Discord aint cutting it

[RemiD]

I'll be putting them up, but I'll have to lose details

what about the respect for the authors ?

a code in public domain does not mean there was no author...

it just means that it can be used freely without having copyright issues.

people who post code examples on forums do it to help others so it is free to use anyway.


about the wayback machine, i don't know exactly how it works, but it does not seem that there are recent posts...
but there should be most of the code examples shared, yes...

[Dabzy]

what about the respect for the authors ?

See, on one site, someone on one site is saying you have to lose the details, and on another, someone is saying what about authors names?

Which is why I've been to citizens advice today!

Dabz

[Dabzy]

I'll be putting them up, but I'll have to lose details

what about the respect for the authors ?

a code in public domain does not mean there was no author...

it just means that it can be used freely without having copyright issues.

people who post code examples on forums do it to help others so it is free to use anyway.


about the wayback machine, i don't know exactly how it works, but it does not seem that there are recent posts...
but there should be most of the code examples shared, yes...

Well, unfortunately, no...

Top and bottom is I can share public domain code without naming the author, as public domain works are free from copyright restrictions. Where it is good practice to add an authors name, morally correct I totally agree, but Data Protection overrides that, I simply cannot, where possible, use the original authors name or details, I have to remove it from the document. This stops a paradox effect and the data protection act overrules... Now, the likes of MIT or similar is different, said license{s} usually states I must add accreditations, so if that is specified, then yes, I MUST give accreditation as per the license, but, I cannot, the law states that I just cannot, especially in regards to the EU, especially them, they are the most stringent out of the lot of them!

It's as simple as that... So I have two options, the first, remove the authors name, adding that I have recognised the license, but I am required by law to receive a notice, in writing from the author to add accreditation details to the material and as such, the material is being used under fair use, the second choice... Well, not use the material at all. Which the latter will totally remove the issue, keeping me compliant and not head down truly murky waters.

It's not me that's refusing to add peoples details, it's the law in various jurisdictions that say I cannot!

So, I've been to see Citizens Advice, and a lady helped me write up a policy for syntaxbomb tutorials, PD stuff from the bb.com archive I'm good on, I'll have to add a little notice in for that in regards to personal data that has slipped through the net (Such as names in comments), or people want me to add accreditation (Which I'm not legally bound to do if I don't want, but if anyone wants it adding, then fair enough, but they will need to follow a procedure which is outlined in the policy)

So there we are... It's turned into a right thing mind, but now I have something which will indeed make me compliant, and I'll finally hear the end of it! hehehe

Sausages



Dabz 

[Baggey]

Names left out sorta makes sence. Thinking about data protection as this is for names, addresses, details about the individual etc..

Im happy with any code that ive put up in the past to be in the public domain.

So i would suggest to the authors, if you see your code and want to claim it. We could tag it maybe?

Kind Regards Baggey

[RemiD]

when you study the writings of a book which is public domain, in school, or in training, you know who is the author...

do what you think is morally fair, and which will not cause problems.

this is not what will stop me to post others code examples, because my goal is to help the others users of a programming langage (💙 blitzbasic 💙) to learn new ways to do stuff and also to share useful procedures. 🔧🪛🤓

[Dabzy]

So i would suggest to the authors, if you see your code and want to claim it. We could tag it maybe?

Kind Regards Baggey

Well this is what I'm saying.

do what you think is morally fair, and which will not cause problems.

I'm doing whats lawful, regardless if I agree with it or not!

A bit like driving in a 20mph zone, sometimes I think "Why the hell is this 20mph? There's nowt here", that still doesnt allow me to go break that speed limit does it!

this is not what will stop me to post others code examples, because my goal is to help the others users of a programming langage (💙 blitzbasic 💙) to learn new ways to do stuff and also to share useful procedures. 🔧🪛🤓

Ah, I was on about that due to MikeHarts reply in Discord and was a question I asked her... It's called "user-generated content (UGC) liability"

Well, this could be classed as a little different see, you've agreed that you are responsible for your own posts pretty much in the signing up registration text. For me as the owner, as long as I have a policy, and a procedure to follow for take downs requests, then... Pfffttttt... That is it really, I've just got to remove the offending material as soon as requested.

The site has a flag system, so any reporting of such stuff is there in place already too.

Can you see how stupidly mish mash it all is, and a proper head f[HEYYYY MACARANI]k!

Top and bottom of the whole lot is, I as the owner cannot do what I want or what is morally right, and in terms of you as the user, can sorta get away with it, and I've just, in the most part, got to act on notices if they occur.

Dabz

[Dabzy]

So... BlitzPlotter has arrived and posted this:-

https://www.syntaxboom.com/forum/index.php?topic=35.msg285

Thats user-generated content, with Paks username in, now, if Paks has an issue, he has to send ME a notice to remove his user name, and I have to do it, I know he wont, but if he did, that's the only liability for me really in the most part, to act on notices...

But, for me as the owner... If I went to put that up, I would have to remove "Paks" user name first, because that makes me liable, and if Paks has an issue with that, he has to notify me to apply attribution!

Honestly, it's whacko, but there we are, that's how it sorta works in a nutshell.

Dabz

[RemiD]

We have taken reasonable steps to remove identifiable author details,

Request Options – Upon verification, you may choose to:
(c) Add Acknowledgment – Attribution details can be added

sorry man but this makes no sense

why remove the name of the author in a code, if it is to then add it again upon request of the author.

just leave the infos that the author added when he posted the code...

[Naughty Alien]

..what is going on here ?  I dont see Paks here, or, sunburn got to me after painting hull, accompanied by nasty mosquitoes..

[Dabzy]

why remove the name of the author in a code, if it is to then add it again upon request of the author.

Because it is an EU directive, it's part of GDPR, it makes the site compliant within the EU, it's what I have to do... I didnt write the bugger, but thats what it EXPECTS from me, it's a lot more stringent the UK version, it doesnt give me the room, I simply have to remove it!

Like, in the US with copyright... Ever seen copyright strikes on channels, and the channel owner has to get it back... Thats not youTube being arsey, that's DMCA at play, they are opposite ours, a copyright strike is noticed, the channel/video gets dropped instantly, no ifs or buts, it's gone, then, the owner has to put in a counter notice to get the site back... Completely opposite to what we have... Again, it's stupid, but... That's how it rolls!!!

So yeah, that is it really, it might be up your arse and inside out, we might not fathom the logic if there is any, but I went to Citizens Advice yesterday and was there was ages going through this with someone who actually knows!

Personal information data is big business nowadays and it's protected more then ever before, I cannot help that... Moi is sorry, but I have to keep myself right me auld bean!

Dabz

[RemiD]

Because it is an EU directive, it's part of GDPR, it makes the site compliant within the EU, it's what I have to do...

Moi is sorry, but I have to keep myself right me auld bean!

all right... (even if i don't think so !)

for the next forum, after this one is down, in the future, we will say that 'somebody' created and managed 'syntaxboom', and he was great man, and we will quote his words, but never reveal his real name.
🙂🙃

anyway, let's move on, and code and graph stuff !!! 🤓