3 ms·

literally the first words ... "All rights reserved; not to be reprinted without permission of the author" and "copyright Arthur C Clarke" - so why share it here

by marstall 3y ago

nine_k 3y ago
Maybe this copy is put out with a permission?
- amanaplanacanal 3y ago
  Exactly! From what I can tell, there is no way to tell the actually copyright or licensing status of anything you find on the internet, you can only guess.
pjbeam 3y ago
Seems like the University of Northern Iowa's concern, no?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
whythre 3y ago
Better call the police. Seriously though, Clark died in 2008; it isn’t like he is being victimized.
bear141 3y ago
Thank you for your vigilance, Hall Monitor.
pb060 3y ago
I know you shouldn’t comment about votes, but why downvotes? You might be against copyright in certain cases but technically, if not legally, the point holds.
- chernevik 3y ago
  Because downvotes are heavily used to say "I don't like this" rather than "this is not relevant". I've complained to HN about this and proposed solutions. They don't care.
- layer8 3y ago
  The comment seems to assume that most everyone would agree that such sharing of the link should not be taking place due to copyright reasons. That is an absurd assumption to make, to everyone who has been around the internet for a bit. It would be different if the commenter would be trying to make an actual, intelligently argued case why the link shouldn’t be shared in this instance. That being said, one could instead link to https://web.archive.org/web/20080718084442/http://lucis.net/stuff/clarke/star_clarke.html https://web.archive.org/web/20080718084442/http://lucis.net/..., where the story is “reprinted by permisssion”.
Rebelgecko 3y ago
My ouji board said Arthur was cool with it
marstall 3y ago
it might be no big deal to link to one pirated short story - but multiply that times the internet and writers are getting shafted out of royalties. You can say arthur clarke has passed on - but part of the way he was rewarded in his life was through licensing the copyright of his works to publishers, and copyright extends to 50 years after death, last time i checked. and diminishing publishers' ability to make money off their licensed works diminishes our ability as a society to support artists in their work. I see support for nytimes here vs. chatgpt - isn't that the same thing as this, just on a different scale?

nine_k 3y ago

Maybe this copy is put out with a permission?

amanaplanacanal 3y ago
Exactly! From what I can tell, there is no way to tell the actually copyright or licensing status of anything you find on the internet, you can only guess.

pjbeam 3y ago

Seems like the University of Northern Iowa's concern, no?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

whythre 3y ago

Better call the police. Seriously though, Clark died in 2008; it isn’t like he is being victimized.

bear141 3y ago

Thank you for your vigilance, Hall Monitor.

pb060 3y ago

I know you shouldn’t comment about votes, but why downvotes? You might be against copyright in certain cases but technically, if not legally, the point holds.

chernevik 3y ago
Because downvotes are heavily used to say "I don't like this" rather than "this is not relevant". I've complained to HN about this and proposed solutions. They don't care.
layer8 3y ago
The comment seems to assume that most everyone would agree that such sharing of the link should not be taking place due to copyright reasons. That is an absurd assumption to make, to everyone who has been around the internet for a bit. It would be different if the commenter would be trying to make an actual, intelligently argued case why the link shouldn’t be shared in this instance. That being said, one could instead link to https://web.archive.org/web/20080718084442/http://lucis.net/stuff/clarke/star_clarke.html https://web.archive.org/web/20080718084442/http://lucis.net/..., where the story is “reprinted by permisssion”.

Rebelgecko 3y ago

My ouji board said Arthur was cool with it

marstall 3y ago

it might be no big deal to link to one pirated short story - but multiply that times the internet and writers are getting shafted out of royalties. You can say arthur clarke has passed on - but part of the way he was rewarded in his life was through licensing the copyright of his works to publishers, and copyright extends to 50 years after death, last time i checked. and diminishing publishers' ability to make money off their licensed works diminishes our ability as a society to support artists in their work. I see support for nytimes here vs. chatgpt - isn't that the same thing as this, just on a different scale?