The Dime, Quarterly

[INDY510]

:fu:

Ratsun.net may or may not be around forever

Hey Okayfine: if you are going to start posting on the best forum ever... ...Please follow our rules:

 

 

NO Multiple Quotes.... please......it gets annoying

 

--------------

:fu:Welcome to ratsun Fuckers:fu:

[okayfine]

And after finding out that if I submit materials to Dime Quarterly and Dime Quarterly accepts them that I surrender all rights to my material to Dime Quarterly I will not be submitting to Dime Quarterly. The reason being If I put material out on web my sole intention is that it be freely shared and not taken hostage by some entity that feels that if they accept my material it is now their material. I call this BULL SHIT THEFT. If you want to purchase said material fine but to commandeer it is wrong.

 

Jesus christ! Get off your high horse, jackass. You don't want to contribute

to DQ, that's your choice. I don't care one lick, I didn't ask you specifically.

 

DQ doesn't "take hostage" anything - lest you construe what happened in the tach thread to be "taking hostage." Rest assured you'd be singing a different tune if/when you put your effort into something that was hijacked by someone else simply because they're too lazy to bother to subscribe and get the content in a fair manner.

 

As an aside, DQ's restrictions are actually pretty lax compared to actual magazines, so I hope you didn't have dreams of becoming published. Hell, even America's Funniest Home Videos keeps your tape - those BULL SHIT THIEVES!

 

Charles, I don't understand your need to be such a BMOC, but whatever. I'm sure you've got millions of words in articles strewn about the four winds, so keep the good work up:rolleyes:

[INDY510]

[okayfine]

Hey Okayfine: if you are going to start posting on the best forum ever...

 

Naw, Ratsun really isn't my bag.

[Skib]

 

..... its true :fu:

[Charlie69]

Julianne I joined Dime quarterly!:eek::lol::lol:

 

I will expect you to call me "Mr. Jackass."

 

Disclaimer: All the ideas, views, and thoughts that I post are my own and have nothing to do with Ratsun.net or other members of Ratsun, and since printed here are probably protected by copywright laws, but I give up all my rights and anyone that reads what I post is welcome to use it and hopefully make improvements as I do not do these posts for monetary gains, they are posted to help other people in general.

Edited October 8, 2009 by Charlie69

[Skib]

I will expect you to call me "Mr. Jackass."

 

I would shoot for "Dr." :D

[DISLEXICDIME]

All i can say is wow this forum realy is going to shit all the guy asked was for us not to copy his news letter . And now this thread seams to have turned in to a pissing mach .

I guess most of you on here either dont remember what it was like to try to find out about upgrades for your car before the internet or your to young. The dq has ben an asset to the 510 community for a long time . If it was not for some of the articles i would have pulled my hair out trying to figure some of the things out i read in the dq. And you cant continue the dq in less people pay for it.

i see where you are coming from okayfine.

[slam_dat_sun]

Naw, Ratsun really isn't my bag.

 

Well if Ratsun isn't your bag go somewhere else , whiners and assholes are not my bag so heres to you :thumbdown: you suck :eek: yeah I said it you suck . And as for Charlie , he is a personal friend of mine and I must say he is a stand out guy . Nor whiner or asshole so Charlie :thumbsup: and julian :poop:

[datzenmike]

Fuck it!

 

The DQ is primarily for the 510 although some articles would apply to others with the same motor/drive train. I would urge any 510 owner to subscribe if he hasn't already, or anyone else interested. This is a great way to support their worthwhile efforts. Anyone using the DQ material, information and photos should note this or provide a link to the site. Enough has been heard and said on this subject and it is now going downhill.

Edited October 8, 2009 by datzenmike

[fisch]

What's the difference between that and taking the Mona Lisa and adding in a mustache and some buildings in the background? Or taking one of your illustrations and making changes? He created original material, material that didn't exist previously, right?

 

There isn't a difference between the two. And if someone wanted to recreate a piece of mine and put a mustache on it, I would have no legal grounds, if, it was a one off piece of art. I believe it is covered under parody law.

 

But it would get stickier if they were trying to sell prints of my work and they only changes a tiny bit. Like a moustache. I believe there are certain percentages allowed for fair use on a piece. Similar to sampling in music. That's not to say it isn't a crappy thing to do, and it will reflect poorly on the artist if anything I did is recognizable in the final piece.

 

There is a difference between what is allowable under law and what is moral, and that is for individuals to judge. I was speaking more to my understanding of the legal aspects.

 

 

But, in the case of DQ articles, what would be the point? The article was already written and photographed, why rewrite and rephotograph the article? Just to be able to post it on Ratsun without causing a fuss? Seems counter to the point of DQ existing.

 

 

I guess that depends on how important the existence of DQ is to them. Or if they are even aware it is hurting them. And what is more important to them, sharing datsun knowledge, no matter where you dig it up, or preserving DQ?

I have no idea I am not them. But there is certainly room for both and your speaking up is a good way to inform them on how it might hurt DQ.

 

And I also think Ratsun has the same goals as DQ, to share Datsun knowledge for the love of the genre. They just don't charge for it. (I know DQ isn't a money machine greedy for dollars, really I do. I know you guys do what you do for the love of it, on your free time and I admire that. I think it is cool as hell.) But the internet has changed things. It is about the free flow of information. If someone were to call someone lazy cause they won't track down a back issue of a magazine to help them install a tach, when they can get the info quick and for free, seems a little silly to me.

 

I get a lot of hot rod magazines. Some going back decades. I can't tell you how many times I have read the same article on installing a dropped axle, or springs or spindles. But (almost) every time it is new words with new pictures doing the same thing. Should they just reference back to an issue from '89 instead of re presenting the info? Magazines and websites need content.

 

 

Ideas are hard things to copyright. Text, yes. Art, yes. Photos, yes. But ideas? Not so easy. Someone can illustrate the same idea I do, even look at mine as a starting of point, and in the end theirs may serve the same purpose as my illustration, but if they are creating original content, more power to them. Legally they don't even have to credit me. Not saying I would jump up and down to celebrate it, but almost nothing is original in art (idea wise). It has all been done before.

 

Really I am not trying to be argumentative here. And like I said at the beginning, I support your position about not scanning DQ articles for public consumption fully. But if someone wants to describe something they learned in DQ in their own words and pictures, they should be able to. Chances are they could have arrived at a lot of the same assumptions as the original author, and DQ might have just filled in a few pieces.

 

But it would be nice if they gave a nod to DQ if that is where they got a substantial amount of their info.

Edited October 8, 2009 by fisch

[fisch]

"All materials accepted become the sole property of The Dime, Quarterly, which reserves the right to reprint and/or republish any accepted materials."

 

You say this like it isn't a big deal to the creator. But the wording is a little vague to me. I believe Charlie was thinking of 'materials' as including the wording of the article, the content, not just the paper it was printed on and physical photos. I can see how it might be misunderstood. Perhaps change it to 'physical materials submitted' rather than just 'materials'.

 

In the case of the DQ, I am sure people are psyched just to get in the mag. But under your wording, you could actually print a book of articles, like the "how to build a hotrod" books that are out there, it 'could' become a best seller, and you wouldn't have to give the creator of that content a dime. Or am I misunderstanding something? Can you only republish in the original format it was created for? Meaning just reprinting that issue of DQ. Could you also sell that book to a big publisher, like Simon and Schuster, or whoever and have them publish it? These things may be far fetched, but they could happen.

 

If you wanted to be really fair, the wording would state that you could only reprint it as a reprinting of that particular issue. Though most contributors, if not professional writers, prolly won't care and will just want to get published no matter what the rights. Or maybe they are professionals, but just want to do it for the love of the genre. In the beginning of my science fiction career, I thought that way for sure.

 

And though other magazines may have tougher wording than DQ. For real articles, with photoshoots (not just letters to the editor) chances are they paid something to have the content in their magazine to begin with. That is why there are staff writers and freelance writers. I am not a magazine writer. But I have done illustrations for magazines, and have been paid. I have also done interviews with magazines and have not been paid, but that is promotion, and the interviewer did get paid.

 

And yes, I totally get that DQ doesn't have a budget to pay writers, I do! I am sure you wish you could. Honestly I get it, which is why when y'all asked to publish my Streetfighter 510 art on the cover of an issue (which didn't happen), all I asked for was a subscription to the mag for compensation.

 

Speaking of which, It was a while ago, but I believe all I asked for in compensation was a subscription to DQ and to know that is was a one time print rights only. So that no posters, book covers, etc would be made from the art. (For perspective, a magazine cover gig is $1500 to $3000 to an illustrator, the magazine only has first printing rights and the illustrator keeps the copyright.) But I think the ball was left is y'all's court and I never heard back? Still not sure why? It is no big deal to me, really! But I wondered if it had anything to do with the rights, or compensation I was asking? If so that might pertain to this topic.

 

Heck maybe y'all just changed your mind for some other reason, totally cool if so, happens all the time in publishing.

[Icehouse]

Juliann I feel you owe me a percentage of the DQ subscriptions for the last day or so for using MY forum to advertise your "news letter".

 

My paypal is Datsunlb110@hotmail.com