73 Magazine: All issues now online

I was reading the other night through an old 73 from either the late 60s or early 70s, can't remember, and it discussed the beginning of the "Institute for Ham Radio" (I think was the name). Complete was a list of the "founding" members, which numbered quite a few. Googling that organization today leads to info on one in India, which I don't believe is the same one Wayne started. So it seems it never got running, at least not that I can tell.

The rest of your comments seem right on. I never read 73 when it was being published, not really sure why. But, my reading now reveals someone who loved to rant and rave but was very short on answers. When he was ranting about the declining numbers of ops and saying he had all the answers, "if only the ARRL would call me!" - I immediately wondered, "well, why don't YOU give us the answers?"

I think I finally figured out the problem last night when he made some great comment about this "great" person, L. Ron Hubbard. Being from Clearwater, FL, that put things in perspective!!

..............Bob

 

Chip, have you seen this from their website? See their terms of use.

Looks like they have an address, phone number and email address. They also expressly solicit information on an issues of copyright infringement. I say give them a call if you wish.

.............Bob

 

Bob,

Wayne was a New York kid growing up in the pulp era, when John Campbell at ASTOUNDING published Hubbard's short story--and then started pushing scientology as a serious thing. Many of us now know where that went; I strongly disgaree with it but can't deny others access--when they are in a rational state of mind.

As a scientist I think scientology is extreme and not tenable based on facts. But as an american I won't be intolerant to those that pursue it.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

Bob, we are all avoiding the big issue, and no one here wants to let it out of the bag.

It comes down to DMCA vs SOPA.

DMCA makes it the copyright holder's problem to request removal. SOPA makes it the poster's problem to secure permission first. Essentially SOPA allows for the shutting down of a site UNTIL the website demonstrates prior permission from the copyright holder. Now, the burden is on the copyright holder to demonstrate that they are the holder first. Obviously many sites do nothing to secure copyright permission and basically use and distribute material until they are caught. Then they pull it.

SOPA is no different than what's been around for generations. When people made pirated cassettes of albums they were shut down first and then had to deal with the copyright issue second. So the precedent is there in copyright law and prosecution. its only been the astronomical abuses of the DCMA that are taking us back to that procedure.


In a few weeks we will see what form of SOPA becomes the law of the land. That is law that the people requested...so if those who disagree with it want it out, well, stop bitching and do something.

SOPA works fine for me, personally.

As I have said, I have successfully dealt with archive.org before. I know the process. But that info may be uselful to others.


73,
Chip W1YW

 

But Chip, the current law is DMCA. The Internet Archive must live by the current laws of the land, not what you or me or anyone else THINKS the law should be. As such, it appears they are neither trying to circumvent the current law NOR your right to challenge copyrighted material. They have provided all the means necessary for you or anyone else to challenge them. Since you have mentioned you have successfully challenged them before, I remain puzzled by this continued debate. Why do you not call them and stand up for your rights?

SOPA has some real problems, not the least of which it appears it would require an online group to contact EVERY author of EVERY article that appears in ANY issue of 73 to assess the copyright conditions prior to publishing that magazine on the web. That would seriously limit most any web sites ability to post just about anything that was ever written before. Taken to an extreme, how many of us have actually ever had unique thought later published? How could one ever prove that?

I agree SOPA does a better job of protecting YOU, but seriously impacts the ability of everyone else to simply read published material. The reasons against SOPA are numerous, and the reasons for it are few. Of course, it depends on which side of the game you're on.

Imagine if some other country decided that our celebrity magazines infringed on the privacy of individuals and thus demanded that all references to said magazine were removed from the internet, search engines, etc etc?? SOPA essentially allows our Justice Department to do exactly that, if they choose. Of course, the final form is unknown since SOPA is still in hearings, but GEEZ!!!

The DMCA ALREADY ALLOWS Copyright holders to seek damages from those who use their material illegally. The person who alleges the copyright simply has to start the process and do something about it. SOPA is for those who just don't want to have to worry about it and don't really care about internet access to published material - they just want to shut it all down. Period.

Not good.

...................Bob

 

Bob,

Thanks for your concern on my property. I am genuinely touched.

I do hope you understand that the respect for property is often tied on with a respect for privacy. In other words, why would I be under any obigation to state what has been done, or what is being done, or what will be done?

Also, how can you expect me to speak for other copyright holders? As I explained, I am only interested in my copyrights.

Are you aware that there may be arguments that waiting a few weeks for SOPA to pass may render copyright pursuits more effective in terms of quick resolve?

Are you also aware that it is vacation time, and that attorneys do, on occasion, take vacations?

73,
Chip W1YW

 

Bob,

That's a bit too deep in its generalization. How do you know that those who support SOPA ALL see it this way? Or that even one supporter of SOPA sees it this way?

I do support SOPA,although like many others, I am most interested in the final language used at passing. As for me, as a copyright holder, I am only interested in exercising control of distribution on said copyright works. Shutting down websites is an extreme measure which may be warranted in rare circumstances, IMO. An example: a website devoted to unauthorized streaming of first run movies.

73,
Chip W1YW

 

No argument from me there, Chip. I agree completely. And I think the issue of someone streaming first run movies is very clear. But, I'm not so sure of the issue of 73 magazine, which is the issue I'm most concerned about.

While it's clear (at least to me) streaming first run movies without authorization is a violation of the law, I'm not so sure what law(s) are broken by putting 73 online for download as was done by the Internet Archives group. Compare if it had been QST instead.

QST is still published, the copyright holder still asserts those rights and is making MONEY off the magazine. Indeed, one could argue that the profits from QST are significant in the day to day running of the corporation that owns QST. Without a doubt, had the Internet Archive attempted to put QST online for free download, they would have quickly heard from ARRL's lawyers.

But 73 seems different. It's not clear even who still owns the copyright, though we have to assume Wayne does. No one with a vested interest in 73 appears to have challenged the Archives and it's not even clear to me that anyone with a vested interest in publishing 73 even exists. As you know, the magazine is no longer published.

With QST, it's clear that someone's monetary interest is at stake . . . not so clear with 73. And as with most legal issues, unless someone's monetary interest is damaged, it's not worth making an issue over, for the most part. While I do understand your concerns over privacy issues, that doesn't rise to the level of monetary damages and thus, most lawyers wouldn't waste their time.

So I think I understand your concern over 73 being published for free and easy download, but I've yet to see how that concern morphs into any type of monetary damages to you specifically, or any other 73 author in general. So it seems to me that much of your concern is over personal issues and personal privacy rights that don't rise to the level of copyright infringement that causes monetary damages.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to discount your concerns. It's just what you might expect to receive from those concerns and what the law currently allows appear in stark contrast. That's not to say that might not change if SOPA is broadly enforced!

...............Bob

 

So we simply have two different views...nothing wrong with that!

73 and have a great New Year Bob; hope to work you on the bands during my few upcoming days off
Chip W1YW

 

Chip/Bob,
SOPA is just the result of politicians p***ing in the same pot as big business who want to turn the free internet into a version of cable TV which they can control.

The politicians just *HATE* the fact that we can find free and uncensored information which doesn't come via their official channels - often information which exposes their corruption and other wrong-doing. Big business of course just want to turn us into good, captive little consumers who feed their monopoly interests.

You can bet that every bit of SOPA that makes you think "yeah, that's reasonable" will be a Trojan Horse to hide many more unsavoury aspects whereby *YOUR* elected representatives will be paid to sign away *YOUR* freedoms (whilst spending your tax dollars).

What the internet has shown so far (and web 2.0 will push further) by way of unfortunate unintended consequence is that the old model which supported industrial patents and paper-published works no longer works. Central control of peer-to-peer infromation flow will work about as well as every command economy has worked (the last one is North Korea, right?). Any legislative controls will be pretty much immediately sidestepped by those developing technology to sidestep them - for one simple reason: that the people breaking the rules are brighter than the dullard legislators and lawyers who make them.

SOPA won't stop online piracy - but it'll be part of the death of a thousand cuts that will destroy the freedoms for which people went to live in your country back in the days when you were the Land of The Free. It's rather like throwing the baby out with the bath water, don't you think?

BTW the Digital Ecomony Act 2010 and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 brought just a little more of Orwell's 1984 to this country. The Coalition Government is considering more "privacy law" legislation to 'gag' publication of information that rich and powerful people don't want revealed - and this is in addition to the presence of 'super injunctions' that suppress free speech.

Dave G0OIL

 

wow, this debate still continues. Don't worry SOPA along with ICE domain seizures will put a stop to all this. And also allow tools to suppress websites with viewpoints that ruling class may find objectable like what is done in China. I find this whole thing despicable. Certain people are so wrap up about pirates that they don't realize the tools being implemented are same tools a dictatorship can use to suppress political opinions. SOPA allows corporations to blacklist websites without due process like what ICE does with domain seizures.

 

Yep. You've got it. I think that healthy countries need a revolution about every 200 years. You're overdue ..... and we're seriously overdue

But don't worry: something other than HTTP and "regular" websites will develop, something other then torrent filesharing will pop up, probably within weeks. And it'll take the dumb law makers about 10 years to catch up ..... before the cycle starts again.

Our politicians do of course love the Chinese model, but most of my acquaintances in China just get around those controls fairly easily.

 

OM,

I am just one guy, who lives off the luck of his talent and wits. I am no better or worse than anyone else; in fact I see myself as somewhat inadequate--I try harder. Much harder. But I can't even begin to impart to you what a challenge it has been to make a living from intellectual property. Basically it has taken me 40 years to be comfortable. I do not live off anyone; I support more than I want to admit. I don't know ANYONE who's had an easy time of it with copyrights, patents, trademarks, etc.. We are meek. We need protection. We came into the system with certain legal stipulations that gave an even playing field and chance to show who we are and make it worthwhile to others.

The present system just isn't working: the one that is DMCA based for copyrights.

Some information will never be free; other information must be. Most of us play the wide margin in the middle.

73 and HNY,
Chip W1YW

 

No, because the model is obsolete. It ceased to be relevant in the late 20th century as the world transformed into a very different place.

No, I don't know what will ultimately replace it, but watching the world in action it seems that the institutions of government and business who are trying to stem the tide feels a bit like watching King Canute. Just as the incumbent leading world economies will further decline this century (unless they change the game, which they show no sign of doing) and will be eclipsed be a new economic order (whatever that may be) the old model will prove itself no longer viable.

 

I don't support SOPA and will never will. Different Groups will use the SOPA to shut down forums like QRZ and other forums.

All it would take is for someone to post the first paragraph of an article from some Big News Corp, then makes some negative comments about the article. Just ask the FreeRepublic.com about lawsuits they have experience in the past, and that was under the current copyright laws.

Under current copyright laws you can paste a paragraph from an article to point something out, then comment on it. I wonder how limiting the SOPA will be. Remember it was Nancy who stated we can not know what is in the Heath Care bill until they pass it. What is hidden in the SOPA.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/272...012-things-know-controversial-legislation.htm

Hopefully I did not break a SOPA or copyright law linking to the article above.