(Topic ID: 98746)

Clay's Guides - are they ever coming back?


By Atomicboy

5 years ago



Topic Stats

  • 277 posts
  • 102 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 5 years ago by pmWolf
  • Topic is favorited by 14 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic Gallery

    There have been 7 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

    645_2.jpg
    k9640514.jpg
    1392.gif
    popcorn.jpg
    ZIG.jpg
    CRG 006.jpg
    dead-horse.jpg

    This topic is closed.

    There are 277 posts in this topic. You are on page 3 of 6.
    #101 5 years ago

    I'm no intellectual property attorney, but I think linking someone to the guides online is fine. It's the printing and selling that would be a no-no. I could be wrong.

    If you search around online, you'll find the guides.

    #102 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    I'm no intellectual property attorney, but I think linking someone to the guides online is fine. It's the printing and selling that would be a no-no. I could be wrong.
    If you search around online, you'll find the guides.

    Lookup contributory copyright infringement.

    -1
    #103 5 years ago
    Quoted from radium:

    Lookup contributory copyright infringement.

    You cant claim any of this until they've been copyrighted. So until that happens, who cares.

    I.e. You can't claim copy write infringement until there is a copyright to infringe upon

    #104 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    You cant claim any of this until they've been copywrited. So until that happens, who cares.
    I.e. You can't claim copy write infringement until there is a copywrite to infringe upon

    100% untrue.

    -1
    #105 5 years ago

    Has copyright been assigned to this material?

    #106 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    Has copywrite been assigned to this material?

    The moment it is written, the writer owns the copy.

    -1
    #107 5 years ago

    Pretty sure The writer needs to register his material to claim copyright rights

    He owns the rights to copyright it.

    #108 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    The moment it is written, the writer owns the copy.

    Great, a new mark I can use.

    LTG : )©

    #109 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    Pretty sure The writer needs to register his material to claim copywrite rights

    You are pretty wrong. Copyright is an official proof of ownership, but it's not the act of claiming ownership.

    You own what you create the moment you create it.

    #110 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    Has copywrite been assigned to this material?

    Copywrite ownership doesn't have to be assigned. It's automatically property the creator when they make something.

    That being said I think it's weird that someone would get so upset over a photos of pinball machine parts to harass someone into removing their entire website.

    #111 5 years ago

    Alt + 0169. I put it on my work all the time and have never officially "Registered" anything.

    #112 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    You are pretty wrong. Copyright is an official proof of ownership, but it's not the act of claiming ownership.
    You own what you create the moment you create it.

    This is true. The moment you create something, it is copyrighted. You can also register it with the US government, which provides additional benefits in case you have to go to court, but this is not necessary.

    -2
    #113 5 years ago

    We can argue all day about it.

    I believe you own the right to your material, but until you register it, I don't believe a court would entertain anything

    #114 5 years ago
    Quoted from asay:

    That being said I think it's weird that someone would get so upset over a photos of pinball machine parts to harass someone into removing their entire website.

    That's because it did not happen that way.

    Clay took the website down to sell the information to raise money for PPM.

    THAT'S when everyone got upset - when photos and text they gave to Clay for free distribution, was suddenly for sale without their permission.

    #115 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    but until you register it, I don't believe a court would entertain anything

    Also, untrue.

    #116 5 years ago

    I mean, it's true that you believe it, but it's not true in reality.

    #117 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    I mean, it's true that you believe it, but it's not true in reality.

    Lol

    Gotcha.

    Like I said I'm no expert. Just what I've read.

    Hopefully clay doesn't come knocking at my door with a summons

    #118 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    We can argue all day about it.

    Or we can just look at the law:

    http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#mywork

    "
    Do I have to register with your office to be protected?

    No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created.
    "

    #119 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    Lol
    Gotcha.
    Like I said I'm no expert. Just what I've read.
    Hopefully clay doesn't come knocking at my door with a summons

    Someone would have to want to spend a lot of money to want to take you down, really...

    The real reason you wouldn't distribute the material is because you respected the guy who 'owns' it, and he asked you not to. Other than that, there's probably no real risk.

    I'm a songwriter, and I've recorded a couple of albums. I have a friend who likes my songs, and he was kind of upset that he couldn't find any of them on torrents. He asked me if he could put up a torrent with my music. I said that I'd rather he not. If he did anyway, there's nothing I could do about it, but he respects me enough not to do it. See?

    #120 5 years ago

    I give up. You guys win.

    #121 5 years ago

    Something change since you posted this on another forum about Clay OP?

    "Regardless of his beliefs or thoughts, there is a higher standard for those in any form of publication. His is flat out disgusting. I guess I’m the only one who feels this way"

    #122 5 years ago

    I'm getting a headache... you know if somehow I were to receive a copy of said guides in a pm or email.that would be sweet.....

    #123 5 years ago

    I don't know if cfh is still reading this thread, but to cfh...

    Back in 2003 when I got into pinball, your guides were invaluable. They were the basis of everything I learned about pinball repair. In addition to allowing me to repair my first pin, I never would have collected more pins if not for your guides. They gave me knowledge. They gave me courage. In the following years, I pointed many to your site containing the guides and I'm confident they proved just as beneficial. They were, perhaps, the most valuable material available to the pinball community.

    I wish they were still available, both for myself, the benefit of new collectors, and all the pin hobbyists as a whole. I don't think their value can be understated.

    ... Altan (a member of the pinball ninja)

    #124 5 years ago
    Quoted from cody_chunn:

    That was a sticking point for some. They contributed when the guides were free and expected to remain so. When Clay leveraged the guides into a pay-per-view (for lack of a better term), many contributors said they wanted their pics and/or info removed.
    Instead of leaving the guides as a free resource, he chose to take them down instead of editing the documents to eliminate the controversy.
    Now he says it's too much trouble to edit them for no "upside" of doing so. I guess just making them free again like they were has no "upside" for him either.

    Most of the copyright claims were bogus in the first place. I contributed pictures to his guides and gave him full rights. But the uproar over him trying to use the content to help out a noble pinball-related charity put a bad taste in many peoples' mouths. When you try to do something nice for the community, after doing something nice for the community 100x over for more than a decade, and people still talk crap about you, you sometimes wonder why bother?

    #125 5 years ago
    Quoted from Blackbeard:

    I give up. You guys win.

    We all win when we understand how the law works! Especially laws pertaining to the Internet since things like DMCA and Net Neutrality will have long term effects on our economy and liberties going forward. Cheers.

    -1
    #126 5 years ago
    Quoted from KenLayton:

    The Pinwiki is still a good source of information. Is it the best source? No. It could be written better, but it does contain a lot of information and pictures.

    PinWiki has a number of issues:

    1. It's a Wiki... it has no real "verification" or editing process - anyone can edit a page and change some information that could cause a person's machine to be worse off than before. There are no checks-and-balances.

    2. PinWiki is not any more stable or secure than Clay's guides. The site has no clear policy regarding copyright - there is nothing saying the content is put into the public domain - it's clearly owned by somebody (or a bunch of people)

    3. When you click on the "about us" at Pinwiki here's what you see:

    "PinWiki was created for the purpose of holding all things pinball in one location. There is a lot of information available on the Internet for pinball but its scattered everywhere. The goal is to incorporate the many groups of information into one centralized location that can be contributed to by all.

    PinWiki was launched on April 21, 2011 at 9pm officially, kicking off with a wiki and a forum. All information contained in this wiki was added from that date on. "

    The owner(s) of Pinwiki as far as I know are secret, and insist on keeping under the radar, and there's no guarantee the site could go pay or disappear from the Internet at any time.

    Some areas of PinWiki are pretty cool - and I can see some potential, but there is no clear overseer taking responsibility for the legitimacy of the content, and the content is not public domain, so the site is as much a ticking time bomb as Clay's guides. There have been discussions about this over and over.. if the site is really intended on being a true public resource, it should require all content submitted to have clear public domain or CC licensing terms like standard Wikipedia.

    #127 5 years ago
    Quoted from tonycip:

    I'm getting a headache... you know if somehow I were to receive a copy of said guides in a pm or email.that would be sweet.....

    And this is a good example of why Clay probably doesn't want to go through this again. He posted here in this thread that the guides are his and don't ask for them to be pirated, and someone does. It's so disrespectful to him. When the community thinks they're entitled to steal other peoples' hard work, it makes everybody else that less motivated to give back to the community.

    Treat other people the way you'd like to be treated. If you create something that you reserve the rights to control access to, give other people the same consideration.

    #128 5 years ago
    Quoted from vid1900:

    That's because it did not happen that way.
    Clay took the website down to sell the information to raise money for PPM.
    THAT'S when everyone got upset - when photos and text they gave to Clay for free distribution, was suddenly for sale without their permission.

    First off, this "everyone" you speak of were a tiny bunch of whiny people, many of whom really weren't even involved in any legitimate claim against him and his work...

    Clay could likely have won the argument legally easily, but PPM succumbed to the faux controversy and rejected Clay's generous contribution. In the end it was incredibly embarrassing that someone who has done so much for the community, and was doing something else really amazing and generous for the pinball community, got crapped on by a small number of outspoken haters.

    I will continue to say those that argued over "copyright" executed the most vile and petty claim I've ever seen. He was trying to help PPM. He was never under any obligation to keep his guides online forever because 1 or 2 dudes gave him a few JPGs. Utter ridiculousness.

    10
    #129 5 years ago
    Quoted from PinballHelp:

    PinWiki has a number of issues:
    1. It's a Wiki... it has no real "verification" or editing process - anyone can edit a page and change some information that could cause a person's machine to be worse off than before. There are no checks-and-balances.
    2. PinWiki is not any more stable or secure than Clay's guides. The site has no clear policy regarding copyright - there is nothing saying the content is put into the public domain - it's clearly owned by somebody (or a bunch of people)
    3. When you click on the "about us" at Pinwiki here's what you see:
    "PinWiki was created for the purpose of holding all things pinball in one location. There is a lot of information available on the Internet for pinball but its scattered everywhere. The goal is to incorporate the many groups of information into one centralized location that can be contributed to by all.
    PinWiki was launched on April 21, 2011 at 9pm officially, kicking off with a wiki and a forum. All information contained in this wiki was added from that date on. "
    The owner(s) of Pinwiki as far as I know are secret, and insist on keeping under the radar, and there's no guarantee the site could go pay or disappear from the Internet at any time.
    Some areas of PinWiki are pretty cool - and I can see some potential, but there is no clear overseer taking responsibility for the legitimacy of the content, and the content is not public domain, so the site is as much a ticking time bomb as Clay's guides. There have been discussions about this over and over.. if the site is really intended on being a true public resource, it should require all content submitted to have clear public domain or CC licensing terms like standard Wikipedia.

    Jesus Christ man...let it go. You've made your point over and over. We get it. We (Wiki authors) don't agree.

    There are a couple of us who regularly "patrol" the Wiki for content validity when new content is added. Some of the older Wiki content still needs to be cleaned up as it was authored before we established a "standard format". If beefing up a particular section of the Wiki could help folks, let me know. I'll prioritize that section higher. Right now, content is added as the main authors come across new info and take new pictures.

    Clay's "guide" wasn't compiled overnight. It takes time to document information in a quality way.

    This pining for Clay's guides comes up about once a year, along with "Steve Young is a <whatever>", and the RGP vs PinSide "conversation".

    I'd rather see people establish a Wiki account and use their energy to add good content.

    Cheerfully submitted...
    --
    Chris Hibler - CARGPB #31
    http://www.Team-EM.com
    http://webpages.charter.net/chibler/Pinball/index.htm
    http://www.PinWiki.com - The Place to go for Pinball Repair Info

    #130 5 years ago
    Quoted from ChrisHibler:

    Jesus Christ man...let it go. You've made your point over and over. We get it. We (Wiki authors) don't agree.

    Why don't you all post an IP policy?

    Why are you so cryptic over who owns the site and who owns the content?

    As long as you're going to promote PinWiki, others are going to want to know why they should contribute and what happens to their contributions?

    This is a basic policy that every other Wiki on the planet has. Why won't you address it?

    This is a very important question. It's not worth "letting go." It has to do with whether or not anyone's contribution on that site ends up being owned by someone else, who the owners are, and what their intentions are. It makes no sense to not outline the site's terms regarding intellectual property. This could be addressed instantly, yet for years, you refuse. Why is that?

    Look, if you simply say, "I put a lot of content in that system. I own the domain, and I reserve the right to that content, and I can do with it what I want to do." then I respect that. But at least say that. I will say that over my site, pinballhelp.com - I own that content, it's mine. I'm going to do what I want to do with it. If PinWiki is your site, why not just say so? Why is it secret?

    #131 5 years ago

    Clay is obviously the undisputed, one-man pin fixing champion of the world. After reading through this thread and all the hassle that he's gone through over those guides, it got me to wondering. Clay has fixed my machines and I have paid him to do so. When he fixed my RFM, I was at work. When I got home, my wife said that it sounded like he was talking to himself in the basement. I really didn't have an explanation. I mean, Clay is Clay, but I had no idea why he might be talking to himself. As it turns out, he was recording my repair and that recording ended up as one of the ninja videos. It never even dawned on me that someone may consider that to be uncouth. I'm sure at least some the other repairs on the Ninja website are of house calls.

    I mean, it doesn't bother me in any way, shape, or form. Hopefully, someone watches the video of my repair and it helps them. Lord knows, I don't have any talent in that area. (That's why I called Clay.) But, legally speaking, does anyone know if having personal property recorded without your knowledge and then used on a pay-to-play website is a no-no as apparently the pics on the guides have run into some intellectual property issues?

    #132 5 years ago
    Quoted from PinballHelp:

    Why don't you all post an IP policy?
    Why are you so cryptic over who owns the site and who owns the content?
    As long as you're going to promote PinWiki, others are going to want to know why they should contribute and what happens to their contributions?
    This is a basic policy that every other Wiki on the planet has. Why won't you address it?
    This is a very important question. It's not worth "letting go." It has to do with whether or not anyone's contribution on that site ends up being owned by someone else, who the owners are, and what their intentions are. It makes no sense to not outline the site's terms regarding intellectual property. This could be addressed instantly, yet for years, you refuse. Why is that?
    Look, if you simply say, "I put a lot of content in that system. I own the domain, and I reserve the right to that content, and I can do with it what I want to do." then I respect that. But at least say that. I will say that over my site, pinballhelp.com - I own that content, it's mine. I'm going to do what I want to do with it. If PinWiki is your site, why not just say so? Why is it secret?

    Is it so hard to believe that there are a few of us who make content available solely to help other pinball hobbyists? People do that on PinSide every day. Vid1900 publishes his "Vid's Ultimate Guide to ...". That's nice of him. As far as I know, he expects nothing in return other than maybe a thank you.

    I don't see your point, and I suppose you'll never see mine. Oh well. I have Wiki pages to author...
    --
    Chris Hibler - CARGPB #31
    http://www.Team-EM.com
    http://webpages.charter.net/chibler/Pinball/index.htm
    http://www.PinWiki.com - The Place to go for Pinball Repair Info

    #133 5 years ago
    Quoted from usandthem:

    Clay is obviously the undisputed, one-man pin fixing champion of the world. After reading through this thread and all the hassle that he's gone through over those guides, it got me to wondering. Clay has fixed my machines and I have paid him to do so. When he fixed my RFM, I was at work. When I got home, my wife said that it sounded like he was talking to himself in the basement. I really didn't have an explanation. I mean, Clay is Clay, but I had no idea why he might be talking to himself. As it turns out, he was recording my repair and that recording ended up as one of the ninja videos. It never even dawned on me that someone may consider that to be uncouth. I'm sure at least some the other repairs on the Ninja website are of house calls.
    I mean, it doesn't bother me in any way, shape, or form. Hopefully, someone watches the video of my repair and it helps them. Lord knows, I don't have any talent in that area. (That's why I called Clay.) But, legally speaking, does anyone know if having personal property recorded without your knowledge and then used on a pay-to-play website is a no-no as apparently the pics on the guides have run into some intellectual property issues?

    Anyone is free to photograph or videotape in public or anything that can be seen from a public vantage point. If private property is open to the public (such as a business or mall), taking video/photos is generally allowed unless igns are posted saying you can't (movie theaters are a good example). The owners can enforce whether or not they allow you to take video/photos and ask you to leave if you don't comply (and have you forcibly removed if necessary).

    In private residences, the owner must give permission for someone to take video/photos. Generally, an invitation into someone's home does not extend a license to take photos/videos without permission. They cannot take photos/video under the guise of being there for something else. In some situations, the person taking photos/video without the owner's permission can be chased down with trespassing charges or anti-voyeurism laws, though this can vary depending on which state.

    If the person taking photos/video has permission from the owner, they would still need to obtain a photo release or agree to a contract in order to be able to use the captured media in a commercial manner.

    As for the example of recording for a pinball repair video (or photo tutorial), I would be happy to allow it under the condition that the video be available for free (ad-supported websites are fine, since the person did the work for the video) and that the interior of my home was to not be shown.

    Post edited by ForceFlow: added example of what I would allow

    #134 5 years ago
    Quoted from ForceFlow:

    Anyone is free to photograph or videotape in public or anything that can be seen from a public vantage point. If private property is open to the public (such as a business or mall), taking video/photos is generally allowed unless signs are posted saying you can't (movie theaters are a good example). The owners can enforce whether or not they allow you to take video/photos and ask you to leave if you don't comply (and have you forcibly removed if necessary).
    In private residences, the owner must give permission for someone to take video/photos. Generally, an invitation into someone's home does not extend a license to take photos/videos without permission. They cannot take photos/video under the guise of being there for something else. In some situations, the person taking photos/video without the owner's permission can be chased down with trespassing charges or anti-voyeurism laws, though this can vary depending on which state.
    If the person taking photos/video has permission from the owner, they would still need to obtain a photo release or agree to a contract in order to be able to use the captured media in a commercial manner.

    Thanks. I kind of figured it would be something like this, but I certainly had no idea what the legalese would be. As, I said, I'm fine with it in this case.

    #135 5 years ago
    Quoted from cody_chunn:

    But it does have to do with money, doesn't it? The people "hassling" you only did so because you leveraged the guides into a pay resource and didn't want their input to the guides prostituted. Isn't that the case, or am I misinformed?
    My problems with your guides have long since been addressed (although the damage had already been done). It is ironic that now you have an interest in copyright protection, whereas when you started you copied other protected IP with no worries.

    The above COmmeNts deserve a <PLONK>!!!

    #136 5 years ago
    Quoted from MrBally:

    The above COmmeNts deserve a <PLONK>!!!

    Dis iss Pinside, ve don't do that here.

    ZIG.jpg

    #137 5 years ago
    Quoted from PinballHelp:

    It's so disrespectful to him. When the community thinks they're entitled to steal other peoples' hard work

    I have bought many of his, this old pinball video's and would have been glad to pay for his guides.
    I'm not one of the idiot's that caused him all the grief to make him stop making it available.
    I think clay has mad skills. and its a shame that the few have ruined it for the many.
    .

    -1
    #138 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    You own what you create the moment you create it.

    This is false. Before it goes into public domain, you have to register it's copyright. You just can't slap a © on whatever.

    If someone steals it, you will have to provide proof that it was yours.

    I had to hire a copyright lawyer several years ago. I speak from experience.

    #139 5 years ago
    Quoted from Magic_Mike:

    This is false. Before it goes into public domain, you have to register it's copyright. You just can't slap a © on whatever.
    If someone steals it, you will have to provide proof that it was yours.
    I had to hire a copyright lawyer several years ago. I speak from experience.

    You have no idea. really.

    -4
    #140 5 years ago
    Quoted from ChrisHibler:

    Is it so hard to believe that there are a few of us who make content available solely to help other pinball hobbyists?

    Then be honest about it and come clean about your intentions and who owns what property.

    Why is that so difficult Chris?

    If it's your intention to own the content on PinWiki.com and reserve the right to monetize it at some point in the future JUST SAY SO, so we can avoid another debacle like people had when Clay tried to monetize his content.

    The irony here is, Clay pulled his guides because people complained about this, and PinWiki popped up to "save the day" and it's positioned to create the exact same mess that Clay was in.

    So if you really want to do the community a favor, make it clear. Do what every other reputable web site and wiki has done and *Post a clear policy regarding who owns what intellectual property*. Until you do that, people have every right to be suspicious of what the site is up to.

    Look, I respect and appreciate your knowledge and contributions. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm encouraging you to adhere to the community standards that your site (assuming it is your site - you continue to be evasive about who owns it) that all other online resources adhere to. Why is that so difficult?

    I have hundreds of repair videos and lots of information to share. But PinWiki.com has no discernable terms of service or IP policy. It would be foolish of me or anybody else to contribute to the site without knowing what the terms are.

    #141 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    You have no idea. really.

    My information was registered legally.

    Believe what you want off the internet and take your chances.

    #142 5 years ago
    Quoted from Magic_Mike:

    This is false. Before it goes into public domain, you have to register it's copyright. You just can't slap a © on whatever.
    If someone steals it, you will have to provide proof that it was yours.
    I had to hire a copyright lawyer several years ago. I speak from experience.

    I believe you're wrong. There is common law copyright and statutory copyright, I think. Common law copyright, I believe, attaches the moment a work of art is created. Statutory copyright, I believe, attaches when you register it.

    #143 5 years ago
    Quoted from wheels:

    I believe you're wrong. There is common law copyright and statutory copyright, I think. Common law copyright, I believe, attaches the moment a work of art is created. Statutory copyright, I believe, attaches when you register it.

    You sure do say, "I believe" a lot!

    #144 5 years ago
    Quoted from Magic_Mike:

    You sure do say, "I believe" a lot!

    I know you're wrong...

    #145 5 years ago
    Quoted from Magic_Mike:

    You sure do say, "I believe" a lot!

    It's a disclaimer. If you would like a legal opinion upon which you can rely, I'll need you to sign a fee agreement!

    #146 5 years ago
    Quoted from Magic_Mike:

    This is false. Before it goes into public domain, you have to register it's copyright. You just can't slap a © on whatever.
    If someone steals it, you will have to provide proof that it was yours.
    I had to hire a copyright lawyer several years ago. I speak from experience.

    No, that is incorrect. The moment you create it, you own the copyright to it--it's automatic. You do not need to do anything in order to claim copyright. However, if you enter a infringement suit, you would need to register the work as a matter of establishing public record. Registering 3 months after creation grants you certain additional rights for recouping legal fees, losses, and damages if your work is part of an infringement suit. Registering also allows you to ban the import of infringing content through US customs. There are some perks to copyright registrations, but it is not required for protection against infringement.

    For anything created or published, the copyright length is the author's life plus 70 years for anything created after 1978. Or, for published works, 95 years from the date of publishing, or 120 years from the date of creation--whichever is shorter. Anything created/published before 1978 has its own set of rules.

    http://copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#protect
    http://copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf

    You need to file for a patent or trademark in order to reap the benifits of legal protections for a patent or trademark.

    #147 5 years ago
    Quoted from ChrisHibler:

    Jesus Christ man...let it go. You've made your point over and over. We get it. We (Wiki authors) don't agree.

    PinballHelp has a valid point that I raised very early, within the first few days of Pinwiki being created. April 22, 2011 to be exact. See this thread:

    http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=180989

    And here:

    https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/pinwiki

    Who owns the content? It is one thing to say, "Nobody, it is free." It is another to spell it out and make it undoubtedly clear that it is free and in what context. Free as in speech? Free as in beer? Early on Casey implied that it would be Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike and GFDL like Wikipedia. The simple reason to do this is so that there are no arguments or about ownership, copyright, or fair use. It is a question that concerned me from the beginning. It is a valid point, and it still concerns me. The fact that it still hasn't been addressed and answered years later is troubling. In the end it may be a middling, nitpicking point. But it needs to be addressed and resolved so that we don't run into problems at a later date. Think problems can't happen? Think again.

    There was already one instance where Pinwiki's server went down and the site disappeared. Content was not available and the mirrors that supposedly existed weren't there. Myself and others started to wonder if this resource had disappeared and we were repeating history (I say that with no disrespect to Clay intended.) From my understanding this incident spurred some action and mirrors are now in place and it isn't an issue, but clarification would be nice. If the site is truly free, anyone could put a mirror back up and resume Pinwiki if it disappeared. Why not tell us if that is the case?

    Basically all we're asking is to officially decide on a license for content, and update the About page and Privacy Policy to reflect it. Do that and all this handwaving and worrying is over and done with.

    Post edited by stangbat: A few edits to clarify.

    #148 5 years ago
    Quoted from ForceFlow:

    You need to file for a patent or trademark in order to reap the benifits of legal protections for a patent or trademark.

    But you don't necessarily have to "file" to claim a trademark or patent.

    http://www.uspto.gov/faq/trademarks.jsp#_Toc275426680

    Must I register my trademark?

    No. You can establish rights in a mark based on use of the mark in commerce, without a registration. However, owning a federal trademark registration on the Principal Register provides several important benefits.

    What are the benefits of federal trademark registration?
    Owning a federal trademark registration on the Principal Register provides several advantages, including:

    Public notice of your claim of ownership of the mark;
    A legal presumption of your ownership of the mark and your exclusive right to use the mark nationwide on or in connection with the goods/services listed in the registration;
    The ability to bring an action concerning the mark in federal court;
    The use of the U.S. registration as a basis to obtain registration in foreign countries;
    The ability to record the U.S. registration with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service to prevent importation of infringing foreign goods;
    The right to use the federal registration symbol ®; and
    Listing in the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s online databases.

    #149 5 years ago
    Quoted from tamoore:

    I know you're wrong...

    Lay off whatever you're drinking in your avatar.

    I have legal established ownership. I can legally send out a C&D to anybody who steals my registered material as well as take them to court for theft and damages.

    If this material wasn't in public domain, I would have not wasted my time to register it.

    I did this to prevent a company I used to work for from using my work as theirs, without my permission.

    #150 5 years ago
    Quoted from stangbat:

    He has a valid point that I raised very early, within the first few days of Pinwiki being created. April 22, 2011 to be exact. See this thread:
    http://forums.arcade-museum.com/showthread.php?t=180989
    And here:
    https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/pinwiki
    Who owns the content? It is one thing to say, "Nobody, it is free." It is another to spell it out and make it undoubtedly clear that it is free and in what context. Free as in speech? Free as in beer? Early on Casey implied that it would be Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike and GFDL like Wikipedia. The simple reason to do this is so that there are no arguments or about ownership, copyright, or fair use. It is a question that concerned me from the beginning. It is a valid point, and it still concerns me. The fact that it still hasn't been addressed and answered years later is troubling. In the end it may be a middling, nitpicking point. But it needs to be addressed and resolved so that we don't run into problems at a later date. Think progblems can't happen? Think again.
    There was already one instance when Pinwiki's server went down and the site disappeared. Content was not available and the mirrors that supposedly existed weren't there. Myself and others started to wonder if this resource had disappeared and we were repeating history (I say that with no disrespect to Clay intended.) From my understanding this incident spurred some action and mirrors are now in place and it isn't an issue, but clarification would be nice.
    Basically all we're asking is to officially decide on a license for content, and update the About page and Privacy Policy to reflect it. Do that and all this handwaving and worrying is over and done with.

    I honestly do not see why they are so secretive about this.

    There is NO GOOD REASON to be evasive on this issue unless the owners of the site are trying to mislead people.

    Ultimately it makes no sense. Because in the absence of an clear licensing/IP agreement, contributors could argue their content is on the site and cannot be exploited without their permission. HOWEVER, if the owners of the site mysteriously make the edit logs disappear, they might be able to "disappear" any evidence that anybody else contributed content to the site, and put the burden on the contributor to prove they added content that is theirs.

    In any case, the whole deal is dubious. Wikipedia would not be in business with an ambiguous policy. And until PinWiki comes clean on who owns what, nobody should contribute to the site, and if nobody is in charge and nobody takes responsibility for the content, who is to know whether anything there is reliable?

    I would love to see this resource prosper. I am happy to contribute, but I'm not going to do so when we don't even know who owns the domain. Why so secret??

    Domain Name: PINWIKI.COM
    Registry Domain ID:
    Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.netearthone.com
    Registrar URL:
    Updated Date: 07-Apr-2014
    Creation Date: 21-Apr-2011
    Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 21-Apr-2015
    Registrar: NetEarth One, Inc.
    Registrar IANA ID: 1005
    Registrar Abuse Contact Email:
    Registrar Abuse Contact Phone:
    Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
    Registry Registrant ID: PP-SP-001
    Registrant Name: Domain Admin
    Registrant Organization: Privacy Protection Service INC d/b/a PrivacyProtect.org
    Registrant Street: C/O ID#10760, PO Box 16 Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to co ntact the domain owner/operator Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to contact the d omain owner/operator
    Registrant City: Nobby Beach
    Registrant State/Province: Queensland
    Registrant Postal Code: QLD 4218
    Registrant Country: AU
    Registrant Phone: +45.36946676
    Registrant Phone Ext:
    Registrant Fax:
    Registrant Fax Ext:
    Registrant Email: contact@privacyprotect.org

    Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
    From: $ 7.00
    Playfield - Protection
    Pinball Haus
    $ 25.00
    Apparel - Unisex
    T-shirt- Grey Color Out of stock
    Project Pinball Charity
    $ 65.00
    Cabinet - (Alt) Translites
    Pinball Haus
    $ 44.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    Lermods
    $ 88.00
    $ 44.99
    Lighting - Interactive
    Lee's Parts
    $ 30.00
    Playfield - Decals
    Mods for your pinballs
    $ 90.00
    Lighting - Led
    Geeteoh Electronics
    From: $ 799.00
    Hardware
    CPR Playfields
    $ 27.99
    Eproms
    Matt's Basement Arcade
    $ 7,599.00
    Pinball Machine
    Operation Pinball
    From: $ 99.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    RGP Models
    $ 38.00
    Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
    ModFather Pinball Mods
    $ 5,799.00
    Pinball Machine
    Operation Pinball
    $ 26.95
    From: $ 42.00
    Cabinet - Shooter Rods
    ModFather Pinball Mods
    From: $ 175.00
    Gameroom - Decorations
    Pinball Photos
    $ 499.00
    Cabinet - Armor And Blades
    Id Rather Play Pinball
    $ 12.00
    Cabinet - Other
    Rock Custom Pinball
    From: $ 445.00
    Cabinet - Armor And Blades
    MI Pinball Refinery
    $ 35.00
    Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
    3D MODS
    $ 119.00
    Lighting - Interactive
    Hookedonpinball.com
    $ 179.99
    $ 15.00
    There are 277 posts in this topic. You are on page 3 of 6.

    This topic is closed.

    Hey there! Got a moment?

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside