GregM

Article about fujita yukihisa, designer of tamiya's r/c lectures

Recommended Posts

Well, it turns out like Tamiyablog's admin does not care too much about the straight facts that he copied the article to his site. From his reactions to my comments, he is not willing to tell ceiling gallery's authour (Dave Kracker) and photographer (Dan Szpara) apart from their imprint page, and from this logic, he isn't acknowledging them as owners of their article.

I don't get it. Do you guys?

 

You know me, guys, usually I'm the one defending Tamiyablog, but this time, I'm just puzzled about Tb's questionable actions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Greg,

unfortunately you used a fake email address when commenting so I couldn't answer you detailed there. To say the truth I also don't really get it where your problem is and what do you expect now to achieve by doing this here. The original article and site was linked and stated as its common when news articles appear on sites and blogs, we also always use our own webspace for the images to not cause extra traffic to other websites from hotlinking. We could have just copied the half of it, would it make a difference? Its a short blog article, not a whole book, also if the authors would ask as us to remove it, we would immediately do so.

Quote

he isn't acknowledging them as owners of their article.

How do you jump to this conclusion?!? We never wrote its our article and linked their site as source from the beginning.

Also your last comment was 

Quote

From that logic, that must mean we're free to republish your whole blog's content anywhere on the web, since your site neither does have author's names under the articles, nor it does have imprint information with a real name and contact adress.

Well, our content gets copied and posted in our sites several times every week and we have no problem with it as long as we are cited as source (which isn't even the case very often but we just ignore it).

It's a shame that we have now to play in such sideshows when we have already to spend a lot of our spare time and money to provide Tamiya fans since almost 10 years freely! (no ads) interesting related content.

Regards

DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As already stated further above, the issue is that

"Tamiyablog has republished the whole article (not just some excerpt) without asking for permission from the original author".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our answer is above and detailed, but it seems you aren't interested in it, so further discussion doesn't make sense.

Regards,

DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could have easily written a blog post like

"Look guys what I just found, a cool article about the designer of our beloved Tamiya mascots. Here's a short excerpt and and one or two images as a preview to what you can expect to read there."

And it wouldn't have cost you an arm and a leg.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what if that site doesn't exist in few years like it happens so often especially for small sites and blogs? There is a reason we always try to keep interesting content copied to our own webspace which even costs us more, it would be much easier and cheaper for us to crosslink and/or just post link collections.

Regards,

DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When its gone, its gone, so what.
For archiving, there's the wayback machine on archive.org.

I don't appreciate that other news sites carelessly copy Tamiyablog's content, but that doesn't justify you to act the same way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GregM said:

When its gone, its gone, so what.

We don't see it this way and were often sad when some great Tamiya related content was lost forever and also want to be one consistent "database", not a mix of half not working content.

Quote

For archiving, there's the wayback machine on archive.org.

Which doesn't work always, especially on images etc.

Quote

I don't appreciate that other people carelessly copy Tamiyablog's content, but that doesn't justify you to act the same way.

For a last time, citing isn't careless copying.

Regards,
DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, how about you contacting Dave from Ceiling Gallery to ask him what he thinks? If he says to you "hey, its cool, I don't care", then everything should be sorted. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since its your point of view you are free to contact them (you can even link to this discussion here) and as said if we are asked from them we would remove the article, our experience of the last 10 years though is that almost all blogs are happy when their interesting articles are cited in other blogs. Sorry but that's enough for now, we do this as an unpaid hobby and have no 247 for it, hope you understand.

Regards,

DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is you who did morally questionable actions by going the simple copy & paste way. Which is not a socially accepted method.

This is your own chance to recover your weblog's reputation, by getting in contact with Dave and letting us know about the outcoming. If I were you, I'd just do it instead of discussing back and forth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the last time we won't do actions for something we don't think we did wrong in the first place, you are the one that finds it questionable, so as said feel to proceed, we have nothing to hide or to worry about. Interesting also that you talk about "morally questionable actions" when you start monologues about our Blog in third sites (like I asked in the first place to achieve what?), use fake email address in comments (to avoid a personal discussion??) and also make untrue statements like the one I posted in my first response.

Regards,

DJT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I've decided to lock this thread. As interesting as the original post was, its now strayed off into different territory that I'm not comfortable with. The only reason I've left all the 'not on topic' discussion here is because DJTheo's post suggest it could be used by 3rd parties who may or may not want to use it as reference if they wish. That discussion though should happen elsewhere and not here.

For what its worth, I've known all concerned in this discussion for many years, both sides, and they've always been good, honest, upstanding members of the vintage community so I'm confident nothing has been done with any malicious/underhand intent.

Chris

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.