So you all may be noticing that an entry here, one which was a mirror of this entry on bynkii.com, got deleted. It seems the person I quoted dropped a DMCA notice on LJ, (and my "real" ISP).
Since LJ (Of course) folded as soon as they saw "DMCA", (funny how my "real" ISP doesn't do that), I yanked the post. It's not like it's the only copy. But, because I'm that kind of guy, I sent the following to LJ Abuse via their form:
Evidently y'all got an email from Jeremy bray regarding the now-deleted post at http://bynkii.livejournal.com/105967.html, which was a mirror of this post on my "main" site: http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/03/on_twitter_ettiquette.htmlFor any who want to follow along, the tracking number for this is 863246, and while you can't follow its progress, I'll try to post some updates.
1) I did not get the email you claim to have sent me on 21 March. I'm not going to accuse anyone of anything. I run email servers as part of my job, and have for some 15 years now, I'm only too aware of how fragile that particular system can be. be that as it may, I didn't actually get that email, nor was I aware, until tonight, of the "problem"
2) Had I gotten the email, I would have happily pointed out that my use of Mr. Bray's post is indeed covered by Fair Use, in that it was used as a source for commentary/criticism in my posting. I did indeed quote what ended up being Mr. Bray's entire post, however, if you read the actual post at http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/03/on_twitter_ettiquette.html, you will see that my commentary, responds to almost every line of Mr. Bray's post. While I disagree with what he said, I did in fact want to accurately represent his words in my article, hence the quoting. Again, commentary/criticism falls under fair use. I did not simply copy his article, and add two words. It is safe to say that I wrote close to, if not as many words as Mr. Bray did in the original two articles.
3) Since you (LiveJournal) are obviously setting yourself up as copyright arbiters, then I think it is only reasonable to ask for a number. What percentage of an article can one quote and not have you (LiveJournal) decide it is not fair use? Note that applicable US law does not actually dictate an amount, so I think it is only fair that you, (LiveJournal) provide us (LJ Users) with an amount that we can rely upon in the future. I will of course, expect all applicable LJ terms to reflect this number, and any changes to said number to be publicly and obviously transmitted to the LJ community.
Thank you for your attention, and I eagerly await your response.
Honestly, I'm not surprised. If LJ has every turned anything resembling a profit, I'd be shocked, and from a fiscal POV, there's no way LJ is going to have copyright lawyers vet every DMCA request they get.
But it just may be worth my while to commence to really fucking with Jeremy Bray, pcnerd37 of Global Geek News. Just in case you wanted to know what kind of guy he his, here's his profile on OKCupid.com. He really does look like Otho from "Beetlejuice".