On Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 6:23:51 AM UTC-5, Karla wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:19:58 -0800 (PST), George Dance
> <george...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >On Jan 15, 5:16 pm, Karla <karl...@NEVERcomcast.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 11:16:11 -0800 (PST), George Dance
> >> <georgedanc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >> >AAPC recently witnessed the return of one of our own regulars,
> >> >~karlapoet~, of the ~poets~*, to complain once more about my quoting
> >> >from a poem without attribution two years ago, and to excuse herself
> >> >and her fellow ~poet~, ~cytherapoet~, for doing the same thing. In the
> >> >course of her screed, ~karlapoet~ mentioned Sarah Palin as an analogy..
> >> >("George, like Sarah Palin,
> >> >failed to apologize and adopted the role of the victim."). Indeed the
> >> >Palin story is an instructive analogy (though not in the way
> >> >~karlapoet~ thinks) -- so, while I skipped commenting on that for the
> >> >sake of brevity in my reply, I thought it deserved a longer
> >> >treatment.
> >>
> >> >Here's the story ~karlapoet~ is referring to:
> >>
> >> >A week ago, a lone gunman shot 20 people, including Rep. Gabrielle
> >> >Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, AZ, killing six. Immediately Democratic
> >> >Party supporters in the media began blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea
> >> >Party for having a hand in the assassination. Literally just minutes
> >> >after the first news story on the shooting, for example, Markos
> >> >Moulitsas ('kos' of the blog Daily Kos) sent out a tweet on the event
> >> >proclaiming: "Mission Accomplished, Sarah Palin."
> >>
> >> >kos linked to a map Palin had put on her facebook page the previous
> >> >March, 'targeting' 20 Democratic congressmen for election defeat in
> >> >the midterms, with crosshair symbols on their districts. Since
> >> >Giffords was one of the targets, the theory ran, the map was what
> >> >inspired the killer to shoot her. Within the hour Paul Krugman of the
> >> >NY Times had picked up the story, and the news that Palin had been
> >> >implicated in the assassination had gone viral.
> >>
> >> >It later came out that kos had also published a list of 'targeted'
> >> >Congressman in the 2010 election on his blog, and had written about
> >> >putting bullseyes on each of them. Giffords turned out to be one of
> >> >his targets as well.
> >>
> >> >It also came out that Palin's map had been previously attacked in
> >> >March: by Krugman, for instance; and by Democratic Congressional
> >> >Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Chris van Hollen, who warned that
> >> >someone might 'take it seriously'. It later came out that the DCCC
> >> >also had a map of 'targeted' Republican congressmen, with bullseyes on
> >> >their districts.
> >>
> >> >The story died when no evidence linking the killer to Palin, her map,
> >> >or indeed anyone in the Tea Party movement was found. (If he had ever
> >> >gone to a Tea Party meeting, then God help the movement!). Today the
> >> >same people who were libelling and slandering Palin as a murderer have
> >> >stopped, and are instead criticizing her for 'portraying herself as a
> >> >victim').
> >>
> >> >Meanwhile, kos and the DCCC received, and still receive, no criticism
> >> >from the same people for their target lists -- even though there's as
> >> >much chance that Giffords's shooter was inspired by kos's site as by
> >> >Palin's. Why? Because the Democrats are the good guys, of course,
> >> >while the Republicans, Palin, and the Tea Partiers are the new Nazis.
> >> >(Krugman, who is Jewish, has accused Palin and other Republicans of
> >> >being neo-Nazis, in code of course, in his column.)
> >>
> >> You assume wrongly. Arizona was a tragedy and I disagree with those who
> >> are linking political symbology (crosshairs).
> >
> >Did you not read what I wrote, did you not understand it, or are you
> >lying about it?
> >
> >I pointed out that you're doing the same as Moulitsas: just as he
> >libelled Palin as an accomplice to murder for doing the same thing he
> >and his chosen party were doing, you (and your fellow ~poets~) have
> >been libelling me (and possibly others) for doing the same thing you
> >and your fellow ~poets~ were doing both before and since.
> >
> >> You also can't seem to read. You resemble Sarah Palin because you get
> >> nutty
> >
> >IOW: Palin is 'nutty' because she objects to being called a murderer.
> >I'm 'nutty' because I object to being called a plagiarist. Right!
> >
> >> rather than do the obvious, cordial thing: apologize.
> >
> >"
> >Mar. 1,2009: "I'll commit to attributing any poetry I post
> >by anyone else, whether I think someone will recognize it or
> >not. I thought it was OK, as it's been done before and has
> >been treated as OK then. But I realize it's not as OK as I
> >
> >thought it was, and I will do my best to not do it again."
> >
> >https://groups.google.com/group/alt.arts.poetry.comments/ms
> >
> >g/7bb003bc76a94033
> >
> >March 1, 2009: "I posted a famous poem without crediting the author.
> >I'd seen it done before, and had been convinced that it wasn't
> >plagiarism. I still don't think it is, but I won't do it again."
> >https://groups.google.com/group/alt.arts.poetry.comments/msg/4ded20a8670f7193
> >
> >That wasn't the apology that was written for me to post (which was a
> >confession of intent to plagiarize), so I can understand why you
> >wouldn't want to count it.
> >
> >> Your huge ego
> >> blows it all out of proportion
> >
> >Out of proportion? You know most magazines won't touch my work now.
> >They don't know the details and don't want to; they just want to avoid
> >lawsuits. I've been blacklisted, for your fun.
> Most magazines...how many? I have the 2010 Writer's Market. I bet there
> are a thousand magazines in there. Did *most* magazines communicate that to
> you in writing? Are you sure it isn't because your poetry isn't up to
> their standards or maybe didn't fit their magazine? How did *most*
> magazines blacklist you? And I don't think it's fun - the day you wrote
> "Hmmm ... What do you think of this?" and posted the Cohen poem, I got
> pissed and let you know it. As I wrote then, I thought you were playing the
> gotcha game and I didn't like the imagist thread being derailed.
> >> and the next thing you know, you're drawing
> >> lines in the sand with every single post made, advancing names for this
> >> group and that group.
> >
> >I came up with one name: I've withdrawn it and advanced another one.
> >
> >> never forgetting the past. In other words, playing
> >> the victim.
> >
> >Just how many times in the last month has my alleged theft been
> >mentioned on aapc? Twice a week looks about right. When was the last
> >time you mentioned it. Last night, right? When before that? October,
> >the last time you were posting here, right? Who isn't forgetting the
> >past here?
> Anytime lately I read this group again, you're drawing lines in the sand,
> lumping people together.

I see that you'd already adopted the paranoid "Them" vs "Us" mentality in 2011.

> >> Palin doesn't have a political strategy. She has a news
> >> strategy. Turn everything into how she's a victim.
> >
> >I'm not even a Republican. But when Palin's being libelled, she's a
> >victim. Similarly, ...
> >
> >> Similarly, you go
> >> here:
> >>
> >> >* (The ~poets~ are the clique I used to refer to as the SP, originally
> >> >the Shit People. Some of them have complained about the name, so I've
> >> >given them a new one. All else about them is the same.)
> >> >
> >> >Which brings us to the point of the analogy. ~karlapoet~ believes that
> >> >she, and her online friends like ~cytherapoet~, can quote others'
> >> >poetry without attribution because -- well, really, because they're
> >> >the ~poets~.
> >>
> >> As I asked above, can you read? Nowhere did I say this person could do it,
> >> that person cannot.
> >
> >Well, maybe that part was unclear. I meant, you don't give any reasons
> >why you and the other ~poets~ can get away with it. Take your defense
> >of ~cytherapoet~ last night, which was just the same counterattack
> >she'd already used: To paraphrase, "It's not plagiarism, because --
> >you're stupid! You don't know what Yeats wrote! But we do, because
> >we're the ~poets~, so it's OK for us!"
> Is that how you deal with what you don't understand? You make up a mystical
> kingdom of people? And I did and still do think you'd recognize the Yeats..
> I don't think Dockery or maybe z would but their trip is music.
> BTW, did Denby plagiarize Arnold?
> >> You incorrectly summarize what I said. Why?
> >
> >As I said, maybe it was unclear. You defend yourself and the other
> >~poets~ and condemn anyone else for doing the same thing; but you
> >don't give any sensible reasons. All one has to go on is the fact that
> >you consider it acceptable, and defend it, iff a ~poet~ does it.
> You made that up. The record supports none of your fantasy.

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 1:56:47 AM UTC-4, fake Jordy C forged:
> On Saturday, January 22, 2011 at 8:45:53 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > Karla says:
> > >Will Dockery wrote:
> > > >On Jan 22, 6:33 pm, Cythera <cyth...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Jan 22, 2:58 pm, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > >>> On Jan 22, 3:23 pm, George Dance <georgedanc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> > > "libelling some of them as plagiarists
> > >
> > > >> > We already went over that when W.B Yeats,
> > >
> > > >> Rob went over this
> > >
> > > >That's nice, but Rob is hardly more of an authority on copyright than
> > > >you or me, Cythera.
> > >
> > > >Stuart Leichter is the only "expert" I know of currently posting here,
> > > >although Karla Rogers is obviously well-read on the subject, having
> > > >sued a man for plagiarism and won.
> > >
> > > Why are you lying about this?
> > Play nice, Karla.
> > I'm not lying, but I can prove that /you/ are a liar, or have lied in
> > the past. Do you really want to play this game again?
> > > I didn't sue him for plagiarism.
> > I used the wrong term writing from memory, but the fact that he took
> > your entire poem and tried to pass it off as his own (& you being an
> > obscure poet, unlike Yeats, Cohen or Dickenson), to me, that looks
> > like plagiarism (but perhaps transformative, slightly).
> > Which is why I stated from the start that I was leaving the responses
> > mainly to Stuart Leichter (the only expert here) and you, who, though
> > not any more of an expert than I, have at least lived through a very
> > similar situation... so, I retract & edit, now, with apologies (though
> > I expect one from you for lyingly calling me a liar):
> > > And, I'm tending to let those who are experts on the subject, such as
> > > Stuart Leitcher, or those who are very well-read on the subject, such
> > > as Karla Rogers (who sued a man for Copyright Infringement & won the prize!), offer their learned opinions and attempt to take it
> > > from that point of departure.
> > >
> > > > >> "libelling some of them as plagiarists
> > >
> > > > > We already went over that when W.B Yeats, Emily Dickinson & others were
> > > > > quoted here without attribution and it was judged by the majority as
> > > > > "okay" because they're "famous".
> > >
> > > > > The problems I've had with those not giving credit where due has mostly
> > > > > been with the more obscure poets which the casual reader woulod have
> > > > > little-to-no chance of recognising when their work is borrowed for
> > > > > another poem, Alacrity Stone, Robert Morpheal, and so on.
> > >
> > > > So Will can you honestly (I know honesty is a quantum leap for you) say
> > > > that you have never plagiarized the works of others?
> > >
> > > Depends on what the judge considers "plagiarism", and that seems to
> > > very from case to case, entire poems can be borrowed and used legally
> > > if the use is judged as "Transformative":
> > >
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.arts.poetry.comments/msg/fa16bff48...
> > >
> > > Or
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/5swvfr6
> > >
> > > > > > If my poems began with his, I have made efforts to indicate that, but
> > > > > > mine are different from his. Please see the quote above and the
> > > > > > Wikipedia article on transformativeness, which begins,
> > > > > > Transformativeness is a concept used in United States
> > > > > > copyright law to describe a characteristic of some derivative
> > > > > > works that makes them transcend or place in a new light the
> > > > > > underlying works on which they are based.
> > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformativeness
> > > > > Yes, that's a very interesting law... I might even try my hand at some
> > > > > of "transformation" myself, someday.
> > > > It's an article, not a law.
> > >
> > > I know.
> > >
> > > By coincidence, I've been reading a book I was given for X-Mas and
> > > came across some law that used transformativeness. In sort of a hurry
> > > right now so I'll go into more detail later, but the law part is:
> > >
> > > "In the landmark case of Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994)
> > > the court ruled that the key factor in determining fair use is
> > > 'whether and to what extent [the new work] is 'transformative,'
> > > altering the original with new expression, meaning, or message."
> > >
> > > The article's illustrative example seems
> > >
> > > > pointless with regard to the fair use doctrine since the original Da
> > > > Vinci has no copyright protection. The court ruled that the parody of
> > > > the Orbison song wasn't an infringement b/c the parody pointed up the
> > > > banality of the original in much the same way (you would say 'in the
> > > > exact same way') that Mikey C[r]ook used your dreadful Karma Bombs
> > > > dreck. In several other so-called transformative defenses as fair use,
> > > > the courts denied the protection and ruled in favor of the copyright
> > > > holder. Your pal Tom Bishop may have transformed Karla's 'April', but he
> > > > lost his fair-use argument to that effect. George's transformative use
> > > > of the Jew Leonard Cohen's poem as an entry in a Usenet competition may
> > > > have succeeded as a parody of the shit people's elitist ignorance of
> > > > most things had Colin not derailed the process before all the shit
> > > > people could boo and hiss at the entry mistakenly as George's original
> > > > 'poem', which he clearly, obviously, and with jealous malice intended
> > > > when he posted the Jew Cohen's lines as though they were his (George's)
> > > > own.
> > >
> > > That "fair use" can also be in the form of parody:
> > >
> > > http://www.photography-forums.com/re-usenet-photo-galleries-t166123.html
> > >
> > > > > The Supreme Court of the United States said that in Leibovitz v. Paramount
> > >
> > > > the plaintiff argued...
> > > > ------
> > > > ... principally on the ground that the defendant's use was commercial and
> > > > therefore should receive little protection under the fair use defense.
> > > While
> > > > we agree that the commercial nature of Paramount's advertisement weighs
> > > > against it in the fair use balance, we nonetheless conclude that this
> > > advertisement
> > > > qualifies as a parody entitled to the fair use defense under the analysis
> > > set forth
> > > > by the Supreme Court in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. , 510 U.S. 569
> > > (1994).
> > > > ----------
> > >
> > > http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...977063&exact=1
> > >
> > > Fascinating and incredibly complicated subject, which I've learned to
> > > keep as open a mind as possible when it comes to make the judgemnet as
> > > to what is "plagiarism" and what is simply "unattributed borrowing" or
> > > what has become Transformative.
> > >> re matt's claim that Dennis plagiarized Donne:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.arts.poetry.comments/msg/b7be7a742...
> > > >> Message-ID: <RjeZ+YBxdQSJF...@sky.com>
> > >
> > > >> "Plagiarism is the deliberate intention to claim credit for someone
> > > >> else's work.
> > >
> > > >> "No intent here since most aspiring to a poetry group would recognise Donne."

Or one of Nancy Gene's favorites, "John Dunne."

> > > >And the same can be said about Leonard Cohen, by far one of the most
> > > >well known poets of modern times.
> > --
> > "A little known story of when my father & mother met, it was at a BBQ
> > shack outside La Grange, Georgia called Hansen's BBQ. True story." -
> > Will Dockery on Sean Rox Trio & BBQ
> > http://en.wikipedia.o