locked - IP rights violations

[bamabenz]

I've participated on a few boards over the years.
I understand that boards are privately owned and operated.

I've seen users banned when they've been rude and disruptive.
I've even seen posts removed when they involved advertisers.

But I haven't seen a topic locked due to alleged IP violations.
To be clear, it certainly looks like this particular creator is sorta clueless and may not have the rights he needs, at least in the USA (where KS is located).

Or maybe not:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/37 ... d/comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Not for me to say.

But what purpose does locking the topic serve?
If we don't talk about it it's not really happening?
What's the agenda here?

[Mike Ratledge]

If I simply removed it (I received a valid "DMCA Takedown" request from the owner of the IP rights, complete with the legalese), It would not be apparent where it went or why. I'll remove it after a few days, I just didn't want them or anyone else to start another topic that I have to go chase down, and frankly - he's a nice guy, just hadn't done his homework.

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act we/you/I have a fiduciary responsibility to protect the IP rights holder(s) from harm, and letting this discussion go on after it was flagged as being a violation doesn't help us or him nor the IP right holders. It's not intended to embarrass him, just reading his freehand interpretation of the law (in your link, which I already had seen before he posted it) doesn't prove anything except that he disagrees with the legally binding document I received. IANAL, but I can read and follow directions.

[bamabenz]

Mike,

Ok,I get it -- you received a takedown notice. While I find these abhorrent, I don't expect you to fight it.
But these notices cover specific items, not conversations -- which is which this board is about, right?
So removing specific images is entirely appropriate, but killing the conversation isn't.
So why not do that -- remove the images but leave the topic open?
It would also be a service to many members of this board if you posted the actual takedown notice that you received.

I have no opinion in this particular instance, I don't personally like the deck and have not backed it.
And I respect JR for working with the estate and getting the rights.
I hope he prints many, many of these decks -- perhaps even new versions in the coming years.

But I'd also note that takedown notices are only claims, not rulings of the law.
The motion picture studios are infamous for using them arbitrarily and improperly.
If there are those who want to argue about them, why not let them?

Its also possible for the Museum deck to remove specific infringing images, names, etc and still produce a deck.

Finally, this campaign is at this moment still live -- KS has not removed it.

/bama