the Authors’ Hangout LITEROTICA/A.I.R. 2012-2015 Themed Contests Support Thread…

Status
Not open for further replies.
And all of them are hotlinked from other sites which is against forum rules and wastes bandwidth for both places.

Not to mention most of them have copyright data on them. Think about that the next time someone steals one of your stories.

There's no copyright violation, because there's no profit or gain made from their use. It falls under FanFic rulings on usage and doesn't violate the owners rights. Let's face it, who's going to complain that their pics are being promoted for free?

Laurel herself has posted that she has no problem with the pics he uses, nor does she have a problem with this thread, so it's interesting that 87k views are showing and that definitely shows a huge interest in what goes on in this thread.

I know this thread and his contests are fake, but he has proven a consistency in bringing up some good ideas for contests and I for one would enter one if it was real. I like how he promotes it and the ideas for contests are far better than the real ones and many would agree.

I find the official thread absolutely boring to go to, as there is nothing of interest about the contest and usually a continuation of what's going on in other threads. I just think Jim could do a much better job of running the thread for the contests is all I'm saying. If not him, at least use his ideas and do something to make the contests more appealing to participate in, like this thread does.

People get taken in by it all and try and enter his fake contests, because they're more appealing than the official ones. Seems interesting no one else has thought of using his techniques to run the real contest threads. Might bring in more than the usual crowd who enter them.

So, as much as this thread and the contests may be fake, there's something to be said about it all and maybe it's time we did something about promoting our work better for everyone and bring in more writers to the contests.

Just an idea, nothing more ;)
 
And all of them are hotlinked from other sites which is against forum rules and wastes bandwidth for both places.

Not to mention most of them have copyright data on them. Think about that the next time someone steals one of your stories.

I get a perverse sense of pride when my stories are stolen. I'm not trying to make any money with them, and if some thief thinks my stories are good enough to rip off, well, that's a nice compliment.

I do feel bad for those of you who are trying to monetize your creativity, but the reality is that the internet has corrupted the entire concept of "copyright". Ask the music industry. Or the porn industry.
 
There's no copyright violation, because there's no profit or gain made from their use. It falls under FanFic rulings on usage and doesn't violate the owners rights. Let's face it, who's going to complain that their pics are being promoted for free?

Where did you get that idea? Copyright is based on "use," not profit. And as far as what Laurel posted when she said hotlinking was fine, she wasn't reading her own forum rules (Forum rule #3. The ban on hotlinking is even rendered in bold), which says hotlinking wasn't allowed. So that shows what either one of you knows about copyright violations. It's the reposting of the material without expressed permission that is a violation--the means you use to do that and the profit or lack of profit the reposter makes from doing it have absolutely nothing at all to do with it.
 
Last edited:
I get a perverse sense of pride when my stories are stolen. I'm not trying to make any money with them, and if some thief thinks my stories are good enough to rip off, well, that's a nice compliment.

I do feel bad for those of you who are trying to monetize your creativity, but the reality is that the internet has corrupted the entire concept of "copyright". Ask the music industry. Or the porn industry.

That's nice--especially the part about you deciding for other authors that they don't want to exercise their property rights.

I trust you will repost your view the next time a Lit. author complains on the forum about a Web site or an Amazon user ripping off their work.
 
There's no copyright violation, because there's no profit or gain made from their use. It falls under FanFic rulings on usage and doesn't violate the owners rights. Let's face it, who's going to complain that their pics are being promoted for free?

Laurel herself has posted that she has no problem with the pics he uses, nor does she have a problem with this thread, so it's interesting that 87k views are showing and that definitely shows a huge interest in what goes on in this thread.

I know this thread and his contests are fake, but he has proven a consistency in bringing up some good ideas for contests and I for one would enter one if it was real. I like how he promotes it and the ideas for contests are far better than the real ones and many would agree.

I find the official thread absolutely boring to go to, as there is nothing of interest about the contest and usually a continuation of what's going on in other threads. I just think Jim could do a much better job of running the thread for the contests is all I'm saying. If not him, at least use his ideas and do something to make the contests more appealing to participate in, like this thread does.

People get taken in by it all and try and enter his fake contests, because they're more appealing than the official ones. Seems interesting no one else has thought of using his techniques to run the real contest threads. Might bring in more than the usual crowd who enter them.

So, as much as this thread and the contests may be fake, there's something to be said about it all and maybe it's time we did something about promoting our work better for everyone and bring in more writers to the contests.

Just an idea, nothing more ;)

Fan fic is fiction based off of an existing product-and one sold for money- Star wars, Game of Thrones, Twilight etc..... Also do not think for a minute that the lawyers for those mediums are not all over that stuff making sure not a dime is made or a law crossed.

And fan fic is based on the original work. Based on, the original work is not being stolen which is the case when stories are stolen here.

So....you're wrong.
 
And all of them are hotlinked from other sites which is against forum rules and wastes bandwidth for both places.

Not to mention most of them have copyright data on them. Think about that the next time someone steals one of your stories.

And.....why do you care? The site owner obviously does not, why should anyone else?

the fake contests and story pumping are legit accusations, but you should drop the hot linking issue because it just makes the site look like it doesn't care

Oh, wait....
 
That's nice--especially the part about you deciding for other authors that they don't want to exercise their property rights.

WTF are you talking about? I only decide for myself and my own work. I found a website that is re-posting many Literotica stories and brought it to everyone's attention in this thread. How the indivual authors choose to handle it is their business.

I trust you will repost your view the next time a Lit. author complains on the forum about a Web site or an Amazon user ripping off their work.

Huh? I said I feel bad for those of you who are losing money due to copyright theives. If I thought my stories had any monetary value I'd be pretty pissed, but alas, my stories aren't that good.
 
WTF are you talking about? I only decide for myself and my own work. I found a website that is re-posting many Literotica stories and brought it to everyone's attention in this thread. How the indivual authors choose to handle it is their business.



Huh? I said I feel bad for those of you who are losing money due to copyright theives. If I thought my stories had any monetary value I'd be pretty pissed, but alas, my stories aren't that good.

I'm talking about actual copyright law. Sorry if that's over your head.
 
So, besides any issues of copyright infringement, I still like the idea of promoting contests this way, as opposed to the official thread and how it's handled.
Whether Scouries did it or not, I like his ideas for contests and think it would be a benefit to try it.
 
Sure, Laurel could do it for the official contests too. She doesn't appear to be able to understand her own Forum Rule #3.
 
I'm talking about actual copyright law. Sorry if that's over your head.

It's not over my head, you're making assumptions about me that aren't valid.

You're a condescending dick, too.

You exercise your rights as you see fit, and I'll exercise mine as I see fit.

You seem to think that hotlinking, or more precisely "inline linking" is a copyright violation. It isn't. Perhaps you need to look into "actual copyright law" a little more deeply before you go around insulting people.

Additionally, Scoriesworld, the BS contest, the BS "A.I.R.", and this entire thread are clearly parody, which again, is not a copyright violation.

Fair Use
 
You seem to think that hotlinking, or more precisely "inline linking" is a copyright violation. It isn't. Perhaps you need to look into "actual copyright law" a little more deeply before you go around insulting people.

The parody clauses are for written material, not images. (You might also look up what parody is. This ain't it. Scouries' use isn't in any way a parody on the original.)

Please show me in copyright law where a reposting of an actual image without permission is not a copyright violation.

And, specifically, you might read the forum rules here. Hotlinking is explicitly banned by Forum Rule #3.

I let you resort to the nasty name calling alone.
 
Last edited:
The parody clauses are for written material, not images. (You might also look up what parody is. This ain't it. Scouries' use isn't in any way a parody on the original.)

Please show me in copyright law where a reposting of an actual image without permission is not a copyright violation.

Read the Wikipedia article on inline linking, particularly the section on copyright law.

I'll give you an example. Let's say I wanted to post a link to an author's website. No problem with that, right? How about if I post a link to a photo at that same website. Still no problem, right? How about if I post the link to the photo but this time I surround it with "IMG" tags thusly:

[removed by admin]

Still no problem. You following this? That's how you hotlink, and all a hotlink does is point your browser to the linked website to show the image. The image is never hosted on the server here, and the owner of the image can remove the image, change the URL, or take other measures to stop inline linking. You can stop the inline link yourself without bothering the mods here, but the smart money is on you crying to Laurel.

[removed by admin]

This is what the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had to say about it:

"Google does not...display a copy of full-size infringing photographic images for purposes of the Copyright Act when Google frames in-line linked images that appear on a user’s computer screen. Because Google’s computers do not store the photographic images, Google does not have a copy of the images for purposes of the Copyright Act. In other words, Google does not have any “material objects...in which a work is fixed...and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated” and thus cannot communicate a copy. Instead of communicating a copy of the image, Google provides HTML instructions that direct a user’s browser to a website publisher’s computer that stores the full-size photographic image. Providing these HTML instructions is not equivalent to showing a copy. First, the HTML instructions are lines of text, not a photographic image. Second, HTML instructions do not themselves cause infringing images to appear on the user’s computer screen. The HTML merely gives the address of the image to the user’s browser. The browser then interacts with the computer that stores the infringing image. It is this interaction that causes an infringing image to appear on the user’s computer screen. Google may facilitate the user’s access to infringing images. However, such assistance raised only contributory liability issues and does not constitute direct infringement of the copyright owner’s display rights. ...While in-line linking and framing may cause some computer users to believe they are viewing a single Google webpage, the Copyright Act...does not protect a copyright holder against [such] acts...."

Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com,_Inc.

So when Scouries or anyone else posts an inline link, there is no copyright violation. Don't get your panties in a bunch over it.


And, specifically, you might read the forum rules here. Hotlinking is explicitly banned by Forum Rule #3.

They should probably change the rule since it's selectively enforced.

I let you resort to the nasty name calling alone.

I'm sure you've been called worse.
 
[size=+2]ASSOCIATION of INDEPENDENT READERS (A.I.R.)[/size]

Yes ladies and gentlemen you are on AHland’s #1 thread!

Sponsored in part by your friends at ScouriesWorld

A.I.R. 2014 Back to School Contest

ATTENTION LITEROTICANS:
If you are submitting your contest story through the LITEROTICA portal please remember that on that site all characters engaged in sexual acts must be at least 18 years of age. Past site rulings can be interpreted as follows: High School seniors are generally acceptable but juniors, sophomores and freshmen aren’t.

tumblr_n1294wZdCl1qlqka5o1_400.jpg

do you remember the first day you realized that your teacher was a possible lay?
that your 28 year old married teacher was attracted to you…
who knew?
and yes it wasn’t easy getting her into bed…
but you eventually did!
and once you got her on her back and full of dick she fucking loved it!
and so did you...


WTF!!!!

I go away for a weekend cruise with the boss and some other friends and I return to this!

The dumbtexan and his bowlfulbard and the pox ALTS! And lovergirl and ace! Two posters who’ve never encountered a thread they didn’t want too disrupt…

This is a contest support thread for crying out loud! Please keep your posts on topic – the A.I.R. Back to School Contest. Only Royce has had the courtesy to stay on topic – thanks!

HOTLINKING? Is ace still crying about the subject? LAUREL has already publicly announced that “hotlinking” is now allowed on the site and that the rule that ace keeps referring to is no longer in force. Period! I understand that our friend from Virginia doesn’t like the new rule and if he wants to complain about it that’s fine too – why not start your own thread on the subject. Or venture into the PLAYGROUND and GBland and post on all the picture threads there. Be a man and take on these violators.

But perhaps even better advice for you (and the other clowns and ALTS) is to get to work on your BACK TO SCHOOL CONTEST STORY. Those were the days!!!!!

 
I'll give you an example. Let's say I wanted to post a link to an author's website. No problem with that, right? How about if I post a link to a photo at that same website. Still no problem, right? How about if I post the link to the photo but this time I surround it with "IMG" tags thusly:

[img]http://www.barbarianspy.com/GrabBag5hBSECover200x300x300.jpg[/img]

I'll show you copyright violation. The cover of my book is copyrighted. It belongs to me, and I didn't give you permission to post it here. I am reporting it as a copyright violation to be erased from here if you don't delete it first.

I've recently done that with another cover of mine that Scouries posted and the Web site erased it and gave Scouries a warning.

So, we'll just see about copyright violations in action. If the Web site doesn't erase it, I'll ask my publisher to take action. It's about time for the world of copyright to be understood on this forum.

Very shortly after: There, take a look. Admin erased my copyrighted image (and thanks for the quick, definitive action). That's the reality of copyright violation, AZ, when an owner actually takes action. I don't see that there's more to argue on this.
 
Last edited:
LAUREL has already publicly announced that “hotlinking” is now allowed on the site and that the rule that ace keeps referring to is no longer in force.

I'm game. Cite where a rule change was announced (I feel fairly confident on this, as Laurel doesn't announce much of anything on the status of anything--as you yourself point out).

You ass certainly was put in a sling when you reposted something I held a copyright on. ;)
 
I'll show you copyright violation. The cover of my book is copyrighted. It belongs to me, and I didn't give you permission to post it here. I am reporting it as a copyright violation to be erased from here if you don't delete it first.

I've recently done that with another cover of mine that Scouries posted and the Web site erased it and gave Scouries a warning.

So, we'll just see about copyright violations in action. If the Web site doesn't erase it, I'll ask my publisher to take action. It's about time for the world of copyright to be understood on this forum.

Very shortly after: There, take a look. Admin erased my copyrighted image (and thanks for the quick, definitive action). That's the reality of copyright violation, AZ, when an owner actually takes action. I don't see that there's more to argue on this.

Proves nothing more than the admin doesn't understand how the internet works any more than you do. I stand by my statement that inline linking is not a copyright violation, and the courts are clearly on my side. Don't bother to read and understand the court's decision, though. Stay ignorant for all I care.

The admin removed the links to shut you up, not because your copyright was violated.
 
Proves nothing more than the admin doesn't understand how the internet works any more than you do. I stand by my statement that inline linking is not a copyright violation, and the courts are clearly on my side. Don't bother to read and understand the court's decision, though. Stay ignorant for all I care.

The admin removed the links to shut you up, not because your copyright was violated.

Nope. It quite graphically shows what you know. Post something I own on here again and we'll go through this show (me) and tell (you) routine again.

Anybody else here miss the point?
 
Nope. It quite graphically shows what you know. Post something I own on here again and we'll go through this show (me) and tell (you) routine again.

Anybody else here miss the point?

What point? The one where you're wrong? Quote me some case law to back up your argument.

Did you even bother to read the court's decision? Do you understand what inline linking is? I'll post it for you again. My bold and italics.

"Google does not...display a copy of full-size infringing photographic images for purposes of the Copyright Act when Google frames in-line linked images that appear on a user’s computer screen. Because Google’s computers do not store the photographic images, Google does not have a copy of the images for purposes of the Copyright Act. In other words, Google does not have any “material objects...in which a work is fixed...and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated” and thus cannot communicate a copy. Instead of communicating a copy of the image, Google provides HTML instructions that direct a user’s browser to a website publisher’s computer that stores the full-size photographic image. Providing these HTML instructions is not equivalent to showing a copy. First, the HTML instructions are lines of text, not a photographic image. Second, HTML instructions do not themselves cause infringing images to appear on the user’s computer screen. The HTML merely gives the address of the image to the user’s browser. The browser then interacts with the computer that stores the infringing image. It is this interaction that causes an infringing image to appear on the user’s computer screen. Google may facilitate the user’s access to infringing images. However, such assistance raised only contributory liability issues and does not constitute direct infringement of the copyright owner’s display rights. ...While in-line linking and framing may cause some computer users to believe they are viewing a single Google webpage, the Copyright Act...does not protect a copyright holder against [such] acts....'

Replace "google" with "Literotica" and maybe you'll understand, but I doubt you have the capacity.

If you are really concerned with protecting your images from inline linking, there are ways to do that on your end. Talk to your webmaster, maybe they can explain it to you.
 
snob.jpg


I'm game. Cite where a rule change was announced (I feel fairly confident on this, as Laurel doesn't announce much of anything on the status of anything--as you yourself point out).

Memory problems again? Surely you aren't going to deny that LAUREL posted the following on July 4th 2014:

No, it is not. People hotlink images all the time, including myself

Seeing she owns the site and makes the rules I think even our dumbest member (yes the texan) would be able to understand the QUEEN has changed Rule 3 prohibiting hotlinking.

She has categorically posted that hotlinking is now allowed on the site.

You may not agree with this rule change but too bad - she's made an executive ruling on the subject.

And no, unfortunately she hasn't been able to update the RULE page for the reason she's explained to you at least a hundred times before - she can't change anything during the sites update! :rolleyes:
 
Which brings it back to what I was asking before. Let's say Jim stops promoting the bogus contests and starts promoting the real ones the way he does here, which as I said, is far better than how it's done now.

I for one would like to see that adopted as a part of the contest thread. What do you say Jim, want to go legit on this?
 
image.php


Well Royce the truth is that the boss did his utmost to help the QUEEN in his early days here. To work inside the system. Later I'll repost some of his suggestions he made way back in 2005 and 2006 and 2007 and 2008!

Unfortunately to no avail. Apparently LAUREL hasn't been able to implement any changes since the site "upgrade" project started in 2004. When, back in early 2010 this was explained to him with the additional information that the "upgrade" might not be finished until mid 2017 jim thought his only recourse was to sponsor THEMED CONTESTS on A.I.R.

Once the QUEEN ever decides that she is able to start working on the LITEROTICA themed contests the boss will certainly offer his expertise to the site. As will everyone in the Association.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top