New contracts

[Ricky]

This sounds quite promising.

If we could get a couple more tied down long term that would round off a great start to the season.


http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/foot...next-blades-star-to-sign-a-new-deal-1-8774051

Sheffield United: Who will be the next Blades star to sign a new deal?

Sheffield United aim to persuade more of Chris Wilder’s most influential performers to commit their long-term futures to the club after John Fleck became the latest player to sign a new contract at Bramall Lane...

Click link above to read more...

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Ones that are probably worth bolting an extra year onto their current deals: Wright and Duffy, whose deals expire in the summer. Whiteman is in the same boat, though I could see being offered a longer term deal in January.

I would imagine Coutts will get an extension to match expiry with Fleck, possibly Moore too – both deals currently expire summer 2019. Then there's Brooks of course, whose deal is also up that summer.

 

[stringer]

Ricky https://www.gov.uk/topic/intellectual-property/copyright

 

[Pedro's Winger]

More ruddy porker propaganda in the Star.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Ones that are probably worth bolting an extra year onto their current deals: Wright and Duffy, whose deals expire in the summer. Whiteman is in the same boat, though I could see being offered a longer term deal in January.

I would imagine Coutts will get an extension to match expiry with Fleck, possibly Moore too – both deals currently expire summer 2019. Then there's Brooks of course, whose deal is also up that summer.

I think it's also a case of rewarding key players with a pay rise to bring them more up to Championship level wages.
So add O'Connell to your list. Probable extension to 2021.

 

[BushBlade]

Ricky https://www.gov.uk/topic/intellectual-property/copyright

Oh dear. Just when I had some sympathy with the way some people treat you on here.

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Ricky https://www.gov.uk/topic/intellectual-property/copyright

Is it a breach of copyright if you provide a link as well as copying and pasting?

 

[jbblade]

Is it a breach of copyright if you provide a link as well as copying and pasting?

No. And it wasn't passed off as his own work either.

 

[stringer]

Is it a breach of copyright if you provide a link as well as copying and pasting?

Yes.

 

[stringer]

No. And it wasn't passed off as his own work either.

Doesn't have to be.

Oh dear. Just when I had some sympathy with the way some people treat you on here.

It means a lot, but I'd rather have a job over sympathy BB

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Yes.

I actually think you should have to clink on a link to read the original story as it's the fruit of other people's labour.
But I'm not convinced that copying and pasting while providing a live link, thereby accrediting the source, is necessarily unlawful.

 

[stringer]

I actually think you should have to clink on a link to read the original story as it's the fruit of other people's labour.
But I'm not convinced that copying and pasting while providing a live link, thereby accrediting the source, is necessarily unlawful.

I agree with your first point. The second's incorrect; by copying and pasting, it's denying income by using copyrighted material.

 

[jbblade]

Doesn't have to be.



It means a lot, but I'd rather have a job over sympathy BB

Ricky posted for the purpose of review, with sufficient acknowledgement. It is not a copyright breach. Besides, half the text is quotations.

 

[TarquinDelouche]

Ricky https://www.gov.uk/topic/intellectual-property/copyright

I suppose that being a dick is one way to get people to organise a boycott...

 

[itsinyerblood]

I actually think you should have to clink on a link to read the original story as it's the fruit of other people's labour.
But I'm not convinced that copying and pasting while providing a live link, thereby accrediting the source, is necessarily unlawful.

That's correct. There's no attempt to claim authorship, therefore any attempt to involve the law would be given short shrift by the courts. Quite rightly too.

 

[Trigger Blade]

Oh dear. Just when I had some sympathy with the way some people treat you on here.

I was about to say the same thing. Danny04 , you can't claim to be here as a fan, distancing yourself from your day job (which you're entitled to do and I am sympathetic to that, you've taken unfair criticism in the past) and then do a complete volte face on a subject like this.

 

[siblade]

Ricky posted for the purpose of review, with sufficient acknowledgement. It is not a copyright breach. Besides, half the text is quotations.

Don't know enough about it but isn't it covered by the exceptions section?

"Fair dealing for criticism, review or quotation is allowed for any type of copyright work. Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of reporting current events is allowed for any type of copyright work other than a photograph. In each of these cases, a sufficient acknowledgement will be required.

As stated, a photograph cannot be reproduced for the purpose of reporting current events. The intention of the law is to prevent newspapers or magazines reproducing photographs for reporting current events which have appeared in competitor’s publications."

 

[Pedro's Winger]

I agree with your first point. The second's incorrect; by copying and pasting, it's denying income by using copyrighted material.

Still think it might come under fair dealing as there is some comment added and the source is accredited.

 

[stringer]

I was about to say the same thing. Danny04 , you can't claim to be here as a fan, distancing yourself from your day job (which you're entitled to do and I am sympathetic to that, you'vyou've taken unfair criticism in the past) and then do a complete volte face on a subject like this.

Why's advising a poster of a copyright breach an about turn of anything? I'd say the same if it was copied from the Daily Mail. It's a problem people often don't think about.

Don't know enough about it but isn't it covered by the exceptions section?

"Fair dealing for criticism, review or quotation is allowed for any type of copyright work. Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of reporting current events is allowed for any type of copyright work other than a photograph. In each of these cases, a sufficient acknowledgement will be required.

As stated, a photograph cannot be reproduced for the purpose of reporting current events. The intention of the law is to prevent newspapers or magazines reproducing photographs for reporting current events which have appeared in competitor’s publications."

siblade, the fair dealing exemption is for people reviewing, say, a book and using a section of it for that purpose.

 

[stringer]

Still think it might come under fair dealing as there is some comment added and the source is accredited.

What part of copying and pasting someone else's work, denying the company who employs them the income from it, would be deemed 'fair'?

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Why's advising a poster of a copyright breach an about turn of anything? I'd say the same if it was copied from the Daily Mail. It's a problem people often don't think about.



siblade, the fair dealing exemption is for people reviewing, say, a book and using a section of it for that purpose.

Don't think that's right.
You will often see newspapers copy and paste stuff from other media but clearly credit where it's from.

 

[TarquinDelouche]

What part of copying and pasting someone else's work, denying the company who employs them the income from it, would be deemed 'fair'?

Criticism, review and reporting current events
Fair dealing for criticism, review or quotation is allowed for any type of copyright work. Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of reporting current events is allowed for any type of copyright work other than a photograph. In each of these cases, a sufficient acknowledgement will be required.

As stated, a photograph cannot be reproduced for the purpose of reporting current events. The intention of the law is to prevent newspapers or magazines reproducing photographs for reporting current events which have appeared in competitor’s publications.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

 

[stringer]

Don't think that's right.
You will often see newspapers copy and paste stuff from other media but clearly credit where it's from.

Yes, the media has a reporting the news exemption under Copyright Law. Anyone would think we're trained in this kind of stuff

 

[siblade]

Why's advising a poster of a copyright breach an about turn of anything? I'd say the same if it was copied from the Daily Mail. It's a problem people often don't think about.



siblade, the fair dealing exemption is for people reviewing, say, a book and using a section of it for that purpose.

That's the review bit surely, what about the 'quotation' bit?

 

[Pedro's Winger]

Yes, the media has a reporting the news exemption under Copyright Law. Anyone would think we're trained in this kind of stuff

Would be surprised if fair dealing only applied to the media and not entirely sure what constitutes media either in 2017.
Is this website not media?

 

[I should coco]

Anyone would think we're trained in this kind of stuff

I think most of on here would not think that of any Star journalists.

'Training', you say. When is that planned to start?

 

[stringer]

That's the review bit surely, what about the 'quotation' bit?

As I said, it allows you to maybe use a paragraph or two from a book if you're writing about it. The law's there to prevent anyone ripping off the entire thing.

 

[TarquinDelouche]

I think most of on here would not think that of any Star journalists.

'Training', you say. When is that planned to start?

I doubt many of us consider them “journalists” either.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

What part of copying and pasting someone else's work, denying the company who employs them the income from it, would be deemed 'fair'?

I would have thought any concern over the technicalities of copyright law would be compensated by the pleasure of seeing the content (credited via link) widely discussed.

Apparently not.

 

[stringer]

Criticism, review and reporting current events
Fair dealing for criticism, review or quotation is allowed for any type of copyright work. Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of reporting current events is allowed for any type of copyright work other than a photograph. In each of these cases, a sufficient acknowledgement will be required.

As stated, a photograph cannot be reproduced for the purpose of reporting current events. The intention of the law is to prevent newspapers or magazines reproducing photographs for reporting current events which have appeared in competitor’s publications.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright

'Details of the exceptions to copyright that allow limited use of copyright works without the permission of the copyright owner.'