david h said in chatroom this name of board may be copyright violation

[clouds z]

so what would you rename it as?

[Curious]

talking brains? :o

[Friendofours]

so what would you rename it as?



http://forums.psychcentral.com/

[dahlek]

the cost of same is exhorbitant to any real reward. Don't worry.

[Parsi]

The similiarity did make me uneasy. So permission was not given?:confused:

[preciousmoments]

Unless he is in it to make money, What should it matter as long as people are getting support they need? this is where "I" have a problem with the admins at BT.

[Username]

If the name "BrainTalk" is copyrighted, then I believe there would be some legal implications. Does anyone know if it is for sure????? If not, then I would say (without any legal knowledge of copyright laws whatsoever) there's probably not much that can be done about it. It was known very shortly after this forum opened, that it was NOT the original and was at least initially created as a temporary spot. I do not believe it was named to create deception or tear down the original BrainTalk.

But then again, what do I know. Very little.

Linda

Here's my 2 cents, and it's adjusted for inflation, for a new name: (Tongue in cheek) Verbal Craniums

[dorry]

http://www.uvm.edu/~ashawley/images/animated/bartmoon.gif

[The Crystal Cave]

Hello, everyone,

Some thoughts, opinions, information and comments, offered for consideration.

A. David H doesn’t have the authority to give any kind of approval, tacit or otherwise. Tacit [unspoken, implied] approval isn’t worth a whit anyway.

B. This is a cookie-cutter, vBulletin Board format that is available to anybody. It wasn’t developed for BrainTalk, and it doesn’t belong to BrainTalk (or John Lester or the non-profit organization or a ghostly cyber entity – I add that because some gentle soul tore into me once for having dared to say John owned BT).

C. Copyright law is still evolving in the digital world. But it looks like the Creative Commons license that John put in place when BT split from MGH is running the show, anyway. If that is correct, content of BrainTalk (hasty pastry version) is there for the taking. Have a feast, no permission necessary. The Creative Commons notice sits beside the note "all rights reserved." In a court decision, I’d love to see which won out – Creative Commons or "all rights reserved." You can’t have both.

D. The name BrainTalk is not registered, it does not have a trademark, and it can’t be trademarked anyway. "Brain Talk" is used all over the Internet, the site run by John Lester wasn’t the first to use the name, and meeting the criteria to be granted the exclusive right to use the name is as likely as a cocker spaniel birthing kittens.

E. It also can’t be copyrighted. From the U.S. Copyright Office:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

1) "Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks." [emphasis is on "some," and there is an extraordinarily rigid set of qualifications to be met]

2)"Copyright law does not protect domain names. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a nonprofit organization that has assumed the responsibility for domain name system management, administers the assignation of domain names through accredited registers."

It would take incalculable amounts of time multiplied by the thousands to get an official ruling about any claim of infringement, never mind by a temporary site.

If someone decides to challenge the shelter that Dr. Grohol built for us, the rules of the cyber-road say the "offending party" is to be requested to stop. From that friendly request (which almost always works), if no results, it's on to certified letter, then, if it's really that important to your business, a talk with an attorney about whether there might be grounds for an infringement claim, another certified letter, this time from the attorney, then a second letter (all this at $125-$250 an hour), and so on.

I just can’t believe that there is even discussion about copyright infringement, and I am stunned by the vitriolic lectures elsewhere. Gee whiz, this is a GIFT for BT members who were cut off for 7 weeks. The BT name is helping members find it. If this becomes a permanent/alternate place that people can visit, the name will be changed, Dr. Grohol said. He's been creating sanctuaries and resources for people like us for a lot of years. If there's a fuss about what he created for us here, I'm figuring he can manage to sort it out just fine without my interpolation.

DocJohn, thank you for going to so much trouble for us, for wanting to help so many. I am blown away that you (anyone!) could care so much.

I hope we all have a better day with less pain, regardless of the kind of hurt that may be.

TCC

[Username]

Hello, everyone,

Some thoughts, opinions, information and comments, offered for consideration.

A. David H doesn’t have the authority to give any kind of approval, tacit or otherwise. Tacit [unspoken, implied] approval isn’t worth a whit anyway.

B. This is a cookie-cutter, vBulletin Board format that is available to anybody. It wasn’t developed for BrainTalk, and it doesn’t belong to BrainTalk (or John Lester or the non-profit organization or a ghostly cyber entity – I add that because some gentle soul tore into me once for having dared to say John owned BT).

C. Copyright law is still evolving in the digital world. But it looks like the Creative Commons license that John put in place when BT split from MGH is running the show, anyway. If that is correct, content of BrainTalk (hasty pastry version) is there for the taking. Have a feast, no permission necessary. The Creative Commons notice sits beside the note "all rights reserved." In a court decision, I’d love to see which won out – Creative Commons or "all rights reserved." You can’t have both.

D. The name BrainTalk is not registered, it does not have a trademark, and it can’t be trademarked anyway. "Brain Talk" is used all over the Internet, the site run by John Lester wasn’t the first to use the name, and meeting the criteria to be granted the exclusive right to use the name is as likely as a cocker spaniel birthing kittens.

E. It also can’t be copyrighted. From the U.S. Copyright Office:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

1) "Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks." [emphasis is on "some," and there is an extraordinarily rigid set of qualifications to be met]

2)"Copyright law does not protect domain names. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a nonprofit organization that has assumed the responsibility for domain name system management, administers the assignation of domain names through accredited registers."

It would take incalculable amounts of time multiplied by the thousands to get an official ruling about any claim of infringement, never mind by a temporary site.

If someone decides to challenge the shelter that Dr. Grohol built for us, the rules of the cyber-road say the "offending party" is to be requested to stop. From that friendly request (which almost always works), if no results, it's on to certified letter, then, if it's really that important to your business, a talk with an attorney about whether there might be grounds for an infringement claim, another certified letter, this time from the attorney, then a second letter (all this at $125-$250 an hour), and so on.

I just can’t believe that there is even discussion about copyright infringement, and I am stunned by the vitriolic lectures elsewhere. Gee whiz, this is a GIFT for BT members who were cut off for 7 weeks. The BT name is helping members find it. If this becomes a permanent/alternate place that people can visit, the name will be changed, Dr. Grohol said. He's been creating sanctuaries and resources for people like us for a lot of years. If there's a fuss about what he created for us here, I'm figuring he can manage to sort it out just fine without my interpolation.

DocJohn, thank you for going to so much trouble for us, for wanting to help so many. I am blown away that you (anyone!) could care so much.

I hope we all have a better day with less pain, regardless of the kind of hurt that may be.

TCC

There ya go! Sounds good to me. I was kind of thinking that JL didn't have the money to fight a legal case over this anyway.

Thanks for this post.

Linda

[Wittesea]

In the many years that I was a member of Braintalk I have seen several members who branch off and decide to open their own forums, and many of those people used the word 'braintalk' in the name of their new forum.

There is/was
braintalk rejects
braintalk shelter
braintalk refuge
braintalk backup
braintalk sucks
braintalk storm shelter
bitten by braintalk
fibro support for braintalk members
ban braintalk

etc..... I could go on and on because there were so many offshoots that used the braintalk name, but you get the point.

Some of these forums were set up as a way to keep in touch with friends during all the BT outages (when the server was even less reliable than it is now), some of them were set up by banned BT members who needed some way to keep in touch with friends, others were set up by people who just wanted to branch out and have a smaller forum than BT for support. All but one of them were set up on free forums (yahoo groups, proboards, etc...).

Most of them don't exist anymore, either due to lack of maintainance, lack of intrest, or because people shut them down when the BT server became more reliable (LOL).

My point is - people have been using the braintalk name on other forums for years and years and as far as I know, John has never gone after anyone for the use of the name, nor has he even asked people to refrain from using the name.

[Curious]

jl might not have himself. but many of the small boards did get threatened by someone who was given power.

these smaller board then closed part of their boards to private. so lurkers woouldn't report back if anyone posted anything about bt. words like braintalk even show up like ****** swear words.

[Curious]

btw...those boards don't have bt in their names either.

[KTM5665]

http://www.uvm.edu/~ashawley/images/animated/bartmoon.gif

ROFLMAO! Classic.:D

[JDPhD]

How about, "No talking aloud.":D

[unknown]

I think it is irrrelevant whether John Lester can actually sue.

The point is that calling something BT2 is misleading, especially since it looks exactly the same. There are millions of other words in the vocabulary and I think it is unethical to call the forum BT2 AND make it look the same.

This may be the "default" color, but I'm sure it wouldn't take much to change it a little.

It has also clearly confused some posters. At least one poster has said that they don't understand why their BT2 password doesn't work on the BT chatrooms.

Too bad that the big concern is whether JL can be sued instead of the ethics of the situation.

[unknown]

In the many years that I was a member of Braintalk I have seen several members who branch off and decide to open their own forums, and many of those people used the word 'braintalk' in the name of their new forum.

There is/was
braintalk rejects
braintalk shelter
braintalk refuge
braintalk backup
braintalk sucks
braintalk storm shelter
bitten by braintalk
fibro support for braintalk members
ban braintalk
...
My point is - people have been using the braintalk name on other forums for years and years and as far as I know, John has never gone after anyone for the use of the name, nor has he even asked people to refrain from using the name.

In my opinion the issue is that those forums did not look exactly like BT and the names clearly indicate that they are not the BT forum. That is not the case here.

Perhaps DocJohn could respond to this issue by telling us why he picked the name Braintalk 2?

[Wittesea]

In my opinion the issue is that those forums did not look exactly like BT and the names clearly indicate that they are not the BT forum. That is not the case here.

Perhaps DocJohn could respond to this issue by telling us why he picked the name Braintalk 2?

He has answered that question in another thread - he named it BT2 so that people (lost people looking for the original BrainTalk) could find it easily with a google search.

DocJohn has said several times that IF he keeps this place open after the original BT is back online that he would change the name.

As for the way this palce looks... it is the default "look" of the forum software, which is the most widely used software for hosting online forums. Thousands of forums look exactly like this one.

edited to add -- and in my opinion if the forum didn't look the way it does, or if the software was different, then so many people would either not participate or they would asked for it to be changed so that it was exactly like the original BT.

For the thousands of people who used braintalk for years, they got accustomed to the software and the way it looks, and I appreciate the fact that DocJohn went out of his way to use the software that we are familiar with (which is completely different to the software he uses at the PsychCentral forums he runs).

I appreciate the fact that DocJohn did everything in his power to make this "home away from home" as close to 'home' as it could possibly be (same software, same look).

[artist]

Well said, Wittesea.

Unknown, to save you the tedium of actually having to read the forums (fora?), if you click on DocJohn's name, you can then click on "previous posts" to see all his messages.

For background information as to how BT2 started, look here:
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2006/08/11/what-happened-to-the-braintalk-communities/

all the best

[dorry]

Artist the link didn't work, but here's the txt in his blog

BrainTalk2 Community Online
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on August 21st, 2006

We’ve gone ahead and created a temporary community for folks to hang out in for ex-Brain Talkers…….

Brain Talk Communities

Please feel free to use these temporary forums until the new ones are back online! And spread the word…..

[artist]

Thanks, Dorry, I just fixed it. :)

[unknown]

A simple disclaimer at the top stating that this is NOT Braintalk would end all the problems.

If that is too difficult, the first sticky could be titled THIS IS NOT BRAINTALK and the explanation of what is is could be in the text.

If the intent is not to deceive, then why not do this simple thing?