dspp wrote:In essence #2 is what has happened here. ...
I should possibly say that I don't know exactly where "here" is - this thread came to my attention as a new thread in the "Biscuit Bar", but AFAIAA I wasn't reading whatever thread it was that the OP referred to. And I don't really need to know either - the point of saying this is just that all my comments are on the general principles involved, not on the specifics of whatever happened on that thread.
dspp wrote:... TLF have realised the Indie's over-enthusiastic claim to copyright. TLF have decided that we are not on some quixotic mission to take on the Indie in court. So TLF have just removed the quote. And to be clear TLF have tweaked their Ts & Cs about this and alerted board users. Some of whom have got in a huff as they think that TLF should be standing firmer on this as a matter of principle. The reality is that we (TLF, mods) have limited time, limited resources, and are simply trying to keep the TLF site out of harms way as best we can. In my opinion the best thing users can do is to not stalk off in a huff, to keep posting, and do their best to cooperate thoughtfully.
No, TLF has done more than that: it has told users that they must co-operate in a particular way, specifically by making certain that they comply with the terms & conditions of the sites they get their quotes from - terms & conditions that can be quite deeply buried, quite complicated and/or change unpredictably and sometime not very noticeably. Furthermore, users often use search engines to find material on whatever is being discussed, which often come up with links to sites the user has heard of, know are reasonably reputable, but has no established relationship with and so cannot be expected to already know the terms & conditions of.
The reality is also that users have limited time and limited resources. If you really expect me to check the terms & conditions of every site I quote from, or to find convoluted and time-consuming ways to say what I want without actually quoting, I am very likely to decide that many of my posts will take more of my time and resources than they're worth. And the same even goes for reading other people's posts for at least some of those convoluted and time-consuming ways. E.g. writing a precis of a quote takes a lot longer and involves a higher risk of unfairness than quoting; referring readers to "the 2nd sentence of the 3rd paragraph of the recipe for unicorn kebabs" rather than quoting involves more of both the poster's and readers' time.
I won't think that TLF should be taking a firmer stance about being able to use "fair dealing" quotes, and won't leave because TLF isn't doing so. But my participation in the site will at least drop, and I might even leave entirely, if TLF make unreasonable demands on my time and resources in order to participate - and that will be based on a straightforward cost/benefit analysis about the use of that time and resources, not on a "huff". From various comments in this thread, I doubt I'm alone in that. I'm not doubting what you say about some of those indicating they might leave being in a huff because TLF won't fight their battles for them, by the way - just pointing out that there are other reasons for leaving besides that.
Hopefully it won't be an issue - but some of the things said in this thread by admins/moderators do have "check the terms & conditions, or else..." overtones to them. If the rules end up saying that and being seriously enforced, I think it will end up doing major harm to the site; if they end up saying it and not being seriously enforced, it will pointlessly add to their volume and detract from the respect paid to them. Better IMHO for the rules simply to say that TLF will not get into any legal battles about copyright and so will remove any quotes of copyrighted material on request by the copyright owner.
If anything more is needed, I'd suggest it should be an extension to one bullet point in part 3 of the rules, the extension being the emboldened part: "◦ Users who break the rules above or persistently create unnecessary work for the moderators may receive a formal warning. Continued transgression may lead to a 30 day suspension or to a complete ban. Where possible we will follow such a staged process, but we do reserve the right to immediately ban a user with no warning." Such an extension would make it possible to deal with a user who persistently posted quotes from known objectors even to "fair dealing" quoting, and would also be useful against excessive rules-lawyering and behaviours intended more to irritate moderators than for the benefit of the site.
Gengulphus