly revert to displaying [img] tags as we did before. In the meantime, converting to use of the ST photo upload option is a reasonable work-around to continued use of the obsolete [img] tag.
rj
JLP:
I respect your opinion and recognize you have opinions on copyright matters that differ from the expert advice from our lawyers.
I think you've stated your differing opinions, and it is clear we're not going to come to a shared agreement on the implications of copyright case law. That is OK.
JLP, I also accept that you believe I am an incompetent fool and that our lawyers are incompetent doofuses. It is your right to have your opinions and I respect that. But, I assure you that ST is not asking you for legal advice, nor will we prioritize your arm-chair legal pontifications over the actual legal advice we have obtained and have motivated these recent changes on the site.
|
|
nah000
climber
now/here
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 06:44am PT
|
RJ, given the info in your above post to Tarbuster, i’ll repeat my request:
Would Supertopo enable linked/embedded photos for one week in order that folks who have been longterm users of this site, could have a chance to [finish] back[ing] up the contributions that they have created and/or appreciated?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 06:53am PT
|
RJ, you wrote:
In the meantime, converting to use of the ST photo upload option is a reasonable work-around to continued use of the obsolete [img] tag.
I still don't see how this statement relates to any option I have to create a workaround to my [img] tags as they exist within the posts of my threads.
I'm not sure you actually answered that question?
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
Punter
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 06:59am PT
|
RJ I appreciate that you are at least still here, chiming in and dialoguing a little bit. This has really been a sad few days for Supertopo and I hope the owner(s)/Chris understand the damage they are doing to a unique and valuable online community. There is probably a reason most of us don’t understand, and that’s your business, but the fairly quick, insensitive broad brushstroke manner that the images were removed will have consequences to the forum and the way this has gone down is quite disingenuous to your users in my opinion.
Well said. A bit more transparency on the part of the hosts would go a long way towards us understanding what is going on. Lack of information leads to speculation. Understood the hosts are maneuvering legal waters and pending legal action need to say nothing. But really?
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:07am PT
|
RJ/CMAC:
What did I get wrong here?
I see below two instances illustrating Supertopo staff supporting Fair Use Doctrine, the first in 2006, and the second in 2017.
Example #1:
I did NOT build this trip report which showed up in my trip report cache – SOMEONE from Supertopo did.
http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Hip-Sassy-Bouldrin-Thread-old-dadsn-youngsters-rip-it/t354n.html
And it was originally posted as a simple thread by me, on September 22, 2006, and built as a trip report directly by someone on the Supertopo team by harvesting/grafting the material from the original thread I constructed. BOTH threads have the same incept date, which I don't understand, and which is fairly immaterial to my example.
The point being: it appears to me that at this time, you guys were holding this up as a model of the way to behave, no?
Note the first picture in this trip report, constructed by you. It is a well-known book cover which I scanned, Master of Rock, Pat Ament:
http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Hip-Sassy-Bouldrin-Thread-old-dadsn-youngsters-rip-it/t354n.html
The original thread from which the trip report was crafted, as it still exists today, in tandem with the trip report, both with the same date, September 22, 2006:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/256974/Hip-Sassy-Bouldrin-Thread-old-dadsn-youngsters-rip-it
Example #2:
Ken Wilson's MOUNTAIN Magazine #1, all of it scanned and posted here cover to cover, by me, and praised by CMAC on March 20, 2017:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/2958309/Ken-Wilsons-MOUNTAIN-Magazine-1-the-whole-enchilada
Chris McNamara
SuperTopo staff member
Mar 20, 2017 - 09:12am PT
Fantastic post. Thank you. http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=2958309&msg=2958984#msg2958984
The Mountain Magazine was posted in its entirety for educational purposes and for purposes of fostering historical discussion. I stood to reap no monetary gain from sharing this magazine on your forum. I'm no lawyer, but I'm thinking that is (or was) within the doctrine of Fair Use. CMAC himself seemed to think so, in 2017, no?
Upon examination of my two examples above, it appears you've been inconsistent yourselves. CMAC supported my so-called copyright infringements!
I'm not in your shoes, so I don't understand the pressures you are under.
But you've made some sweeping changes that have wrecked a metric ton of productive discussion-based content on your forum.
...........................
In closing, here is an example of what Steve Moyles a.k.a. Scuffy B had to say about my contributions, a day prior to my 50th birthday in 2010:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1244072&msg=1244072#msg1244072
Topic Author's Original Post - Aug 16, 2010 - 08:24pm PT
I'm jumping the gun here, but only by a few hours. It's Decade Time for Roy, one of our favorites.
He's nothing but positive in his dealings with the rest of us.
The Tarbousier really raised the level of the Forum a few years back, when
he launched the Mussy Nebula series of threads.
He photo-bombed us like nobody ever had, and his warm style made outsiders
and hangers-on feel like they were in the scene right along with the real
participants.
What he did with that series was to draw other creative types out of the
woodwork with their own archival goodies, and many of our most precious
and revered posters can be traced back to Roy, literally. He opened doors
that could never be shut again. ^^^
Those doors have been shut by you guys, under the advisement of your lawyers, and based on what you say is a new ruling as of 2018.
This to me appears to be an overreaction, but again, I'm not in your shoes.
I see that your reference to case law changing in 2018 at least explains your sweeping changes, thanks for specifying the underpinning of your actions.
...............................
Good luck with it going forward,
Roy
|
|
monolith
climber
state of being
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:17am PT
|
How is having to click the new image link circumventing any copyright violation?
You are still displaying the image from a possibly copyrighted source, still using bandwidth of the source server, not giving credit, etc.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:24am PT
|
You are still displaying the image from a possibly copyrighted source.
That's not true.
clicking [Click to View Linked Image] takes you away from this site to the so-called owner site to view the image.
The only problem I saw in this whole episode in the last couple of days is the bull rampaging thru the china shop attitude.
Some of the people you affected are just that actual people not digital entities with no soul.
It's easy to push keyboard buttons to make changes but live people reacte differently than computer speak and website configurations changes.
Here's what Vitaliy M. said on his "Lone Pine Peak - OS Free Solo of the Winter Chimney (3,000 WI3 M4)" trip report.
Sorry for the photos not showing up! That is an unpleasant surprise, they used to show up fine.
Uploading photos would take forever and my files are too large to load.
I tried to load one to have a cover shot, but the files are too big.
Don't have the time to deal with uploading every photo qand sizing my files specifically for ST.
|
|
Don Paul
Social climber
Washington DC
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:26am PT
|
To me the conversation seems to be a necessary one. If there were no rules at all about posting copyrighted info, then supertopo might actually have some liability. Although I feel sorry for people who put so much work in and then had it deleted.
Would Supertopo enable linked/embedded photos for one week in order that folks who have been longterm users of this site, could have a chance to [finish] back[ing] up the contributions that they have created and/or appreciated? Here
Or send the authors a copy of the deleted materials by email. It seems like only a half a dozen people were seriously affected. If this isn't easy then check on the wayback machine to see if they are organized in a way that they can be downloaded at once. The links and directory structure are all preserved. It's according to the directory structure. You would have to get in there and look at it.
|
|
monolith
climber
state of being
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:35am PT
|
WB, It's still displaying the image without the sources consent even if it's displayed in a new window, using their bandwidth, and not giving credit.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:39am PT
|
I'll wait till RJ Spurrier to see what he says.
|
|
formerclimber
Boulder climber
CA
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:42am PT
|
Forums and social networks are normally protected from liability by DMCA safe harbor, specifically the one for "information residing on systems or networks at the direction of users". Otherwise, Facebook, Twitter, youtube, most forums and photo hosting sites would cease to exist.
That "game changer" 2018 decision (Goldman vs. Breitbart) is a very bad one/a suit brought on by, in my view, a system-milker - hopefully, eventually will be overturned by the Supreme Court and might have negative impact on Mr Goldman's business or career- but it doesn't seem to have to do with sites protected by safe harbor such as forums.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/copyright-and-online-journalism-whats-going-new-york
Mr. Goldman, the photographer, posted it to Snapchat and it was quickly reposted on Reddit and Twitter. Eventually, various news publishers and media websites wrote about the developing sports story and embedded the tweets containing the photo into their articles.
...
Alternatively, he might have sued Twitter for copyright infringement for displaying the photo, though Twitter would likely have defeated that lawsuit by invoking the DMCA safe harbors. But the photographer chose a third, potentially more lucrative approach: sue the news organizations that reported on the story.
Notice, Goldman never sued Twitter or Reddit/protected by safe harbor - he only was able to sue news sites.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:45am PT
|
expert advice from our lawyers. I call BS. Your vernacular and summary of this is so bizarre and otherworldly, I can’t accept it as fact. It sounds more to me like The Verge is ST general counsel, you got called out and now you’re lying about it.
Regardless, and as a separable matter, the world is full of similar risks. This is what insurance is for and why guys with a sack are needed to manage certain matters with success. IMO, you're ignorant, weak, willing to do and say anything to CYA and should be replaced.
|
|
Off White
climber
Tenino, WA
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:46am PT
|
Roy, Scuffy B (miss that guy) really nailed it, those Mussy Nebula threads really were a game changer here, well done my friend. I had to go back and look at them the other day when all this foofraw started, and indeed they're so much less engaging with all the photos replaced by links. The thrill is gone.
Thanks for all your work over the years, you've always been an awesome contributor.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 08:20am PT
|
Roy, Scuffy B (miss that guy) really nailed it, those Mussy Nebula threads really were a game changer here, well done my friend. I had to go back and look at them the other day when all this foofraw started, and indeed they're so much less engaging with all the photos replaced by links. The thrill is gone.
Thanks for all your work over the years, you've always been an awesome contributor.
+1 to what Off White said. I really appreciate all your effort over the years Roy.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 02:59pm PT
|
Werner and formerclimber have it right.
Thanks formerclimber for your comments and linking to that EFF article, which does a nice job of breaking down the disturbing implications of that 2018 ruling. It is that case which forces our hand on this unfortunate change in how we are handling [img] tags.
A key quote in that EFF article is this one:
Even worse, the logic of the ruling applies to all in-line linking, not just embedding tweets.
Werner is correct that by simply linking to the hosting site, rather than displaying the image on SuperTopo, we avoid inheriting the copyright infringement liability implied by that 2018 rulling.
Tarbuster:
You are correct that this change in how we handle [img] tags is both a significant change and quite unfortunate. We don't like it either. If the case law related to how those [img] links didn't change, we would not have changed our approach. But, we need to deal with the law as it is, even if we don't like it and hope it might change in the future -- the reality at this time is that SuperTopo can't take on the copyright liability risk related to displaying those hotlinked images. Sorry.
JLP:
The solution you linked to on Mountain Project looks like an intriguing hack to workaround our [img] tag handling. Thanks for pointing it out. We obviously can't do that kind of hack for you, but you all are free to do what you want with hacking your own Chrome browser if you'd like.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 04:15pm PT
|
For the record if I disappear it was not voluntary I got nuked. RJ it certainly appears that you flat out lied about Tad asking to have his posts removed and leaveing of his own free will. This is from an email conversation that I just had with Tad Hocking.
Hi Nick, you don’t have to call him out or make a big scene of it.
If you want, your call, you can post this for me;
“I didn’t request my posts be removed , I was deactivated and my posts purged before I had a chance to reply to his last post directed at me which he has since deleted.”
If you lied about Tad how do we know that you did not lie about DMT? how can we trust anything you say? How does this not affect your credibility for whatever climbs that you have claimed to have done in whatever style they were reported as????
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 04:51pm PT
|
JLP - the improved version doesn't work at all for me. All the links are back. The original version got most but not all of the links put in as in-line photos.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 04:57pm PT
|
tradmanclimbs:
With all due respect, Tad's recollection is mistaken.
At 10:35pm on Tue, Apr 16 Mr. Hocking made a post that requested his posts be deleted. He made that post on the no Political topics thread. He requested that a few things, including his TRs and a few threads he had started and was particularly fond of, such as a van thread, be left in place. It is possible that those details may help Tad refresh his memory. Unfortunately, we don't have an easy way to accommodate that kind of precision strike request and so all his posts were deleted using our normal deletion tool as per his request (which removes all content).
Quite frankly, there was no delay in acting on Tad's request, because he had been rude and disparaging of Chris in his posts at that time and that did not leave me motivated to double-check whether he was really serious in his request to have his content removed.
While I did not make a screenshot of his post before accommodating his request to have his content scrubbed from the site, I wrote Chris a contemporaneous email immediately afterward briefing him of Tad's request for removal.
We ban people from the site regularly due to inappropriate or rude behavior. We're not shy about taking responsibility for banning people when we do. You may feel that I would be somehow motivated to make up a story to make it seem we were happy with Tad, and would do never consider deleting him for cause. But, that is not the case. I felt Tad was acting like an ass. Tad was walking on thin ice. When Tad started spreading false rumors about ST being in the middle of an acquisition, and saying things like his rude and baseless accusation he posted that afternoon, where he claimed that Chris "doesn't really give a sh#t about eh community he's created here," I took offense. That kind of bullshit certainly rises to the kind of thing that might justify a person being kicked off the island. But, that isn't what happened. Instead, I posted on that thread at around 6p making it clear how I felt about Tad's false and rude comments about Chris.
What happened is that four and a half hours later, at 10:35pm that evening, Tad made an angry post requesting the removal of his content from the site. It seems clear that his recollection leaves that important detail out. I can't explain why he would not recall it. But, I can clarify that his request was accommodated without hesitation.
rj
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 05:17pm PT
|
JLP - the improved version doesn't work at all for me. All the links are back. The original version got most but not all of the links put in as in-line photos.
I tested a lot of pages and it works, except it leaves the [] behind - which seems acceptable until someone can do better.
So the problem was every possible way I tried to post that code snippet would hack it up - xxxx was removed in this case - I can't even type it - so now I just posted an image. Edit your code manually.
I just tested this, it's what running on my browser, and it's working on every page I've tried - including the Mussy Nebula!
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:15pm PT
|
RJ said:
JLP:
The solution you linked to on Mountain Project looks like an intriguing hack to workaround our [img] tag handling. Thanks for pointing it out. We obviously can't do that kind of hack for you, but you all are free to do what you want with hacking your own Chrome browser if you'd like.
For anyone following the saga, this statement, especially the last part, should go some ways toward letting readers know that CMAC/RJ feel they have to do what they've been doing to protect themselves, and they also aren't so psyched on the solution. (And he spelled it out in his prior paragraph addressed toward me.)
And for the record, if anybody figures it out: I don't have any photos on the Supertopo server anymore, except for my avatar photo. I asked for them to be cleaned up, not because I'm taking my cards away from the game in some sort of retribution, but because it's just too much work for me to go through and make the selections. So that was my choice as an act of good faith in complying with CMAC's need for all of us to avoid copyright infringement on photos we've uploaded to his servers.
I'd only been using it for about a year, and it represented something like 10% of my total photo output on the forum. So I just let go of it as an act of expediency.
And if you look at my last big post on the prior page about CMAC's 2017 approval of my scanning and posting of all of MOUNTAIN magazine #1, what that basically shows is that these guys weren't so worried about the fair use/copyright infringement borderline until something changed in 2018.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:36pm PT
|
Could someone please confirm the script a few posts up works for them, and if not post a link to the page where it doesn’t. It’s working fine for me, hasn’t missed a single photo in these historical threads, unless of course the photo is actually missing.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 08:25pm PT
|
Thanks much for this, JLP.
I've e-mailed this workaround to several fellow archivists. I'm unable to enact it myself, but if I hear back from them, I will either let you know or have them chime in.
|
|
Q- Ball
Mountain climber
but to scared to climb them anymore
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 08:51pm PT
|
I'm no computer guy, but all my TRs (just 4) are still intact. I have always used the prompts from ST on how to upload images. And yes they are my pics.
I can understand the frustration folks are having seeing their work disappear.
I first learned of this forum in 06 when Todd passed. I was amazed at the outpouring of stories and love folks wrote. I lurked for several years, then decided to start sharing some of my own stuff.
I still will post a new Honduras jungle exploration tr when I get time. With pictures.
I enjoy sharing knowledge to this group of wackos because... I have never met any of y'all but we share many experiences that most have never dreamed of.
A paraphrased quote- the ordinary man looking at a mountain is like an illiterate man trying to read a Greek manuscript. Don't recall the author of that quote.
Hugh or Qball
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 10:07pm PT
|
JLP - I was using the script on the Old Parkinglot Photos thread:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=375444&tn=0&mr=0
Just started from scratch in a Chrome browser. The original script works (it also leaves behind [ ]) with about 90% of the linked images: that is, the photos show up on the page. For 10% the live links are there.
With your version of the script, I'm back to all links other than the photos resident on the ST server. Don't take this too seriously as I could be implementing things incorrectly.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 10:31pm PT
|
somebody help me. I'm having a high brain fog day. I'm currently doing heavy metal detoxification. could be good things for my future, but currently its rough.
What I'm having trouble with understanding is how all this went down. The forum was given virtually no warning before the changes were made. So people couldn't adjust to what was going to happen and decide what they wanted to do. Fritz didn't have time to make his case or make changes. Neither did others. Some people responded poorly.. but good grief. Many people poured their souls into their efforts on this forum. This was a big change. And it wasn't one change. It was two changes.
So what I am having trouble understanding is why it had to happen virtually overnight. RJ and Chris had time to discuss this. They had time to talk to a lawyer. They had time to prepare for how they would handle it.
And then they gave the people who make up this forum no time to adjust. They just implemented it with basically 24 hours of notice.
that really bugs me.
we might not have lost DMT or Tad, whatever went on with them, if we had been given time to adjust.
Seems to me a pretty poor way to handle this change.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 18, 2019 - 10:39pm PT
|
The only difference is the last line of code. If his works for you, then you just need to find the typo between that and my picture above - and it should work. Be confident you can figure it out and figure it out. I ship a lot of code, that script above works.
So also consider this - if RJ would be a mature professional adult and return a zip file with the deleted photos back to the respective owners - now take these photos and keep the same ID in their name and put them on an external server - all in one place, one giant bucket - then that same little script engine could then be used, with a few minor mods, to rebuild the “missing photo” threads - which could then be saved. For me, a half day - for a professional web programmer probably 15 minutes.
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2019 - 12:19am PT
|
RJ, here is an idea to explore with your legal counsel for how to make the links to offsite pictures less painful for users:
1. Mouseover to view pic in same page (e.g. javascript as a new div with the pic ), to minimize clicking while retaining firm clarity that the pic is from outside of your website
Full first-world problem... I'm too lazy to click a bunch of links to see the embedded images, and skip over content that contains them. I'm just not motivated to click through the links for each image. I am much more likely to click a single link to follow someones trip report in their personal website.
Also, if you are forcing people to use your hosted images to provide trip reports with inline images, then please address the shortcomings that caused me to never covert:
 low image resolution
cap on image size (no auto-downsizing of images to meet your resolution limitations)
The only images I have included in the 83 trip reports I've done (under nutjob or NutAgain! and not all officially labeled as trip reports) since 2005, are for the thumbnail image or when I was uploading directly from my phone in the middle of a trip and didn't already have my photos uploaded to Google Photos. It has been annoying at times that even when posting TRs from my iPhone, I have had to exclude some of the best images because they are too large. This is especially the case with pano pictures, but more common now with all pics with modern phones and higher pixel densities.
|
|
Yury
Mountain climber
T.O.
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2019 - 05:20am PT
|
JLP:
Your explanations are so flat out wrong I doubt you actually engaged one. I think you’re lying to cover. Not necessarily.
There are a lot of bad lawyers with limited skills/knowledge out there.
Most likely they talked to a cheap lawyer and got a bad advice.
|
|
nah000
climber
now/here
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2019 - 06:59am PT
|
John M: +1... my sentiments exactly.
at the end of the day i’m not the owner of this board and i haven’t had to, year in and year out, give the highly thankless and relatively uncompensated work, that a few have likely had to, in order that this board stays up and running.
and so in that regard i am empathetic to whatever decisions these guys think they need to make around here... regardless of how much i, as a person providing no on demand work to this endeavour, differ in opinion.
however.
given the, to this point at least, unacknowledged but frankly emotionally abusive manner [change long-standing board functioning, then when people complain, delete a few individual’s content for breaking rules that you the owners are breaking with your own uploaded files, and then blame those folks for their own info’s demise...] that this has gone down, i intend this to be my last post to this board [other than a final tr post that i had already started and intend to complete due to its importance to me].
i had hoped my, what would seemingly be a, simple request and which i posted twice to this thread above, would at least be replied to... and that that might have provided a glimmer of hope to allow for me to continue contributing here.
unfortunately, so far these guys have shown themselves to be unwilling to admit that they might have made a mistake in how this was rolled out and all i’m seeing is a bunch of corporate styled doublespeak [“these image tags have been unsupported for years” when they still worked for those years and there was no notice that their capabilities were going to be deleted and “this has been our policy regarding copyright for years” when you can to this day goto the owner’s photo page and see images that are copyrighted (and i’m not referring to the ones from guys in our community who he likely has permission from)]
without a course correction regarding at least acknowledgement of how awfully these changes were handled, i can no longer give these guys the benefit of the doubt and continue to entrust them with the info that i entrusted them with in the past. while i don’t want my past work here deleted, i also won’t be contributing more.
so with all of that said and as this is a likely swan song: a sincere thanks to all of the friends and foes i have engaged with on here over the years. i’ll paraphrase a bit of what mb1 said regarding dmt: what I appreciate most about this place is that many of you were real people, sharing your honest experiences... i am a much richer human due to many of those shares.
and so due to those honest shares, if our paths cross, it’d be a pleasure to share a climb, a libation or maybe just a story or two...
I also still owe cmac, rj and anyone else that has given too much to this board that round or seven for the years of relatively thankless, uncompensated work that they have likely already given.
and so to all involved: it was a fantastic run.
peace out bitches.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2019 - 09:23am PT
|
Stick around Nahoo.. there isn't any place better.
but yep.. I get it.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
Straight Outta Crafton
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2019 - 08:08am PT
|
I can't imagine a photo hosting site, such as Photobucket or Flickr, ever siccing a lawyer on anybody for posting a photo on a forum website. They specifically market that service, and I pay them for that.
Checking around - I'm an actual member of one other on-line forum, KAP Discussion, and lurk on a couple others - shows Supertopo alone in changing from photos to links on a page. Time will tell if Supertopo made the smart move without over-reacting and those other forums are cruisin' for a bruisin', or the opposite.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2019 - 09:16am PT
|
Concerning hacking your Google Chrome browsers to make ALL of the IMG tags visible again on any Supertopo thread,
Hacking your browser to see photographs on Supertopo
JLP asked:
Apr 18, 2019 - 07:36pm PT
Could someone please confirm the script a few posts up works for them, and if not post a link to the page where it doesn’t. It’s working fine for me, hasn’t missed a single photo in these historical threads, unless of course the photo is actually missing.
I just had a visit from Nut Again! – and he performed the browser hack for me.
ABSOLUTELY it works.
Gotta say, JLP, DAMN good work sourcing that fix from Mountain Project and presenting it over here!
Nut a.k.a. Scott, thinks he can fix those bracket [] remnants as well. Stay tuned.
|
|
JLP
Social climber
The internet
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2019 - 09:31am PT
|
Nut a.k.a. Scott, thinks he can fix those bracket [] remnants as well. Stay tuned. While in that thought space, I would wager the same pro talent could make quick work of the youtube thing in the same script.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2019 - 09:46am PT
|
While in that thought space, I would wager the same pro talent could make quick work of the youtube thing in the same script. Excellent point! I'll ask him about that soon.
This is quite valuable to those of us wishing to archive threads, so thanks again, JLP!
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Apr 25, 2019 - 11:15am PT
|
RJ
Thanks formerclimber for your comments and linking to that EFF article, which does a nice job of breaking down the disturbing implications of that 2018 ruling. It is that case which forces our hand on this unfortunate change in how we are handling [img] tags.
First off I appreciate the time and effort you have gone through to create this forum.
I think a lot of blow back could have been avoided if you stated why you were making these changes in the initial post on these changes and preferably some advance notice. Actually there was a post about not uploading images you don’t own but no official post about removing embedded images and videos. Have you stated why YouTube videos are no longer embedded? You tube encourages this and the videos owner can easily prevent it.
This forum has organically changed from a forum to provide climbing info to a forum where climbers discuss topics that interest them. After nearly 20 years of that to start enforcing your original vision for the forum and the appearance of not seeming to respect how much time people have put into threads such as historical info (eg saying it would take a few minutes to change how photos are displayed, while true for a few photos, someone updating all their trip reports etc could take hours), or tractors or whatever, is not ideal.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2019 - 01:47am PT
|
A key quote in that EFF article is this one:
Even worse, the logic of the ruling applies to all in-line linking, not just embedding tweets.
Werner is correct that by simply linking to the hosting site, rather than displaying the image on SuperTopo, we avoid inheriting the copyright infringement liability implied by that 2018 rulling.
Yes, but this analysis completely ignores the DMCA Safe Harbor, which is the only reason why Internet forums open to random people on the Internet are viable. It is the reason why you can post pictures and images on Youtube, Instagram, Facebook, etc. Each of these web sites has a DCMA policy with a takedown procedure.
If SuperTopo (not a random forum user) takes a copyrighted image and post it on the SuperTopo home page (and it's found to be infringing and not fair use), then SuperTopo is liable.
However, if a random forum user (such as myself) were to post an infringing image right here in this thread, and if SuperTopo was using polices that made the DMCA Safe Harbor available to it, then SuperTopo would be insulated and it would me that would be liable as the infringing poster--although in practice, the aggrieved party normally only has the infringing post removed.
If Supertopo has received competent legal advice, I'm sure they have been advised of the DMCA Safe Harbor and its ins and outs. Maybe they just don't want to have the logistical hassle of receiving having to deal with take-down notices from time to time, especially if they consider the forums to already be a money-losing drain on resources? That would certainly be understandable.
My take on this is that the SuperTopo forums have been going downhill ever since Facebook and other social media sites became popular. A lot of people just share with their FB friends and/or Instagram followers what they used to post here.
But I expect that removing images will just make it even harder for SuperTopo to compete. We will see if this is correct or not...
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2019 - 04:49pm PT
|
what if we hosted supertopo in Europe?
|
|
| Messages 1 - 81 of total 81 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!