InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "Bring in the dancing lobsters"

schmevil (schmevil) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-03-19 18:19:00

Entry tags:

admin: mod post

PAD clarification
heeha_tag posted a clarification from PAD, and I'm going to relay it to all of you.

"Well, the last time I was over there it was made abundantly clear that I wasn’t welcome, so I’m not going to make the mistake of going over there and saying this. But feel free to post the following in response:

The position espoused is not remotely correct. I have EXPLICITLY said that I have no problem with “snippets.” A few panels here, a page there. Anything that remotely falls under the realm of fair use is of no concern. And the comment about wanting people to consult with me over reproducing “even small portions” of my work is, again, 180 degrees away from what I said.

What I had said was that–giving a for-instance–if people wanted to produce LARGE amounts (such as the 50% that was reproduced of X-Factor) of work to which I own the copyright (such as Fallen Angel) that they but had to approach me and we could likely work something out. Here I was trying to put forward an example of how I’d be willing to work with Scans regarding work where I have the legal option to make that call (unlike that Marvel work) and it’s being twisted and distorted to make me come across as uncooperative. I really can’t fathom it."

The ban on PAD, just so we're all clear, isn't about blaming PAD for anything. Understandably we're a bit nervous about having his work on SD, and we've received negative attention for the posts that were made after the migration. When rabican and I started talking about a creator rights clause in our rules, it was both to give writers and artists an easy out, and a way to protect the community. It's not about targeting people as poor sports, or bad fans.

PAD: I do apologize for mistaking your words regarding permission to post. Some of that misunderstanding comes down to terminology. Coming from SD as I do, a snippet would be more than a panel, or a page.

The ban will stay in place for now, but this is something we should talk about as a community. I encourage you guys to share your views, but please do so civilly, and with attention to all the issues involved.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	bluefall 2009-03-19 07:10 pm UTC (link)
	Totally unrelated, but seems as good a place to mention it as any: I may have found a hint toward a solution to our RSS problem. (IE the one where porn and Wondy megaposts don't cut properly through the RSS and force people still watching from LJ to drop the feed.) (Reply to this) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-03-19 09:35 pm UTC (link)
	To the mods, I suggest using the "Title" syndication style. Summary could possibly display images on an RSS feed... 'course, this needs to be tested. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	tavella 2009-03-19 10:26 pm UTC (link)
	I would much prefer summary. Title tells me almost nothing about whether I want to bother clicking through. I don't bother with title RSS feeds, ever. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	foxhack 2009-03-20 01:49 am UTC (link)
	Well, if the poster makes an effort to mention a bit of the contents in the first paragraph, then that would work. Or something. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -