Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Craigslist, ebay and other vintage scope ads.

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
490 replies to this topic

#101 greju

greju

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2005

Posted 11 May 2011 - 12:56 PM

" Not true "? I think we pretty much said the same thing! Some people are just itchin' for a fight! :lol:
 

#102 Scott in NC

Scott in NC

    Refractor Fanatic

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 31503
  • Joined: 05 Mar 2005

Posted 11 May 2011 - 01:36 PM

" Not true "? I think we pretty much said the same thing! Some people are just itchin' for a fight! :lol:


No--not itching for a fight. The CN TOS stipulates that all fights must be confined to the Refractor Forum. :roflmao: Sorry if I came across the wrong way--I'll edit my last post so nobody gets the wrong idea. Best regards.
 

#103 Jon Marinello

Jon Marinello

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2010

Posted 11 May 2011 - 01:43 PM

I just wanted mainly to warn you guys that this seller was using fraudulent photos. Beyond that its not a huge deal.
 

#104 magic612

magic612

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3837
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 11 May 2011 - 02:09 PM

Because I am quite stringent with my children with respect to buying - rather than "sharing" - digital music (and even wrote a bit of music in the past myself), I have looked pretty deeply into copyright issues. Here's a link that should shed more light onto the situation:

http://www.templeton.../copymyths.html

A quick, and relevant, section as it pertains to the recent discussion:

For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately and originally after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not. The default you should assume for other people's works is that they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you know otherwise.


The pictures are Jon's original work, therefore they technically do have copyright protection.

Okay, enough of me rambling about the law - carry on. :)
 

#105 tim53

tim53

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14407
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004

Posted 11 May 2011 - 03:38 PM

Thanks for posting that. Too many people are unaware that, when they post something on the internet - whether it is text like this or photos - their own material is copyright protected.

-Tim.
 

#106 Kerig3

Kerig3

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1228
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2009

Posted 11 May 2011 - 04:29 PM

What flag category?

miscategorized
prohibited
spam/overpost
best of craigslist


FYI, although I flagged this yesterday (and again today) the ad remains. One way that CL works when flagging an ad is that if its flagged from multiple people (identified by their IP number) then the folks at CL will pay more attention to it. Not a perfect system, but that's Craigslist for you. :(
So let's get flaggin' guys! :waytogo:
 

#107 greju

greju

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2005

Posted 11 May 2011 - 08:37 PM

"The pictures are Jon's original work, therefore they technically do have copyright protection."

I think it would be safe to say the word "Esquire" does not follow your name. :lol:

Brad Templeton? Who is Brad Templeton? :lol:

"This article was originally composed in 1994. The latest revision was in October 2008." Probably not the best link to use to try and make a point. :lol:

No offence Magic but I stand by what I said concerning Jons pictures. There is no copyright attatched to them IMHO. :lol:
 

#108 greju

greju

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2005

Posted 11 May 2011 - 08:40 PM

" Not true "? I think we pretty much said the same thing! Some people are just itchin' for a fight! :lol:


No--not itching for a fight. The CN TOS stipulates that all fights must be confined to the Refractor Forum. :roflmao: Sorry if I came across the wrong way--I'll edit my last post so nobody gets the wrong idea. Best regards.


My reply to you was completely in jest! No need to say "Sorry" on my account. :lol:
 

#109 Kerig3

Kerig3

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1228
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2009

Posted 11 May 2011 - 10:13 PM

Straight from the horse's as...err...the gov'ment. :grin:

Can I copyright my website?
The original authorship appearing on a website may be protected by copyright. This includes writings, artwork, photographs, and other forms of authorship protected by copyright. Procedures for registering the contents of a website may be found in Circular 66, Copyright Registration for Online Works.
 

#110 magic612

magic612

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3837
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 11 May 2011 - 10:37 PM

"The pictures are Jon's original work, therefore they technically do have copyright protection."

I think it would be safe to say the word "Esquire" does not follow your name. :lol:

Brad Templeton? Who is Brad Templeton? :lol:

"This article was originally composed in 1994. The latest revision was in October 2008." Probably not the best link to use to try and make a point. :lol:

No offence Magic but I stand by what I said concerning Jons pictures. There is no copyright attatched to them IMHO. :lol:


:foreheadslap:

Well no offense to you either greju, but I'm pretty darn sure that you're wrong. Sorry. Check it out yourself:

http://www.copyright...aq-protect.html

"Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works..."


...which links to this: http://www.copyright...ircs/circ01.pdf

"It is illegal for anyone to violate any of the rights provided by the copyright law to the owner of copyright....Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is cre­ated in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who cre­ated the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright"


Please, by all means, tell me how I'm wrong here.

Given that these pictures are NOT being used under "Fair Use" guidelines or for parody purposes, I am quite certain they are covered by copyright. If you feel otherwise, by all means, make your case. Provide a link, to make your case. I don't mean to drag this thread off course, but other people here at CN have had their pictures used - wrongly - by people on CL and Ebay and stating that the pictures represented the item actually being sold.

I don't need to be a lawyer - nor do you! - to understand the very basics of copyright protection. These were Jon's pictures, they are his original works, and he had copyright protection the moment he made them. Period. It really is that simple. Anyone with other ideas on this, please feel free to share your thoughts and links to prove me wrong. I'll gladly read more on this - I've read books on it already. I think I have some idea what I'm talking about though. And "I stand by what I said" doesn't amount to a hill of beans in a court of law.

No offense, but it doesn't. ;)

Again, apologies for going OT. Carry on.
 

#111 Datapanic

Datapanic

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3825
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2009

Posted 11 May 2011 - 11:20 PM

Unless the creator of the work specifically wrote "FOR THE PUBLIC DOMAIN", the work is copyright whether it says "Copyright" in it or not. A registered copyright makes it a lot easier to go after a violator but even without one, it's a pain in the neck - I know, I've been there and done that with some of my own software I wrote that was stolen by copyright infringement.
 

#112 ukcanuck

ukcanuck

    Vendor (Skylight Telescopes)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1423
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2006

Posted 12 May 2011 - 04:59 AM

A Dollond refractor...in India :question:
 

#113 tim53

tim53

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14407
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004

Posted 12 May 2011 - 08:43 AM

Saw that one. I'm no expert, mind you, but there are things "wrong" about that which would bother me if I were considering it. engraving is rather coarse. Focus knob is crosshatch knurled, not crown knurled.

Plus, it's from the "Land of Harbormasters"

-Tim.
 

#114 greju

greju

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2005

Posted 12 May 2011 - 12:48 PM

"Please, by all means, tell me how I'm wrong here."

O.K. This link is probably more compatible to the discussion. Copyrighted, I'll grant you that one but Copyright Protected, not unless the website or material is registered.


http://www.copyright...ircs/circ66.pdf
 

#115 magic612

magic612

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3837
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 12 May 2011 - 01:37 PM

First, I don't know what you think is different about "Copyright" and "Copyright protection" so this may clear that up for you:

http://en.wikipedia....ight_protection

The monopoly granted to authors by copyright, as in "The 1996 act provided additional copyright protection," or "Permission is not granted to use these images, which are protected by copyright."


I would hope that the above statement is crystal clear. Copyright = copyright protection.

In addition to that, your link supports the case I - and others here - have already made:

"Copyright protects original authorship fixed in tangible form (17 USC sec. 102(a)). For works transmitted online, the copyrightable authorship may consist of text, artwork, music, audiovisual material (including any sounds), sound recordings, etc."


and

Under U.S. law, copyright protection subsists from the time the work is fixed in any tangible medium of expression from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Copyright registration is not mandatory,


So, to sum up:

- The pictures are original works
- They have copyright protection the moment they were created

Things I've already stated previously, that you somehow found funny.

I bolded the important parts and italicized the part that firmly establishes what I've implied twice now, previously. Note that much of what your document link states is referencing registering complete websites, databases, etc., where are not at all the same as a private individuals photograph, and therefore does not require the registration I assume you are referencing (note what I bolded above). Again, please make a case that establishes what you're actually arguing. I appreciate the link, but you've not argued how it supports your contention, and I've now demonstrated how it does support mine.

So, do we really need to continue arguing this? Or can you just agree that the images have copyright protection, and should not have been used? This is really pulling this thread far off its intent.
 

#116 Nave

Nave

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1449
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2010

Posted 12 May 2011 - 01:38 PM

"Please, by all means, tell me how I'm wrong here."

O.K. This link is probably more compatible to the discussion. Copyrighted, I'll grant you that one but Copyright Protected, not unless the website or material is registered.


http://www.copyright...ircs/circ66.pdf


From your own link:

Copyright registration is not mandatory, but it has important benefits.


You remain on the wrong side of this argument.

A copyright is secured automatically when a work is created. This concept is frequently misunderstood. Some people still believe that there are formalities required in order to create a copyright. This is not true. Under the latest version of the Copyright Act, neither publication nor registration with the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress is required in order to secure full copyright protection. When a work is created, it is automatically copyrighted.

http://www.photolaw.net/faq.html

Display of the photograph did not forfeit Jon's rights to his photograph - anymore than broadcast of music by Pandora nullifies copyright protection of music.

The party in question did not secure permission from Jon to use his photographs. That's theft of his intellectual property.
 

#117 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 35468
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 12 May 2011 - 01:56 PM

This has wandered WAY off topic. Please confine discussions to classic telescopes.
 

#118 Kerig3

Kerig3

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1228
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2009

Posted 12 May 2011 - 05:37 PM

Beware!

Sears Discoverer Telescope for Sale!!! - $100 (Scranton)
http://scranton.crai...2351727912.html

That's me in the picture and those are shots of my 6305-A that this seller stole from me. I emailed and asked that he take them down and he ignored me.

I don't live in Scranton. ;)

jon


It's been finally flagged for removal and is not displaying! :waytogo:
Now we can get back on topic and share classic scope ads! :grin:
 

#119 Jon Marinello

Jon Marinello

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2010

Posted 12 May 2011 - 05:40 PM

I have to say I enjoyed all the opinions expressed by out in-house legal experts! :bow:

Thanks all for helping if you flagged it as prohibited.

I was busy all day restoring my Tasco 10TE case.

jon
 

#120 JohnD_STL

JohnD_STL

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 288
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2009

Posted 13 May 2011 - 11:14 AM


Tasco 10TE

Starting bid $399, BIN $499.
Located in Carson City, NV.

I'm not the seller.
 

#121 Jason H.

Jason H.

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007

Posted 14 May 2011 - 01:30 PM

Todays' harvest:

6" Edmund with lander feet pedestal EQ, red tube.
Telescope - $450 (Wiscasset)
http://maine.craigsl...2363019183.html

Edmund 4" EQ reflector
4" Telescope - $40 (Columbia)
http://columbiamo.cr...2343778598.html

Another Edmund?
Telescope - Barrington Edison - $50 (New London)
http://nh.craigslist...2326723736.html

Yet another Edmund??
BIG TELESCOPE!!!! - $50 (Downtown)
http://nashville.cra...2364060721.html

Meade 6" EQ motorized reflector w/ lunar lander feet
Mead Telescope - $100 (Canutillo)
http://elpaso.en.cra...2333669009.html

"SummaTech" (???new to me, looks neat)
Hi-End Telescope &Tripod SEE PHOTOS - $75 (CENTRAL+ PHOTOS)
http://cnj.craigslis...2372241547.html

Telescope, Jason model 315 - $50 (napa county)
http://sfbay.craigsl...2378752007.html

60mm EQ (a Jason?)
Telescope - $150 (Pleasant Hill, MO)
http://kansascity.cr...2301600796.html

Mayflower 816
Mayflower Telescope - the real deal - $100 (willow glen / cambrian)
http://sfbay.craigsl...2378189463.html

Optex (looks ~70's Japan-made, like those small terrestrial Focal scopes, but 60mm?)
***TELESCOPE*** - $20 (GRESHAM)
http://portland.crai...2372400943.html

Sears Z-O-O-O-M 30mm
telescope - $40 (chandler)
http://phoenix.craig...2368232663.html

"Sears" no pic, but $10
telescope (coplay)
http://allentown.cra...2355203697.html

Tasco 60mm
Telescope with Tripod - $25 (Meyerland (Hillcroft/Braeswood))
http://houston.craig...2355076276.html

Tasco 4.5" EQ reflector
Vintage Tasco Telescope - $20 (Richland)
http://kpr.craigslis...2369736863.html

And last but not least
a Montgomery Ward 60mm (not EQ)
Telescope - $75 (Tuscarawas)
http://tuscarawas.cr...2342216396.html


Ta ta, Jason W. Higley
 

#122 Jon Marinello

Jon Marinello

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2010

Posted 14 May 2011 - 03:37 PM

On the Mayflower 816 this guy also "used" my pictures. Look carefully pictures of the set up scope. Its my Mayflower but a different model completely. Its a Mayflower branded Towa 339. I emailed him to buy the scope but haven't heard back.
 

#123 Nave

Nave

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1449
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2010

Posted 14 May 2011 - 03:41 PM

On the Mayflower 816 this guy also "used" my pictures. Look carefully pictures of the set up scope. Its my Mayflower but a different model completely. Its a Mayflower branded Towa 339. I emailed him to buy the scope but haven't heard back.

I noticed that they were your photos, too, but didn't want to bring attention to it before I'd purchased it.

Which I have. Last night.

It's in excellent condition and "SYW" marked.
 

#124 Ham Radio

Ham Radio

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 694
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2009

Posted 14 May 2011 - 04:49 PM

You sure seem to be a popular fellow Jon!
 

#125 wfj

wfj

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1732
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2008

Posted 14 May 2011 - 05:10 PM

Perhaps because Jon takes nice pictures :)
 


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics