On Tue, 20 Sep 2022 21:45:03 +0000, Donald Davenport
<cf1573c4abb35a02e7a2ed4c4088bd00@example.com> wrote:

>No, didn't receive anything.
>When I tried emailing you by using the drop down button it was sent to
> 7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com. That's not a valid address.
> I tried clicking on my name, I also got @example.com. That is not my email.
> Don't know how to move past this problem.
>Not going to post my email address publicly. Suggestions?

If one of you two has a web email that you seldom use
or use mainly for sketchy stuff - post it here ..
I have 3 email addys 1 with my ISP and 2 web-based
for stuff like this and spammy stuff.
John T.

Maybe post a WTB on Craigslist (or some other forum that allows email) for Mason & Sullivan 6150 plans. Let me know when it posted. I'll try searching for it. We should be able to contact each other then.

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/mason-and-sullivan-plans-search-449912-.htm

John,
How did you send this (I received an email apparently from John T that may be an guru of the group that didn't get posted to the board)? It looks like it came from a real email address with a reply-to field of rec.woodworking at Google groups dot com addressed to me via the board (something like <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com>" which obviously doesn't work). Also the reply-to doesn't seem to work very well but I'll give it a try here.
dave (just in case I'm idrathernot2010+homeownershub@gmail.com - let's see if this gets filtered)
BTW - the Reply-To field is bogus too - it bounced - I guess Google Groups is broken!

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/mason-and-sullivan-plans-search-449912-.htm

Obscuring is one thing but making them useless is quite another!

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/mason-and-sullivan-plans-search-449912-.htm

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 05:01:42 +0000, dave b
<7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> wrote:

>John,
>How did you send this
> (I received an email apparently from John T that may be an guru of the group
> that didn't get posted to the board)?
>It looks like it came from a real email address
>with a reply-to field of rec.woodworking at Google groups dot com
>addressed to me via the board (something like
><7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com>" which obviously doesn't work).
> Also the reply-to doesn't seem to work very well but I'll give it a try here.
>dave (just in case I'm idrathernot2010+homeownershub@gmail.com - let's see if this gets filtered)
>BTW - the Reply-To field is bogus too - it bounced - I guess Google Groups is broken!
>

I didn't send any emails. I suspect that google groups and/or
homeowners hub is cludging things.
John T.

dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?

Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>
>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.

c/leaches/steals
copyrights are copyrights

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 10:44:42 AM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
> >dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
> >>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
> >
> >Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
> c/leaches/steals
> copyrights are copyrights

While usenet content is technically copyrighted, I've always considered
that both the Fair Use and Implied License sections of the copyright act
apply.

"leaching" may not equate to "stealing" under the copyright act since (in most
cases) none of us are harmed when HOH - or any other website that reposts
usenet content - copies/presents said content.

(and by "harmed" I don't mean embarrassed/pissed off by having our nym/name
show up on that POS forum. In that respect we are most certainly harmed.)

If not for fair use/implied license, any of us that ever copied a link or set of
instructions or anything else from a usenet post would be guilty of copyright
infringement.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>
>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>
>c/leaches/steals
>copyrights are copyrights

Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 1:42:51 PM UTC-4, Markem618 wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
> >>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
> >>
> >>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
> >
> >c/leaches/steals
> >copyrights are copyrights
> Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
> put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
> do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.

By default, your own material *is* copyrighted. You don't void your copyright
by posting it, but you do (have to) allow it to be used by virtue of the Fair Use
and (possibly) the Implied License sections of the copyright act.

From one of many hits from a search of 'is everything I write copyrighted'

<https://www.writersdigest.com/whats-new/6-questions-writers-ask-about-copyright-and-the-law>

"Do I need to register my work with the U.S. Copyright Office to hold a
copyright on the work?

No. Your work is copyrighted the moment it hits a tangible medium—
everything from your scribbles on a piece of paper to your musings on
your Internet blog are protected. "

and then from:

<https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-rule-copyright-material-30100.html>

"Under the "fair use" defense, another author may make limited use of the
original author's work without asking permission. Pursuant to 17 U.S.
Code § 107, certain uses of copyrighted material "for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies
for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of
copyright." "

I give up. Try braun.david.a@gmail.com - I haven't used this since I was looking for a job (retired now) so it's been a few years. I'll watch for you.

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/mason-and-sullivan-plans-search-449912-.htm

Dave, I don't know what else I can do without your email address. I can't get them to you if we can't communicate. Let me know if you figure out a way to email me.

--
For full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodworking/mason-and-sullivan-plans-search-449912-.htm

On 9/21/2022 4:45 PM, Donald Davenport wrote:
> Dave, I don't know what else I can do without your email address. I
> can't get them to you if we can't communicate. Let me know if you figure
> out a way to email me.
>
Fine woodworking takes skill but it's not rocket science.
Is it feasible to get photos of the desired clock and reverse
engineer plans?

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 08:38:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 10:44:42 AM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>> >dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>> >>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>> >
>> >Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>> c/leaches/steals
>> copyrights are copyrights
>
>While usenet content is technically copyrighted, I've always considered
>that both the Fair Use and Implied License sections of the copyright act
>apply.
>
>"leaching" may not equate to "stealing" under the copyright act since (in most
>cases) none of us are harmed when HOH - or any other website that reposts
>usenet content - copies/presents said content.

The fact is that it IS copyrighted.

>(and by "harmed" I don't mean embarrassed/pissed off by having our nym/name
>show up on that POS forum. In that respect we are most certainly harmed.)

>If not for fair use/implied license, any of us that ever copied a link or set of
>instructions or anything else from a usenet post would be guilty of copyright
>infringement.

No, there is no "fair use". You can't copy something in it's entirety
and claim "fair use".

I didn't give permission to use my post, or my name.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:42:42 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>
>>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>
>>c/leaches/steals
>>copyrights are copyrights
>
>Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.

Wrong. Just by the fact of creating something, you have a copyright to
that work.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:34:30 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 1:42:51 PM UTC-4, Markem618 wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>> >>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>> >>
>> >>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>> >
>> >c/leaches/steals
>> >copyrights are copyrights
>> Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>> put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>> do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>
>By default, your own material *is* copyrighted. You don't void your copyright
>by posting it, but you do (have to) allow it to be used by virtue of the Fair Use
>and (possibly) the Implied License sections of the copyright act.

Implied license would include all nodes on the Usenet. I wouldn't
have posted it to the Usenet if I didn't expect it to be distributed
throughout the network.

Trivial pieces can be used under "fair use" and parody is allowed
under "fair use". Copying an entire work is not.
>
>From one of many hits from a search of 'is everything I write copyrighted'
>
><https://www.writersdigest.com/whats-new/6-questions-writers-ask-about-copyright-and-the-law>
>
>"Do I need to register my work with the U.S. Copyright Office to hold a
>copyright on the work?
>
>No. Your work is copyrighted the moment it hits a tangible medium—
>everything from your scribbles on a piece of paper to your musings on
>your Internet blog are protected. "
>
>and then from:
>
><https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-rule-copyright-material-30100.html>
>
>"Under the "fair use" defense, another author may make limited use of the
>original author's work without asking permission. Pursuant to 17 U.S.
>Code § 107, certain uses of copyrighted material "for purposes such as
>criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies
>for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of
>copyright." "

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:34:30 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <teama...@eznet.net> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 1:42:51 PM UTC-4, Markem618 wrote:
> >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
> >> >>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
> >> >>
> >> >>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
> >> >
> >> >c/leaches/steals
> >> >copyrights are copyrights
> >> Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
> >> put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
> >> do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
> >
> >By default, your own material *is* copyrighted. You don't void your copyright
> >by posting it, but you do (have to) allow it to be used by virtue of the Fair Use
> >and (possibly) the Implied License sections of the copyright act.
> Implied license would include all nodes on the Usenet. I wouldn't
> have posted it to the Usenet if I didn't expect it to be distributed
> throughout the network.
>
> Trivial pieces can be used under "fair use" and parody is allowed
> under "fair use". Copying an entire work is not.

So sue them if you are so sure that you have a case.

Bitching about it and calling them trolls every time you see the HOH tag
line isn't going to get them to stop stealing your precious words.

> >
> >From one of many hits from a search of 'is everything I write copyrighted'
> >
> ><https://www.writersdigest.com/whats-new/6-questions-writers-ask-about-copyright-and-the-law>
> >
> >"Do I need to register my work with the U.S. Copyright Office to hold a
> >copyright on the work?
> >
> >No. Your work is copyrighted the moment it hits a tangible medium—
> >everything from your scribbles on a piece of paper to your musings on
> >your Internet blog are protected. "
> >
> >and then from:
> >
> ><https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-rule-copyright-material-30100.html>
> >
> >"Under the "fair use" defense, another author may make limited use of the
> >original author's work without asking permission. Pursuant to 17 U.S.
> >Code § 107, certain uses of copyrighted material "for purposes such as
> >criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies
> >for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of
> >copyright." "

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 19:52:30 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:

>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 9:14:17 PM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:34:30 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <teama...@eznet.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 1:42:51 PM UTC-4, Markem618 wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>> >> >>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>> >> >
>> >> >c/leaches/steals
>> >> >copyrights are copyrights
>> >> Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>> >> put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>> >> do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>> >
>> >By default, your own material *is* copyrighted. You don't void your copyright
>> >by posting it, but you do (have to) allow it to be used by virtue of the Fair Use
>> >and (possibly) the Implied License sections of the copyright act.
>> Implied license would include all nodes on the Usenet. I wouldn't
>> have posted it to the Usenet if I didn't expect it to be distributed
>> throughout the network.
>>
>> Trivial pieces can be used under "fair use" and parody is allowed
>> under "fair use". Copying an entire work is not.
>
>So sue them if you are so sure that you have a case.
>
>Bitching about it and calling them trolls every time you see the HOH tag
>line isn't going to get them to stop stealing your precious words.
>
Only because they are.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:09:24 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 08:38:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
><teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 10:44:42 AM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>> >dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>>> >>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>> >
>>> >Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>> c/leaches/steals
>>> copyrights are copyrights
>>
>>While usenet content is technically copyrighted, I've always considered
>>that both the Fair Use and Implied License sections of the copyright act
>>apply.
>>
>>"leaching" may not equate to "stealing" under the copyright act since (in most
>>cases) none of us are harmed when HOH - or any other website that reposts
>>usenet content - copies/presents said content.
>
>The fact is that it IS copyrighted.
>
>>(and by "harmed" I don't mean embarrassed/pissed off by having our nym/name
>>show up on that POS forum. In that respect we are most certainly harmed.)
>
>>If not for fair use/implied license, any of us that ever copied a link or set of
>>instructions or anything else from a usenet post would be guilty of copyright
>>infringement.
>
>No, there is no "fair use". You can't copy something in it's entirety
>and claim "fair use".
>
>I didn't give permission to use my post, or my name.

Then do not post on usenet simple, one can fully copy your post of
yours in a reply and have no concern about you claiming copyright
infringment. If you could find a lawyer to take your case you would
being conned out of your money.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:10:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:42:42 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>>
>>>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>
>>>c/leaches/steals
>>>copyrights are copyrights
>>
>>Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>>put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>>do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>
>Wrong. Just by the fact of creating something, you have a copyright to
>that work.

Good luck on collecting any royalties.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:11:39 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:09:24 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 08:38:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>><teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 10:44:42 AM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>>>> >>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>> >
>>>> >Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>> c/leaches/steals
>>>> copyrights are copyrights
>>>
>>>While usenet content is technically copyrighted, I've always considered
>>>that both the Fair Use and Implied License sections of the copyright act
>>>apply.
>>>
>>>"leaching" may not equate to "stealing" under the copyright act since (in most
>>>cases) none of us are harmed when HOH - or any other website that reposts
>>>usenet content - copies/presents said content.
>>
>>The fact is that it IS copyrighted.
>>
>>>(and by "harmed" I don't mean embarrassed/pissed off by having our nym/name
>>>show up on that POS forum. In that respect we are most certainly harmed.)
>>
>>>If not for fair use/implied license, any of us that ever copied a link or set of
>>>instructions or anything else from a usenet post would be guilty of copyright
>>>infringement.
>>
>>No, there is no "fair use". You can't copy something in it's entirety
>>and claim "fair use".
>>
>>I didn't give permission to use my post, or my name.
>
>Then do not post on usenet simple, one can fully copy your post of
>yours in a reply and have no concern about you claiming copyright
>infringment. If you could find a lawyer to take your case you would
>being conned out of your money.

You're dead wrong. My copyright exists because I created something. It
is illegal to copy it without my permission. Just because I'm not
going to hire a lawyer doesn't change the facts one little bit.
Homemoaners club is still guilty of IP theft.

On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:13:57 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:10:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:42:42 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>>
>>>>c/leaches/steals
>>>>copyrights are copyrights
>>>
>>>Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>>>put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>>>do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>>
>>Wrong. Just by the fact of creating something, you have a copyright to
>>that work.
>
>Good luck on collecting any royalties.

Idiot.

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:11:05 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:11:39 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:09:24 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 08:38:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>><teamarrows@eznet.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 10:44:42 AM UTC-4, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >dave b <7871077cd2e560a7...@example.com> writes:
>>>>> >>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>>> >
>>>>> >Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>>> c/leaches/steals
>>>>> copyrights are copyrights
>>>>
>>>>While usenet content is technically copyrighted, I've always considered
>>>>that both the Fair Use and Implied License sections of the copyright act
>>>>apply.
>>>>
>>>>"leaching" may not equate to "stealing" under the copyright act since (in most
>>>>cases) none of us are harmed when HOH - or any other website that reposts
>>>>usenet content - copies/presents said content.
>>>
>>>The fact is that it IS copyrighted.
>>>
>>>>(and by "harmed" I don't mean embarrassed/pissed off by having our nym/name
>>>>show up on that POS forum. In that respect we are most certainly harmed.)
>>>
>>>>If not for fair use/implied license, any of us that ever copied a link or set of
>>>>instructions or anything else from a usenet post would be guilty of copyright
>>>>infringement.
>>>
>>>No, there is no "fair use". You can't copy something in it's entirety
>>>and claim "fair use".
>>>
>>>I didn't give permission to use my post, or my name.
>>
>>Then do not post on usenet simple, one can fully copy your post of
>>yours in a reply and have no concern about you claiming copyright
>>infringment. If you could find a lawyer to take your case you would
>>being conned out of your money.
>
>You're dead wrong. My copyright exists because I created something. It
>is illegal to copy it without my permission. Just because I'm not
>going to hire a lawyer doesn't change the facts one little bit.
>Homemoaners club is still guilty of IP theft.

Incorrect, so by your reasoning Google groups is also guilty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:11:24 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:13:57 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:10:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:42:42 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>>>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>>>
>>>>>c/leaches/steals
>>>>>copyrights are copyrights
>>>>
>>>>Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>>>>put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>>>>do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>>>
>>>Wrong. Just by the fact of creating something, you have a copyright to
>>>that work.
>>
>>Good luck on collecting any royalties.
>
>Idiot.

Kettle.

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 11:08:07 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:11:24 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 23:13:57 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 21:10:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 12:42:42 -0500, Markem618 <markrm618@hotmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:44:37 -0400, krw@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:49:57 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>dave b <7871077cd2e560a74ec0d7664acfba49@example.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>Well it looks like the email poster thing doesn't work and I'm a bit reluctant to post anything like a email address or phone number since I've already been abused as being a troll. Anyone have a better suggestion?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Don't use the useless "home moaners hub" website, which just leaches off Usenet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>c/leaches/steals
>>>>>>copyrights are copyrights
>>>>>
>>>>>Unless you post your own copyrighted material to usenet, then you just
>>>>>put it in free use, voiding your own copyright. Posting something you
>>>>>do not own copyrights to does not void the copyrights of the owner.
>>>>
>>>>Wrong. Just by the fact of creating something, you have a copyright to
>>>>that work.
>>>
>>>Good luck on collecting any royalties.
>>
>>Idiot.
>
>Kettle.

Maybe I should explain it in terms even idiot can understand (probably
not).

Homemoaners *IS* violating copyright, therefore thieves. which is what
I claimed. I never claimed that I was going to sue them.

Got it now, dummy!