73 Magazine: All issues now online

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by WA5ZNU, Dec 18, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: abrind-2
ad: QSOToday-1
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
  1. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thanks for the calibration Jim. I imagine there are a few who feel that Atlas Shrugged is trash. I don't worship the book or the author, but I do feel it conveys a valuable viewpoint that was well-expressed. I also feel that one needs to have that sort of exposure.

    Jim,IMO, you need to let go of your jaded edge. it's just not ham friendly. I am sorry , but it does shut down my interest in engaging you in discussion.

    Expanding on my earlier point, copyrights are the right of the author(s). They may have many reasons to want to continue to hold onto them, but the bottom line is very, very, very few authors, who wish to make even a meager living from their works, allow copyright into the public domain in their lifetimes. I appreciate that 'sharing' in that way--placing in the pubic domain-- is the flavor of the month, but I have yet to see any argument that is pursuasive to do so. Please: don't try to re-hash them for 4 me.

    Wishing you luck in 2012,

    Chip W1YW
     
  2. K4YZ

    K4YZ Guest



    First of all, thanks to the folks who put in an obvioulsy tremendous effort to make the "73" archive available to all. Please take a bow! I for one had been looking for re-prints of 73 articles for projects, and now I have them.

    73 Magazine was one of the most interesting, well balanced magazines in terms of over-all interest to "Joe Average Amateur", especially for entry-level folks.

    What 73 magazine had way too much of, unfortunately, was Wayne Green.

    At one point in time early in his 'career', Green had something to say and it made some sense. But the more rediculous his rants became and people tired of his "It's All The League's Fault" rhetoric, the more vile and irresponsible his "editorials" became.

    In 1995, I sent Green three letters, two of which he responded to with profanity and suggestions of what I could do with my opinions and the dubious legitimacy of my parentage. And I am sure that I wasn't the only person that was subjected to similar barrages of profanity and threatening language. Therein lies the true character of the man.

    The cause of those rants, by the way, followed some of Green's promptings in his "Never Say Die" column for the Amateur community in general to rise up and abandon the League. I suggested that he use his pulpit to create some alternative organization for the Amateur community that offered even a portion of the services and opportunities the League did. Of course Green always was a loud-mouth charlatan whose only interest was making more money for Wayne Green, and he said that his only "duty" was to stir the pot, not to contribute to it. It was "someone else's responsibility" to create that new organization, Green stated. He was only responsible for the idea of creating one.

    Green was no more interested in the long term health or welfare of the Amateur Radio community than he was concerned about feminine hygiene products.

    That Green was never sued by the League for more than a few of his moronic, pre-pubescent-like rants was (and still is) to me, remarkable. He deserved it on more than one occassion. Green may have had some publishing saavy, but his mouth and relentless tilting at windmills was his undoing.

    I wrote to the League on one occassion about one of Green's blatantly deceitful and demeaning rants, and they (rightfully) said that the turmoil that a lawsuit against him would bring to the Amateur Radio community wasn't worth whatever compensation a civil judgement would bring. In retrospect, their decision to just sit back and thumb their noses at him was the right one to take. He was his own un-doing.

    73 died an untimely and unnecessary death and Wayne Green was its executioner.

    Steve, K4YZ
     
  3. K4YZ

    K4YZ Guest



    Chip, Old Boy, there's a 'jaded edge' there, OK, but it's not Mr. Miccolis'. Please avail yourself of the nearest mirror before making such rediculous assertions in the furture.

    And I dare say that your reticence in engaging Jim in any discussions is the do to the likelyhood that he's going to sweep the floor with you in the process. Others have tried, and just wound up looking idiotic. Keeping your self-agrandizing to yourself will, in all likelyhood, mitigate the bruises to your ego.


    Steve, K4YZ
     
  4. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Steve,

    If I was jaded then I wouldn't be here. If you'd like to be more descriptive, please drop me an email, or let's make a sked on 20M to discuss it if you'd like.

    Wishing you the best in 2012,

    73,
    Chip W1YW
     
  5. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I am sure we'd all like to publicly know who these folks are there Steve; why are they anonymous? Do you know who they are?

    Why are you condoning apparent piracy--there is no evidence that the downloadable aspect of 73 on archive. org is authorized?

    Making it available to read is fine, but distributing it without restriction, with request for 'donations'...how can that be construed as anything but theft? Enlighten me why its not.

    73,
    Chip W1YW
     
  6. W4PG

    W4PG Super Moderator Lifetime Member 279 Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    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
     
  7. W4PG

    W4PG Super Moderator Lifetime Member 279 Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    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
     
  8. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    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
     
  9. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    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
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2011
  10. W4PG

    W4PG Super Moderator Lifetime Member 279 Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    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
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: ProAudio-1