|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
There have been some excellent well informed points made in this
discussion, across the various threads, many of which are correct.
IMO it comes down to our personal point of view ... where we stand on
these ethical issues (as indicated by Tomasz's post of yesterday).
The fact is that community opinion is divided and polarized on the
subject, particularly in the software and internet domains where the
battle is being waged.
That is why I made the point earlier, that as a software program like
AB grows it's customer base, there will be an increase in dissension
and misunderstanding over copyright issues (once code starts to go
into an explicit copyright environment the cycle of resentment will
begin).
The fact that the Yahoo group forum is technically an explicit
copyright zone is not as contentious, because it is a community site
where open use is implicit, no advertising exists (outside of the
owners ads) and no fee is charged, compared to privately owned
explicite copyright zonea where a fee is charged.
Only the developer can do anything about it, according to their
personal point of view, via the licensing mechanism.
Also whether 'code' can be copyrighted, in all countries and under
all situations is not as clear cut as some seem to think.
I am not disagreeing with you or others.
Hope people won't see me as being immoral, or mean spirited, but IMO
some issues they we are skirting around should be placed on the table
(at random):
- many elect not to post copies of books, systems etc out of respect
for the author, and their effort, and not because of any threatened
big stick i.e. they are self regulating users
- the US court rulings only have jurisdiction in the states (unless
transposed to international patent law)
- in reality virtual citizens can, and do, make it difficult for the
internet cops to find and prosecute them
- the value of trading systems, books etc is very small relative to
the legal costs of pursuing people alleged to have transgressed
- in many cases the chances of the winners, in a court case,
receiving any compensation are almost zero
- people who live in low income countries and who are struggling to
feed themselves, or their families, aren't going to make the
same 'moral' judgements as those who live in affluent countries
(there is a world wide conflict going on between the haves and the
have nots which can't be ignored)
- there is a whole new generation, in the developed world, who don't
buy into the values of the past (doubt if they will) ... they aren't
vocal they just walk away from it
- citizens will silently oppose the law if they consider it to be an
ass
- much of the sophisticated 'internet anarchy' originates in the
developed countries?
- internet plagiarism will never be stopped .... no area of law has
100% cleanup rates ... nor can they ever hire enough police
- internationl internet law is in its infancy
- if customers needs aren't meet, on the net, they will privately
take it into their own hands and will co-operate with like minded
peers
- the more pressure is bought to bear on the virtual citizen to
complywith laws they don't buy into the more they will go underground
It is no good hiding our head in the sands or thinking that the old
models will serve us going forward into the new IT age.
Example:
- music copyright is black and white
- everyone knows the Beatles wrote and recorded "Yellow Submarine"
and that it is an offence to download an ecopy of them performing it
- every single personal computer on the net has an illegal copy of a
song downloaded onto it, except mine of course O:-)
(shock horror who are the criminals who are doing this?)
- music corporates have whinged about it, campaigned against it,
fiddled with the laws, prosecuted a couple of the 'ringleaders' as a
jolly good lesson for everyone else to take note of etc
Music file sharing continues unabated ... it is the cultural norm and
it is the existing paradigms that are lagging the culture.
brian_z
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ohneclue <ohneclue@xxx> wrote:
>
> You bet there is a copyright on them. Once someone publishes a
review of a book in any format, i.e, print, electronic, they own the
copyright to those words that they wrote.
>
> Try and take some of the "public domain" information and sell it as
your own and you'll soon find out they are NOT in the public domain
for that. You can buy the book, set up the formulas and follow them
to your financial ruin or remineration but they are STILL copyrighted
works.
>
> Judith
>
> ________________________________
> From: Michel Guibert <michelg14@xxx>
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 3:25:59 PM
> Subject: RE: [amibroker] Re: COPYRIGHT
>
>
> If I follow all the copyright , I can't do anything , everybody has
done everything before me.
> Many formulas were published in many books or review and you think
there is copyright on them ???
> Personnaly when they are published in a review I consider them in
the public domain.
>
> MG
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> From: ohneclue@xxxxxx com
> Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:05:28 -0800
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: COPYRIGHT
>
>
>
> Whenever you write something, you own the copyright to it such --
even these posts are the IP of the individual poster and they own the
copyright to the contents. Yahoo does not own it, the group owner
does not own it and in the Yahoo TOS, this is so stated.
>
> In another group that suffers from overt estrogen overloaded, 1
person wrote a guide, lifted whole posts of other members and put
them in her guide (without credit or permission) that she sold and
was called on it. The person who was charging for the information
had to refund money and revise her guide to be strictly and
exclusively her own words. That is an example of copyright violation.
>
> I use and quote George C Lane and his application of the stochastic
formula all the time and it is NOT a violation of copyright because
the settings are mine that I have played around with, I give credit
where I have learned something from someone else such as David
Elliott about stochastics settings, etc., and don't lift entire
paragraphs or words in the same series as their works. These are not
copyright violations. These come under the fair and free use concept.
>
> If I am discussing something from a trading book or manual that is
copyrighted and put it into my own words even though it is not my
original idea, that is not a violation of copyright.
>
> If I write a book or prepare a PP presentation and pass the work
off as my own when it is based on someone else's work and the charts
are THEIRS I lifted entirely, word for word or exactly the same
indicator settings, other than my own stochastic settings I've
developed, and sell it, that is a violation of copyright.
>
> The two elements are: passing stuff off as your own when you
copied it from someone else and selling it as your own idea.
>
> Judith
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Barry Scarborough <razzbarry@xxxxxxxxx .us>
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 10:32:28 PM
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: COPYRIGHT
>
>
> No. It appears there is a lot of confusion on copyright laws. A
good
> discussion is at http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Copyrights. OF
course
> this isn't official but it is an easier read than the law books.
> People like Wilder published his works so others could benefit from
> his discoveries. What the copyright laws do is prevent someone from
> copying his work and selling it. But the intellectual property he
> disclosed is for our use. Why else would he publish it?
>
> Barry
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com, "binjobingo" <binjobingo@ ...>
wrote:
> >
> > Does referring to Wilder's Relative strength Indicator,or Lane's
> > Stochastics, or Chande's Vidya & so on lead to copyright
violation?
> >
> > Say one reads An Author's book & am not able to write AFL for the
> > Indicators & so ask the forum members to write it for me Is it
> > copyright violation?
> >
> > If one give a link to the Website say some other website which
> > explains the parameters & use of the said "indicator" but the
> website
> > may not be owned by the Author himself does it lead to copyright
> > violation ?
> >
> > If it is so I think all the forums would close down & nobody would
> > discuss their trading strategy since trading strategies use some
> > Indicator by some author.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Win a trip with your 3 best buddies. Enter today.
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
*********************
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
*********************
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
*********************************
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|