ANNOUNCEMENT News: the carnival is over

[Kimlo]

Could 3 or 4 of us post a section each

Haha, you're probably joking, but no. We can't allow it. Best we can do is summarise in our own words.

I will add that anything from NRL.com or Broncos.com.au should be fine to post. Not the full article, put the link in, and the first paragraph.

 

[tommy]

Any direct quotes should be fine right? I mean a quote is not plagiarism.

 

[Kimlo]

Any direct quotes should be fine right? I mean a quote is not plagiarism.

If it's from News LTD we're not quoting anything at all. We can put it here if it's a tweet, like this

 

[tommy]

If it's from News LTD we're not quoting anything at all. We can put it here if it's a tweet, like this

Quotes from players or coaches though?

 

[Kimlo]

Quotes from players or coaches though?

Not if it's from News LTD, no.

If the quote exists elsewhere, like NRL/Broncos website, or on Twitter, sure.

To be clear, it's not about what's right or wrong, or even what's legal. If they take legal action, BHQ gets shutdown, unless we do a Folau and get legal expenses covered with spare change for a few investment properties.

 

[I bleed Maroon]

More convinced than ever certain people like Badel, Dobbo and Lurker were fishing for leaks and stories and then reported the site for sharing paid articles. I guess we'll take that as a backhanded compliment News Ltd, you miserable c unts.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

More convinced than ever certain people like Badel, Dobbo and Lurker were fishing for leaks and stories and then reported the site for sharing paid articles. I guess we'll take that as a backhanded compliment News Ltd, you miserable c unts.

I know which one I’d put my money on as the whining little sook.

 

[FaithinHook]

Is this still Australia we live in, or North Korea? Feels like a form of censorship to me. You know, a suppression of speech and public communication/discussion, that kind of thing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame admin here for taking the stance you now have regarding non-publication of paywalled articles, as you seem to have little choice with threats of possible legal action being taken. I do worry however for BHQ though as during the off-season, it is primarily paywalled newspaper/website articles about club news/player signings/training updates etc that tends to generate a significant amount of discussion amongst the fans who congregate here.

The off-season just became that much longer, and a little more depressing because of this happening in my view. Will be a lot less activity and banter in here from now until gameday I suspect, unfortunately.

 

[Xzei]

To be fair 90%+ of what they write is garbage and we will be alot smarter for having not read it.(looking at you badel)

 

[Kimlo]

To be fair 90%+ of what they write is garbage and we will be alot smarter for having not read it.(looking at you badel)

They just rehash what we write on BHQ anyway. I can't think of any original stories they break unless you count local spies saying Gillett was in good spirits after retirement as original content.

 

[Sproj]

I reckon we should put in a disclaimer here that any ideas, fabricated or otherwise that appear here first before print are liable to result in legal action.

 

[ningnangnong]

I reckon we should put in a disclaimer here that any ideas, fabricated or otherwise that appear here first before print are liable to result in legal action.

A long time ago we were all putting disclaimers in our signatures about what our posts could be used for, as there was a media outlet lifting people's posts and using them as 'comment' in articles.

This was like mid-2000s from memory. Anyone else from back in the day remember that brief period?

 

[Dexter]

A long time ago we were all putting disclaimers in our signatures about what our posts could be used for, as there was a media outlet lifting people's posts and using them as 'comment' in articles.

This was like mid-2000s from memory. Anyone else from back in the day remember that brief period?

I didn't know that but I do remember reading stuff and saying how I'd said or read that exact comment on BHQ.


As far as the paywall stuff goes , surely if someone sells you something it should be yours to do what you want with it.

 

[Kimlo]

I didn't know that but I do remember reading stuff and saying how I'd said or read that exact comment on BHQ.


As far as the paywall stuff goes , surely if someone sells you something it should be yours to do what you want with it.

It's quite telling they don't go after Reddit or Twitter whose many users post up the paywalled articles every single day. They only go after the little guys who don't have the resources to defend themselves in court. Wankers.

 

[Kimlo]

A long time ago we were all putting disclaimers in our signatures about what our posts could be used for, as there was a media outlet lifting people's posts and using them as 'comment' in articles.

This was like mid-2000s from memory. Anyone else from back in the day remember that brief period?

I sure do, I swear it was something around the Henjak era, they were running articles kind of like they do today where they copy paste Twitter posts and call it news.

I may be mistaken but I swear @Alec was quoted in one of them. Hard to remember that far back for sure.

Couldn't for the life of me nail it down any further than that, would be fun to find those threads again [emoji23]

 

[McHunt]

It's quite telling they don't go after Reddit or Twitter whose many users post up the paywalled articles every single day. They only go after the little guys who don't have the resources to defend themselves in court. Wankers.

That's not true. Only a year ago, Reddit was a hive of stream sharing. You have to jump through way more hoops to find that community now: Discord, Notabug, etc.

We really can't complain about them asking us to cease and desist; it's their content. We can, however, contend that it might be in everyone's best interest to allow us some kind of access to Broncos news. That would have to be granted at a corporate level, not by asking them to turn a blind eye because someone else is getting away with it.

My opinion is the CM should drop the paywall for Broncos news as an experiment to see how it affects their subscriptions. It would certainly benefit the Broncos brand, which is owned by the same parent.

 

[Allo]

I didn't know that but I do remember reading stuff and saying how I'd said or read that exact comment on BHQ.


As far as the paywall stuff goes , surely if someone sells you something it should be yours to do what you want with it.

I’d assume they claim some sort IP infringement in terms of reproducing it elsewhere. Of course it’d have to be original (and intellectual) for that to be true.

As far as copyright goes, it’s not like we’re plagiarising and claiming it as our own/discrediting the author, as far as it being theirs anyway.

Not sure how loss of revenue/income plays a part in all that, as it’s the biggest part of it all. But I’m no lawyer

 

[McHunt]

I’d assume they claim some sort IP infringement in terms of reproducing it elsewhere. Of course it’d have to be original (and intellectual) for that to be true.

As far as copyright goes, it’s not like we’re plagiarising and claiming it as our own/discrediting the author, as far as it being theirs anyway.

Not sure how loss of revenue/income plays a part in all that, as it’s the biggest part of it all. But I’m no lawyer

The legal term in Australia is called "fair dealing." It does not apply to headlines, only copy. Suggest you read this:

Fair Dealing: What Can I Use Without Permission

www.copyright.org.au

There's also an "open licence," but that's not relevant to us. And we certainly don't want to get involved in the expense of challenging it:

Open licence for newspaper content - Copyright Agency

www.copyright.com.au