3 thoughts on “David Horowitz’ Terror Offensive Against Progressive Academics – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Your hypocrisy is astounding.

    Here, you say, “I must say that at least twice people have appropriated pictures of me from this blog and used them at other websites to heap abuse upon me for my political views. In both cases, the images were removed. But in one of those cases I had to retain a copyright attorney to threaten the blogger’s publisher with a Digital Millennium Copyright infringement. And this cost me money, time and aggravation.”

    Then, a few posts down, you violate copyright law by posting pictures from a Dr. Seuss book.

    You’re fine with invoking laws when they benefit you, but when they inconenience you, you have no problem blatantly breaking the law. This sounds a lot like a certain POTUS… You’re ridiculous relativism makes all liberals look bad, which is a shame.

  2. For three yrs, Josh has been ‘stalking’ this blog. But he’s a particular kind of stalker. Not a threatening stalker. Just an annoying one. He’s only interested in one thing as far as this blog is concerned. He wants to tell the world, & wag his finger at me for allegedly “stealing” images and featuring them here. He’s done it five or six times before and now returns like a broken record.

    Hypocrisy indeed. I’ve argued before that my posting of images is well within the terms of the Fair Use provision of the copyright statutes. First, I always credit the owner of the image to the extent that I can determine that. The Dr. Seuss image you refer to is in my post about Oh, The Places You’ll Go. I used the image from the Amazon site. Amazon uses the image to help sell the book. I displayed the image in order to give my readers a sense of the book so that they might consider buying it. Amazon’s purpose in displaying the image is very similar to mine.

    A Fair Use claim is enhanced if you change the image in some significant way (resizing is but one possible way to do this) so it is ‘transformed’ from its original form. I almost always resize images for the smaller display necessary for a blog format and I radically reduced the image size of the original at the Amazon site. Fair Use can be invoked if you are not damaging the commercial “value” of the work you are using which I certainly am not by displaying it here. Also, you must make no commercial use of the work which I am not. Uses of works for educational or research purposes are also permitted under Fair Use. The entire purpose of this blog and this post is to educate the public about the social, political and constitutional issues that are important to me. Again, I’m covered under Fair Use. Another pt. Josh neglects to mention is that I prominently say in my Terms of Use that any copyright holder who objects to my display of their work has only to let me know this & I will willingly remove the work. If Amazon or the Seuss estate doesn’t like my use I will take it down immediately. No fuss, no muss, no bother. Only Josh is bothered, poor fella.

    What surprises me is that Josh did not object to the image displaying in this post. Now that I’ve credited the photographer he probably will. But to anticipate his objection…fer chrissake, this is a picture of a book jacket! It’s not a work of art. If I owned the damn booklet I could take the picture myself & post it here w/o violating copyright. Unless, that is, David Horowitz wanted to come after me for violating his copyright of the booklet. But that’d be a laugh since he violated copyright first by using Beinin’s image on its cover.

    Finally, Josh Barkin does not get to determine whether or not I’m violating copyright laws. Whether a use is permitted under the Fair Use provision is a complicated and technical legal issue, which only a judge can decide. As far as I know, Josh isn’t a judge. So until he is, we’ll give his opinion the weight it deserves…

    What poor Josh neglects to mention is that with the image from Dr. Seuss I also featured a link to buy the book from Amazon. Anyone who does so will be actually supporting the Seuss estate and Amazon. So that post and this blog are actually sustaining the authors and musicians whose work I feature here. Copyright is meant to protect owners from misuse and commercial appropriation of their work, neither of which I’m guilty of here. In fact, I’m promoting sales of the book in question by displaying the image along with the link.

    I’m afraid, Josh, that you’re only making yourself look bad by being a simpering, pouting copyright stalker. And this is your & my final word on the subject. Post a reply here & it will be deleted and you will be banned for a period of time from posting comments at all.

  3. Richard – copyright is one of the legal mechanism employed to protect Israel’s reputation on Wikipedia. You can be prevented from the use of paraphrase (because that’s not what the “Reliable Source” has said) and you’ll not be able to quote, because it’s said to be “breach of copyright”. Meanwhile, revolting lies will be inserted from blogs. Trivial (and in many cases, really unpleasant) pro-Israel blogs will get a soothing article eg the article on Masada2000 (which is not currently actually hosted anywhere!) has more people saying they feel honoured to be on the SHIT list than it has people saying how disgusting and threatening it is. Needless to say, if you were lucky enough to have a Wikipedia page it would be full of personal smears against you. But I’m sure you know that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *