One question :)

One question :)

Posted by: darkalpha
Posted on: 2007-08-19 05:24:00

Hi, Im thinking about registering on this hosting service, but before I do that I must known if can I upload anime on this server without any consequences.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: infinitaus
Posted on: 2007-08-19 05:41:00

Unfortunately, no. You will be breaking the terms by uploading anime onto your DreamHost account and may get your account suspended. You may wish to refer to DreamHost's Terms of Service. If you meant posting links to anime

Re: One question :)

Posted by: darkalpha
Posted on: 2007-08-19 06:31:00

Mhm ok, but we can upload not licensed anime in USA? :P

Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-19 07:40:00

In reply to:

Mhm ok, but we can upload not licensed anime in USA? :P


If you upload anything that you don't have permission to distribute, either because of copyright or licensing restrictions, or because it is illegal (such as child pornography), then you risk having your account immediately terminated. If you own the right to distribute the anime you have no problem. If you are expecting consequences, my guess is that you are trying to do something you shouldn't be.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: monkeyboy7706
Posted on: 2007-08-19 07:41:00

Basically you can only upload it if you have permission from the copyright holder or if you have created it yourself.

More codes

Re: One question :)

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-19 10:58:00

In reply to:

Mhm ok, but we can upload not licensed anime in USA? :P


The main questions are:
1. Is it legal?
2. Will the copyright holder exert his or her right to restrict distribution?

DreamHost is based in California and does comply with the DMCA. If they are served and as a result they do find that you are in violation of their Terms of Service, your account will be terminated.

Read the DreamHost Abuse Center's detailed section on copyright infringement. It is amazingly detailed and clear on DreamHost's position.

Even if the copyright holder doesn't send a notice and your site does post content in violation of copyright and DreamHost "notices", you will have trouble.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-19 17:55:00

You can upload almost anything. It's downloads by others that can get you in trouble. :-)

Re: One question :)

Posted by: matttail
Posted on: 2007-08-19 18:07:00

In reply to:

You can upload almost anything. It's downloads by others that can get you in trouble. :-)



That is a guess as to getting caught or not - that doesn't effect it's legality. Listen to above posters, not this.



--Matttail
art.googlies.net - personal website

Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-19 18:10:00

In reply to:

You can upload almost anything. It's downloads by others that can get you in trouble.


That's not really the case, Bob. From a legal standpoint, uploading copyrighted material is basically synonymous with illegally copying with an intent to distribute. In fact, you will find that organizations are more likely to pursue the uploaders than the downloaders because it is a more successful strategy for stopping piracy.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-19 18:48:00

Actually, Pee-wee, if nobody downloads something, then nobody knows it's there, and nothing can happen.

BTW, Pee-wee, while you're playing copyright expert, why don't you tell about how you uploaded a Pink Floyd picture to the wiki, and it was deleted by Dreamhost because of copyright concerns. Or even better, don't.


Re: One question :)

Posted by: seiler
Posted on: 2007-08-19 20:29:00

In reply to:

You can upload almost anything. It's downloads by others that can get you in trouble. :-)


In reply to:

why don't you tell about how you uploaded a Pink Floyd picture to the wiki, and it was deleted by Dreamhost because of copyright concerns.


Are you disagreeing with yourself?

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 03:34:00

> Are you disagreeing with yourself?

Are you? ;-)

The Pink Floyd picture was viewed (i.e. downloaded) by people, which got it in trouble.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 04:57:00

In reply to:

Are you disagreeing with yourself?


He probably doesn't see it that way. He appears to me to know no more about copyright law than he does about trademark law, or defamation. wink

For instance,

In reply to:

if nobody downloads something, then nobody knows it's there, and nothing can happen.


is just hopelessly incorrect, and reflects complete ignorance of the issues involved, be they legal or technical.

Generally, it is best to just ignore such ignorant remarks, but to do so in this case might have contributed to the OP being grievously misled about his potential for trouble, so I suppose it needed to be responded to. People tend to "hear" what they want to hear, and I'd hate to see the OP rely on *that* statement.

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 05:06:00

In reply to:

In fact, you will find that organizations are more likely to pursue the uploaders than the downloaders because it is a more successful strategy for stopping piracy.


That is a provably true statement when it comes to the RIAA and the MPAA when it comes to their war on P2P file exchange.

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 06:24:00

In reply to:

Actually, Pee-wee


Name-calling is extremely rude and childish, Bob. When addressing me in a public forum directly, you are welcome to use my first name (Simon) or my user name (scjessey). I would rather you refrained from using "Pee-wee" as I see it as a personal attack.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:00:00

In reply to:

as I see it as a personal attack.


I would rather you take down your "special" site, Pee-wee, and stop addressing me by anything other than my userID, as I see those as more serious personal attacks, versus a friendly little nick-name like Pee-wee.


Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:05:00

You just can't see it in any way other than uploads AND downloads. Think of the example of uploading backups, where nobody but the uploader will download it. Especially when encrypted, it should be pretty safe. The other angles were already covered. I suppose it's true that humorless (re: ":-)" ) or foolish may seize the "wrong" interpretation, but they're bound for trouble anyway.


Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:25:00

In reply to:

I would rather you take down your "special" site, Pee-wee, and stop addressing me by anything other than my userID, as I see those as more serious personal attacks, versus a friendly little nick-name like Pee-wee.


You have previously identified yourself as "Bob Smith", so I have courteously referred to you as "Bob" since then. How is that a personal attack? Would you prefer Robert, or Mr. Smith? Which userID would you like me to address you as? The one I am most familiar with is ardco (which is also the most prolific).

Since you now use sock puppets in an attempt to conceal your identity when you make inflammatory posts, I began keeping a list of them so that I could keep track of them all. The genie is out of the bottle, and getting DreamHost to delete identities is not going to help you. Nor will sending me threats.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:29:00

In reply to:

I would rather you take down your "special" site, Pee-wee, and stop addressing me by anything other than my userID ...


That's an interesting thought. Which "UserID" would you like people to use - or are you really talking about your forum Username(s), and which of those would you prefer we use?

I, for one, have no intention whatsoever of "pretending" to be talking with different people if I exchange posts with one of your puppets - I'm still interacting with *you* irrespective of who you choose to call yourself in a given context.

Maybe it would be less confusing for everyone if I just went back to referring to you with the username you used on these forums for over 2,000 posts, over a period of several years, or if I just hyphenated all your usernames into a single "mega-persona".

It seems pretty obvious to me that if you don't want people to refer to you in a manner that lumps all your puppets into a single "entity", for convenience of reference and history, you could just pick a username and use it.

Since you don't want to do that, you can hardly blame anyone for "addressing" you as any and/or all of the usernames you employ here or even a completely different "catch-all", like "Bob".

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:39:00

In reply to:

Since you now use sock puppets in an attempt to conceal your identity when you make inflammatory posts ..


I agree that it might appear that is the reason for the puppetry, but there could be other reasons.

An obvious one that comes to mind is the expanded distribution of promo codes in the various puppets' sigs ... shocked

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 09:43:00

In reply to:

An obvious one that comes to mind is the expanded distribution of promo codes in the various puppets' sigs



Surely not! Wouldn't that be regarded as incredibly dishonest and deceitful?


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:13:00

In reply to:

Surely not! Wouldn't that be regarded as incredibly dishonest and deceitful?


Well, apparently not by some! wink

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:19:00

Well, RLParker,

As long as we're all introducing ourselves, isn't it about time you acknowledged who you are, since you obviously want everybody to "expose" themselves like Pee-wee.

You're here for advertising and drumming up business, right. Don't be shy; is this you? How's biz?

Robert L. Parker, Jr.
6400 Canoga Avenue
Suite 300
Woodland Hills, California 91367
(626) 256-2938
email: rlparker@rlparker.com



Re: One question :)

Posted by: seiler
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:30:00

From the TOS:

In reply to:

Customer may only use DreamHost Web Hosting's Server for lawful purpose. Transmission of any material in violation of any Country, Federal, State or Local regulation is prohibited. To this effect, child pornography is strictly prohibited as well as housing any copyrighted information (to which the customer does not hold the copyright) on DreamHost Web Hosting's Server.


Seems to contradict the whole "uploading is fine" theory.

Do you really not see how a new user would be better off following the TOS they're agreeing to when the sign-up, rather than the exact opposite?

Sure, you'll be there to console them when they come back to the forum crying about how their account was just unfairly disabled... but that shoulder to cry on isn't going to get their sites back up, or grant them access to their files, mail, etc...

Yes, you can get away with stuff, or the internet would be trouble-free... but that doesn't change the TOS, or the fact that advising people that it's okay to break it is a bad idea.

You also don't need to catch a junkie (downloader) buying drugs from a dealer (uploader) to charge the dealer with possession with intent to sell/distribute. Crazy, huh?

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:37:00

I think the protocol says after Pee-wee and Robert Parker take the thread completely off-topic, then we're supposed to stop discussing the original topic completely. Don't let me stop you from flogging it more though.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:41:00

In reply to:

is this you?


I am astounded that you would post a private address and telephone number in an open, searchable discussion forum.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: seiler
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:46:00

It shouldn't have needed to be discussed at all.

By the way, don't forget to attack mattail--he also pointed out how bad your advice was.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:49:00

I would be astounded if even 10% of what you post is intended to be true, and is accurate.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 10:55:00

> By the way, don't forget to attack mattail--he also pointed out how bad your advice was.

You shouldn't take the "flogging" comment as an attack; it wasn't intended as one. Neither was matttail's (3 t's) statement, or at least I don't take take disagreement with facts as an attack.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: macinarizona
Posted on: 2007-08-20 11:21:00

I wonder how all of this is going to work with DRM-free thumbdrives. Can't you upload files to files forever....I am assuming I can house my drm-free mp3s there as a backup...or am I wrong?

b

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 11:22:00

> An obvious one that comes to mind is the expanded distribution of promo codes in the various puppets' sigs ...

You know, Robert, I'll give you a break because it just "came to mind," which is surprising since you seem to think about puppets a lot, but I have to call you on that one - it doesn't make any sense.

Since it's "obvious" please keep the explanation short. Thanks.


Re: One question :)

Posted by: seiler
Posted on: 2007-08-20 11:23:00

Just pointing out that he's the only one that calls you out without getting a reply. I was more concerned for his emotional well-being, as he's probably feeling left out and unloved.

He wasn't disagreeing with "facts." He was disagreeing with your post. The "fact" is that your post is the exact opposite of what's clearly stated in the TOS, which is what customers are held to when they sign up.

Are you saying that's not the case?

Would you guess that more users have been booted for doing exactly as the TOS says, or for doing the exact opposite?

I gave you your credit with the "Yes, you can get away with stuff" part of my last post, but that doesn't change anything. You can get away with murder too, but doing so doesn't rewrite the law.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-20 11:43:00

In reply to:

You can upload almost anything. It's downloads by others that can get you in trouble. :-)


In reply to:

That is a guess as to getting caught or not - that doesn't effect it's legality. Listen to above posters, not this.


To Dark, the OP: According to my read of your original post, you intend to upload with the intent to distribute material on a public website. If you don't explicitly have the right to do so, your account will be deemed in violation of the Terms of Service and canceled. Note that there are a lot of details in this that I'm not going to cover. If the material is in the public domain or is not copyrighted at all, then you should be fine. Because of the provisions of the DMCA, you should be proactive in declaring the copyright status of questionable material lest you become "guilty before proven innocent." I'm not going to inject my opinion of this state of affairs.

To anyone else using this thread as a reference: The crux of matter that will get you in trouble is the publishing of material on a website. The act of uploading or downloading is less relevant than whether you make the material available. As a matter of practicality, this has meant that most people here think that backups for personal use are acceptable - both uploading them as backup and downloading them as recovery. Note that this is personal and practical opinion and does not constitute advice, either personal or professional.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 11:58:00

In reply to:

As long as we're all introducing ourselves, isn't it about time you acknowledged who you are, since you obviously want everybody to "expose" themselves like Pee-wee.


As far as I'm aware, I have *always* "acknowledged" who I am - I've been "rlparker" on these forums for years, are you confused about that or do you think I have pretended to be someone else?

You seem to be pretty confused about what you think I "want" - I'd be tickled if Angelina Jolie "exposed" *herself*more often, or maybe in my swimming pool, to be sure, but other than that, I could care less about who "exposes" themselves. wink

Who you "really" are is of absolutely no interest to me, and never has been. It's your duplicitous attempt to be "different people" at different times on these forums that I take issue with, and you have known that for years. Yeah, I know you claim that you use your puppets in "non-pejorative" ways, but I believe your posting record (at least what's left of it after the "death" of "Ardco") indicates otherwise.

Woot! your ability to "google up" that webpage address information is *rich*! Who would have imagined that someone doing business on the web for over 10 years might actually actually have one of their sites located by someone using a search engine ?shocked

And thinking to research a username someone has used consistently for 10 years to help locate that site was an amazing piece of detective work! Wow! I'm impressed - ha ha. You know, it never even dawned on me that anyone who could operate a computer with an internet connection *could'nt* do that! In fact, I just automatically assumed they could, and would, if they were interested and I never even cared. Silly, silly me! The intarWebs *are* an amazing place, eh?

Somebody probably ought to update that page one of these days. Seems that the old saw, "cobblers' children have no shoes" might have an element of truth to it! Maybe when business gets slow enough for me to spare the time, I'll update that old thing to current web standards. It's a low priority for me though, as no one pays me to "fix" that page, and it's current sad condition has not impacted my business at all. Hell, maybe it's a kind of "badge of honor" from having been there way back then.

Since it has not impacted my business negatively, it does almost seem like that page doesn't even need to contain all that contact information that is so sadly out of date (unlike that on some of your easily locatable online information.) smile

Of course, I decline to post such that information here about *you* as these forums provide profiles where users can share whatever they want, and none of your recent puppets have chosen to share any information. Besides, there's always Google, so what would be the point? "Inquiring minds" can find more than they need to know easily enough on the web.

While one could argue that it's really poor form to broadcast email addresses in open forums, that behavior on your part doesn't surprise me at all, I've been expecting it and I have really good spam filters so, meh wink

In reply to:

You're here for advertising and drumming up business, right. Don't be shy; is this you? How's biz?


No, sorry to disappoint, but I'm here to help others when I can in an effort to "pay it forward" for the way many helped me. When I was just starting out on the web, *years* before I ever did any web development work, as well as in the early days of my web development business, many old-time wizards helped me, and I always said that when I could afford to do it, and when I had knowledge to share, I would return the favor. The fact that you can't seem to believe that is really interesting, though a little sad - I'd hate to go through life being so cynical that I had to assign an ulterior motive to every act that appears to be altruistic.

I've never posted a referral code or a promo code in a sig, here or anywhere else on the web. I have posted about why I *don't* and if you go back to your "Ardco" days and look at a thread we both participated in, you could probably find it. You know I *did* once create a special promo code for a potential customer who wanted a "custom packaged one" and asked for it on the forums in the wee hours of the morning - I thought it would be nice for him to get it right away, and it was a "max discount value" anyway, so meh - I was just trying to help him out (I wonder if I ever got any secondary referrals out of that one?).

Actually, my business is fine, thanks for asking. Hey, it gives me time to hang out here and offer help when I can (*and* dick around with you now and again). While I'm always on the lookout for interesting and/or profitable projects, I turn down potential business inquiries from these forums on an infrequent but fairly regular basis - they never seem to present themselves at a time when I can take them on because of my other workload, and like said before, that's not why I post here anyway. wink.

Of course, I can't help but wonder why you are asking these questions - I still have PM's in my mailbox from quite a while ago where I explained much of this to you in private. If you really want to "air things out", maybe I ought to just post those and let Google at 'em, so *everyone* can share! wink

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: rlparker
Posted on: 2007-08-20 12:19:00

In reply to:

Since it's "obvious" please keep the explanation short. Thanks.


For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible. You're Welcome!

--rlparker

Re: One question :)

Posted by: matttail
Posted on: 2007-08-20 12:21:00

In reply to:

By the way, don't forget to attack mattail--he also pointed out how bad your advice was.


Don't worry, I'm not feeling left out. These posts are often fun to read, though I have long thought that if people could just ignore the Troll's bait he would go away.

What the poor OP must be thinking though - he posts "one question" and it turns into a 2 page flaming session. Just encase the OP is still reading this, don't feel bad - this has happened in several threads before.

In fact we should perhaps have one thread for all of these fun posts. We'll put it in the OT section, "Ardco-Bob-anonymous2-whatever V.S. Discussion board" Then anytime someone feels like having fun just quote the offending user and carry on. Who knows - that might really take off, we might get as many posts as the massive word association thread.

anyways, do carry on and feel free to continue to leave me out - or include me. Whatever your little heart desires.



--Matttail
art.googlies.net - personal website
Edited by matttail on 08/20/07 12:27 PM (server time).

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 16:25:00

I think you protest too much.

> For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

OK, so you're saying you *really* hate to admit when you're mistaken, and you're just being a dick = jerk = troll.

> I'd hate to go through life being so cynical that I had to assign an ulterior motive to every act that appears to be altruistic.

And yet you often do, and so, you are living what you'd hate to.



Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 17:26:00

> ... I began keeping a list of them so that I could keep track of them all.

I'm curious about something, Pee-wee. What do you want from this? How do you gain?

Don't you think having people see Simon Jessey is untrustworthy, with cyber-stalker tendencies will make them assume Keystone websites probably uses deceptive practices too.

ANONYMOUS0=>Max Discount ANONYMOUS2=>Max - $1. Being mean doesn't make you look smarter than him. And bigoted remarks are not appreciated on this forum.Edited by Anonymous2 on 08/20/07 05:34 PM (server time).

Re: One question :)

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-20 17:50:00

Marissa Mayer, Director of Consumer Web Products for Google, wrote on the official Google Blog in September 2005:

In reply to:

We don't condone the practice of Google bombing, or any other action that seeks to affect the integrity of our search results, but we're also reluctant to alter our results by hand in order to prevent such items from showing up. Pranks like this may be distracting to some, but they don't affect the overall quality of our search service, whose objectivity, as always, remains the core of our mission.


Re: One question :)

Posted by: scjessey
Posted on: 2007-08-20 17:53:00

In reply to:

Don't you think having people see Simon Jessey is untrustworthy, with cyber-stalker tendencies will make them assume Keystone websites probably uses deceptive practices too.



Thank you for linking to my websites, Bob. I'm well aware of what you are attempting to do, but probably all it will do is imperceptibly improve my PageRank.


-- si-blog --

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 18:12:00

That's great, Pee-wee, I forgot you read minds. I don't:

So, what do you want from this? How do you gain?

Re: One question :)

Posted by: Lensman
Posted on: 2007-08-20 18:14:00

In reply to:

Don't you think ...


BTW, fwiw I think this post is simply a nasty piece of work. I can't imagine the amount of ire that had to build up in order for someone to be so mean spirited.

It's unfortunate that yet another thread has devolved to where it's likely to have to be deleted. Read it while you can.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: seiler
Posted on: 2007-08-20 18:25:00

In reply to:

You're here for advertising and drumming up business, right.


How is he drumming up business?

You also fail to see the difference between going out of your way to dig up info on others, to post here for no apparent reason, and people simply repeating info you've put here yourself.

The only time I've seen his personal info posted before was the last time you posted it.

You on the other hand, chose ardco as your user name and had this as your signature to "drum up business":

In reply to:

ARDCO Templates by QuiltSmith, Ltd.
http://www.ardcotemplates.com/


During that time, you at least seemed to try being helpful and contributing to the board, while promoting the business. But once Dreamhost promo codes kicked you off the gravy train, taking away the ability to wrap answers in affiliate links to set/overwrite referrer cookies, ardco starts to fade out and make room for several troll accounts.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to simply not take on a new personality that would embarrass the business you promoted, rather than expect the rest of the world to play along with this nonsense? Seriously, how many other adults do you know that need so many user accounts to troll a single forum?

And about that funny "notice" you sent some of us... For someone that thinks people should be able to break laws at Dreamhost with loopholes like "uploading is fine," and simply ignore the rules, it's funny how pro-censorship you are when trying to get people to stop saying a word that YOU introduced us to. There's no way you really thought it was a trademark issue, but nice try.

Also, wouldn't your behavior here resemble the behavior you complain about when posting as Se7enOf9? I'm referring to the conversation you're having with yourself in the off-topic forum.

Anyway, someone that truly wanted to disassociate a type of behavior with a name he created, would probably drop the behavior. But that wouldn't be as fun as posting irrelevant info about others that haven't posted here themselves--unlike how you spread your own info all over the forum for years, then play the role of victim when someone repeats it.

Seriously, let's see if your harassment works if you limit your ammo to what's on this forum.

I think that pretty much covers it, so I guess you can go ask Jeff to come clean up your mess for you again.

Re: One question :)

Posted by: anonymous2
Posted on: 2007-08-20 19:25:00

>> I can't imagine the amount of ire that had to build up in order for someone to be so mean spirited.

But nothing to say about Pee-wee and his "special" site. Hmm. That post is almost nothing. Ire and mean spirited would be making another "special" site about Pee-wee, or publishing private communications, or piling on like Seiler and Parker, just to dick around.

Tags: one questionhosting serviceconsequencesanime