# Forum More Stuff Debate & Technical Discussion  Copyright

## Bros

> Firstly, Merry Christmas to All. 
> Personally as a sparky, I would be an idiot if I installed cable behind furring channel. 
> Regards,

  Firstly I would ask you to refrain from direct quoting from AS3000 as it is copyright.  
You can argue over that validity of copyright on AS but the fact remain it is copyright.   

> COPYRIGHT© Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand
> All rights are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or
> copied in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
> including photocopying, without the written permission of the publisher,
> unless permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Australia) or the
> Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand).]

  Secondly you quoted from an old version of AS3000 
And last but not least Merry Christmas to you.

----------


## fiox1

> Firstly I would ask you to refrain from direct quoting from AS3000 as it is copyright.  
> You can argue over that validity of copyright on AS but the fact remain it is copyright.   
> Secondly you quoted from an old version of AS3000 
> And last but not least Merry Christmas to you.

  Thanks, I have amended the above. Still essentially the same requirement though as there is not enough movement within the furring channel to ensure the cable can move out of  the way in the instance a screw hits it. 
Re copyright, no problem.   Regards,

----------


## Bloss

> Firstly I would ask you to refrain from direct quoting from AS3000 as it is copyright.  
> You can argue over that validity of copyright on AS but the fact remain it is copyright.   
> Secondly you quoted from an old version of AS3000 
> And last but not least Merry Christmas to you.

  Quoting from a copyrighted item is not a breach of copyright. "Fair Dealing" provisions of the Act would clearly cover the references and extracts used on this site - of course not the provision of an actual standard unless it is otherwise in the public domain. In determining what can be used the 10% rule is used, but that is not legislated, just a guidance as to what might be fair use in any litigation it is the quality and impact of the quoted material not the quantity that is evaluated. 
And I wouldn't run cables within furring channels, but commonly see them run behind channels between the walls and spacers especially in commercial construction.

----------


## Bros

> Quoting from a copyrighted item is not a breach of copyright. "Fair Dealing" provisions of the Act would clearly cover the references and extracts used on this site - of course not the provision of an actual standard unless it is otherwise in the public domain. In determining what can be used the 10% rule is used, but that is not legislated, just a guidance as to what might be fair use in any litigation it is the quality and impact of the quoted material not the quantity that is evaluated.

  I would not agree with that.  

> A fair dealing with a copyright work,sound recording, film or broadcast will not amount to an infringement of copyright if done for thefollowing purposes:
> • research or study
> • criticism or review
> • reporting of news
> • giving of professional advice by a lawyer or a patent or trade marks attorney, or
> • parody and satire.

  
And the 10% rule which also doesn't apply here.   

> There is no general exception that allows 10 per cent of a work to be reproduced without infringingcopyright. Where a part of a work is copied, the issue is whether a substantial part of that work has beenreproduced and an infringement has occurred. However, there is a reasonable portion or 10 per cent rulewhich applies in relation to fair dealing copying for the purposes of research or study. A reasonableportion of most categories of works may be copied for research or study

  Even if there is some doubt it would have to be contested in court so in the interim to me it is copyright as I am no lawyer.

----------


## chrisp

Oh the irony!!! Bros is quoting excerpts of material copyrighted by the Australian Copyright Council to make the case that quoting excerpts of copyrighted material is an infringement.

----------


## Bros

> Oh the irony!!! Bros is quoting excerpts of material copyrighted by the Australian Copyright Council to make the case that quoting excerpts of copyrighted material is an infringement.

  Complete rubbish as it is a document published by the Attorney General Department giving a brief explanation of the copyright act.

----------


## fiox1

> Firstly I would ask you to refrain from direct quoting from AS3000 as it is copyright.  
> You can argue over that validity of copyright on AS but the fact remain it is copyright.

  After watching some grown men/women discuss the rules of copyrights, I have come to a conclusion; I would rather be sure the meaning of the standard is not skewed because of my interpretation so as not to infringe on it's copyright. So if that means my quoting of the standard saves a life, prevents potential hazards, etc, then I will wear that happily.  
In my professional career, my roles involve the interpretation of a standard. On many occasions have I seen it incorrectly interpreted by test laboratories (mostly in China) and product certifiers. My approach is to eerie on the side of caution. Everything else comes in second place. 
Regards,

----------


## craka

If memory serves correct. It is not an infringement of copyright to use an excerpt if referenced appropriately.

----------


## chrisp

> Complete rubbish as it is a document published by the Attorney General Department giving a brief explanation of the copyright act.

  ... and it states that it is copyrighted at the end of the document.  It's not "complete rubbish".  You have quoted a copyrighted document while telling others that it is illegal to do so. 
It seems to me that you are somewhat precious when it comes to quoting or providing information on electrical matters.

----------


## PlatypusGardens

:Rofl5:  
Isn't this the same guy who complains that he can't record (copyrighted) shows and movies off TV and copy them to other devices and watch them anywhere anytime.....?   http://www.renovateforum.com/f192/ne...ml#post1038417     :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## Bros

> ... and it states that it is copyrighted at the end of the document.  It's not "complete rubbish".  You have quoted a copyrighted document while telling others that it is illegal to do so.

  Well why haven't you posted the section that says it is copyright?   

> It seems to me that you are somewhat precious when it comes to quoting or providing information on electrical matters.

  And I make no excuse for that.

----------


## Bros

> Isn't this the same guy who complains that he can't record (copyrighted) shows and movies off TV and copy them to other devices and watch them anywhere anytime.....?

  Yep but I was corrected.

----------


## Bros

> ... and it states that it is copyrighted at the end of the document.  It's not "complete rubbish".  You have quoted a copyrighted document while telling others that it is illegal to do so. 
> It seems to me that you are somewhat precious when it comes to quoting or providing information on electrical matters.

  Tell you what Crisp seeing you are so peed off with my moderation you should complain to the Admin (James) and have me replaced by yourself then you can do as you please.

----------


## Bloss

> Even if there is some doubt it would have to be contested in court so in the interim to me it is copyright as I am no lawyer.

  As it happens I am lawyer . . . amongst other qualifications. Fortunately unless one is using copyrighted material to on-sell or for consistent and regular commercial gain posters on this Forum are highly unlikely to have any legal threat or actual action taken against them. As always those who are concerned about such a low risk are easily able to mitigate it, those who are less concerned can take their chances. 
Of course the Forum moderators can impose whatever restrictions they feel they must - but best not to over think and over estimate risks. Even were a formal complaint were raised by a  copyright holder there are defined steps for a remedy that include simply taking down any claimed material - so the consequences for Forum owners even if copyrighted material were found on a Forum post are trivial. And since clear warnings have been given to posters then that itself is a defence - no-one expects copyright policing at the sort of low level implied by occasional use and quoting on this Forum. 
And thanks Bros (& others) for being Moderators - I wouldn't do it for quids and Forums can't work unless someone does!

----------


## chrisp

> Tell you what Crisp seeing you are so peed off with my moderation you should complain to the Admin (James) and have me replaced by yourself then you can do as you please.

  Hi Bros, 
I'm not peed off with your moderation.  I have just made an observation about your sensitivity of providing electrical information.  I don't think that I'm the only one judging by the recently closed threads and the new thread asking why it was closed. 
In general, I really don't see any problems at all with posting factual material to support answers on a forum - just as you have when quoting copyright guidelines.  Personally, I value the posts that provide quotes and links to support the poster's argument as it helps to seperate facts from opinions. 
I do appreciate that moderation is a somewhat thankless task and one that takes a great deal of time and quite a bit of judgement to keep the forum on track.  I do appreciate the considerable time that you and the other moderators and administrators have put in behind the scenes.

----------


## Bros

> Hi Bros, 
> I'm not peed off with your moderation.  I have just made an observation about your sensitivity of providing electrical information.  I don't think that I'm the only one judging by the recently closed threads and the new thread asking why it was closed.

  As an explanation the poster had been a member for 7 years and only posted 11 times. I get annoyed with posters who come in here just to extract information that suits them and disappear. You will find some of the long term posters get a bit more help but not ever to the extent of telling them which wire goes where. Genuine long term posters know to include a photo as the description in almost all cases doesn't match the picture just their version as they see it.  I notice this is also common on threads on other subjects. 
Random user name gave a link to information that is available on line, I don't have an issue with that as he never gave electrical advise so the reader can decide for themselves if they want to act on it or not but I wouldn't like to see passages of it copied to here so the reader thinks it is gospel just the link only.   

> In general, I really don't see any problems at all with posting factual material to support answers on a forum - just as you have when quoting copyright guidelines.  Personally, I value the posts that provide quotes and links to support the poster's argument as it helps to seperate facts from opinions. 
> I do appreciate that moderation is a somewhat thankless task and one that takes a great deal of time and quite a bit of judgement to keep the forum on track.  I do appreciate the considerable time that you and the other moderators and administrators have put in behind the scenes.

  As for copyright the first couple of pages of the AS state the copyright details. I find it lazy for people to just cut and paste rather then give their version of the standard. If it is wrong the other electricians on this forum will correct that. If you remember I had an on line discussion with another member who was obvious and electrician (you can pick them over time) about an interpretation of an passage in AS3000 this will always happen.

----------


## UseByDate

> Complete rubbish as it is a document published by the Attorney General Department giving a brief explanation of the copyright act.

  The governments of Australia (Federal, States and Territories) do hold the copyright of materials created or first published by them.
 If you go to   https://www.ag.gov.au/Search/Results.aspx?k=copyright
 and click on the first document. It states that The Commonwealth owns the copyright in all material produced by this department.  I.e The Attorney-General's Department.

----------


## Bros

> The governments of Australia (Federal, States and Territories) do hold the copyright of materials created or first published by them.
>  If you go to   https://www.ag.gov.au/Search/Results.aspx?k=copyright
>  and click on the first document. It states that “The Commonwealth owns the copyright in all material produced by this department.”  I.e The Attorney-General's Department.

    My copying was correct my mistake was not refering to Common creative attribution.

----------


## PlatypusGardens

> The anonymity the internet provides gives people such courage

  I've got nothing to hide.
Have posted plenty of pics of myself and anyone capable of using Google will find everything they need to know about me, including address and phone number.

----------


## UseByDate

> My copying was correct my mistake was not refering to Common creative attribution.

  Just being a bit pedantic: but the rules of the forum state that  “You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by the Forums.” They do not state that it ok to post copyrighted material so long as there is no infringement of that copyright.

----------


## r3nov8or

> Just being a bit pedantic: but the rules of the forum state that  “You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by the Forums.” They do not state that it ok to post copyrighted material so long as there is no infringement of that copyright.

  What if I take a photo of a copyrighted page and post it. I own the copyright to the photo...  :Smilie:

----------


## UseByDate

> What if I take a photo of a copyrighted page and post it. I own the copyright to the photo...

   :Doh:

----------


## Bros

> Just being a bit pedantic: but the rules of the forum state that  “You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by the Forums.” They do not state that it ok to post copyrighted material so long as there is no infringement of that copyright.

  On another forum I go to occasionally there was poster who took a very unique photo and it ended up appearing in a photographic company web site while not saying it was there's gave the reader the impression it was. So he sued and won the case but it was he never go any reward just an apology and removal from the web site.  
Any photos are owned by someone but on posting the photo you sign away that ownership. 
Copyright is always a bit hairy fairy look at he money the film companies have spent and continue to spend defending their rights, if it was clear cut it would be simple not involve court cases which they lost when taking on IInet.

----------


## PlatypusGardens

> It is normal for all threads no matter which forum to get off track

  
What happened to this one anyway.......oh yeh....something about copyright   :Rolleyes:

----------


## Bros

Well that's one way to get around copyright.  Green v Mundine: How two blokes outsmarted Foxtel and why it should get on board - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

----------


## Marc

Copyright is the right to copy ... so what happens if you own the photocopier? Do you own all the copies? 
Just asking  :Smilie:

----------

