-
-
I could be wrong......But I thought extracts for review purposes aren't liable to copyright?..Now I can accept one man's review is another's unfair criticism, but are we being told 'You can't reproduce any of the book here...But you can talk nicely about all the chapters but two' ?Comment
-
Using images to illustrate a broader point and creating a discussion about a topic other than what the images were originally intended for- in this case highlighting plagiarism, rather than talking about Barnett’s bio or the use of CCTV, is protected use and not a breach of copyright.
JMComment
-
Having said that, I support Howard’s decision to remove the images as he’s been threatened with legal action (a lifetime ban offense on Casebook, I might add. See David Orsam) as this is Howard’s house and I think the case of plagiarism has been sufficiently made. Whether that makes people dislike Ricky Cobb is Cobb’s problem and no one else’s.
JMComment
-
Rob,
I am inclined to agree with you, but an upfront admission of responsibility by Ricky and the mysterious "Keith Stride" would probably have been enough to satisfy most people and they'd have moved on, but "Keith Stride" has remained in the shadows and Ricky done nothing but his best to minimise the whole thing, threatened legal action to have the evidence removed, attempted to change the discussion to the book, and insinuated that those here are not grown-up or adults - presumably including me; I am not party to the behind-the-scenes discussions. Whether people dislike Ricky or not, and whether or not they have good reasons to dislike him, I think you have to agree that he's not done anything to help himself, or resolve the public aspect of this problem.Comment
-
How about that chapter by Mick Priestley on Albert Backert? Pretty good, eh?
Tracey Ianson's chapter on Jacob Levy is a veritable cornucopia of class genealogical research.Comment
-
I think we can all agree Ricky is his own worst enemy, but after reading some of the comments here and by certain people I wouldn't have personally have gotten involved if I was him. And the issue over plagiarism could have been taken privately by those who are affected. It doesn't need a crowd. As some people are aware I have my own issues regarding some of the photographs and illustrations and I am dealing with that privately. Speaking of photos. I suppose those are exempt as I think I could mention photographs being used in other peoples books which look suspiciously like they came from me. But I wouldn't want to make people feel uncomfortable.Comment
-
Since John Bennett & Rick Cobb have been in contact concerning the issue raised on this thread.....I'm moving the thread to Members Only.
People can still post if they care to......Comment
-
Hi Scott,
Yes, I also thought that Mick Priestley did a fine job with his chapter on Albert Bachert. Mick pointed out how Albert's home on Newnham Street was close to all the murder sites, with Buck's Row being the furthest away. It was also mentioned that Mitre Square was directly behind the house that Bachert grew up in. And he lived only eight doors away from Malvina Haynes.
Mick also pointed out that Bachert's home was directly between the murder sites of Stride and Eddowes.Comment
-
Andrew:
I don't take Ricky's bluster any more seriously than I would if someone more mature threatened The Forums. As Rob Clack said, he's his own worst enemy.
All that was required to ameliorate the situation was to take the attachments down. Since then, I haven't heard anything.
But I'll tell you this : The first time he posts anything I consider offensive to anyone other than himself, he'll be removed from the membership and this time there will be no coming back.
I try to offer people from within all of the various 'cliques' in this field the opportunity to promote their merchandise...he happens to be one of them.
Its up to him if he cares to do so here.Comment
Tweet
Comment