The goal of Dieselpunks is to help the *punk community grow and prosper.
We do this in three ways. One, by making it easy to find the information that defines our movement. Two, by solidifying the community via forums and live events. And third, by promoting the artists we love.
Don't be a dick. If you're not sure about something while using Dieselpunks, refer to this rule before proceeding. The admins have been instructed to shoot first and ask questions later.
The Lingua Franca of this website is English, but the forums are open to all languages. The admins speak English, Russian, and French. If you're having an issue and need a translator, let us know.
Do not upload copyrighted material to Dieselpunks. This not only refers to music in your MyPage jukebox, but also covers videos and images. If you're not sure about something, discretion is the better part of valor. The penalty for hosting copyrighted material can equal the termination of this website, so please be careful.
Dieselpunks does not support racism or prejudice in any form. If a piece of media is added to the site concerning Nazis or other related organizations, it is for historical purposes only. See Rule #1 for details.
If you don't know something, then ask. Be bold! Ask a stupid question once in a while. We all need to start somewhere.
Articles are for use by Dieselpunks' administrators and lieutenants. Any articles written by members will need to be approved before going live, so it's always best to post your updates in the forums instead of the articles section.
I have published two articles on this wonderful forum and was wondering if I could copy them for my own storytelling blog? I would rather ask first. I am used to selling technical articles and when I do, I relinquish the rights.
Thank everyone for providing a soapbox that keeps creative juices flowing.
You wrote it. Your name stays on it. You own it. Them's the rules.
No shackles here, paper or otherwise.
Is it possible to make "editing" of an approved article not to require second approval? I believe our community is rather well-behaving, and sometimes you do not notice simple mistakes...
I had an issue with an editor a few years ago.
He would write something, we would approve it, then he would go back and change it to whatever he wanted and none of us knew about the changes until people complained. The re-approval process puts a check-and-balance system on that kind of abuse to keep it from happening again.
Okay, understood. Anyway, it leads to higher level of self-discipline:)
I have a question on uploading artwork...
I happen to have in my possession a wonderful piece of cover art by Hannes Bok which really probably belongs in the existing collection of Hannes Bok art covers already posted on the web site. Is this work copyrighted? Surely it once was, but given that the book was published in 1946, I am nearly certain that any copyrights have long since expired.
So what is the policy on this sort of thing? Should I just upload and see if I get booted? Should I continue to hide this wonderful work from the rest of the world?
Go ahead and post it. We haven't heard any complaints from the Hannes Bok camp, but we'll be sure to comply with any requests they make.
Music is the big kicker. The MAFIAA is really strict and I can't stomach their "sue first and ask questions later" policies, so I stay on the safe side.
According to this Wikipedia article, US works are protected for life + 95 years (not including potential copyright extensions which might be in effect), but this also assumes that someone is going to actually spend the time and money to come after people who attempt to republish this material.
On the other hand, I probably have one of the very few copies of this book which remain on the planet, and there is kind of a funny story around how I came into possession of this book as well, so it would be a shame not to share this cover art and associated story. I guess I'll just post it and see what happens.
Rule #5 is my type of rule, so in the spirit of it here is a question or two.
Rule #3 seems in need of reworking in light of Google's win in the lawsuit against Viacom. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/dmca-protects-youtube/
I do think a strong policy on IP infringement is needed but as it is worded now, i was hesitant to upload from You tube initially.
Second question is Have you considered incorporating Creative commons licenses into the site? i was wondering if your software for the forums allows us the members to have signature blocks - if yes, then a member could incorporate into there signature block what CC license their posts fall under so others could disseminate it online. heres the link to creative commons http://creativecommons.org/
thanks for creating such a great place for all of us to meet at...
Rule #3 is still legitimate. You can embed content that is hosted by other sites, but you cannot upload copyrighted content to Dieselpunks' servers. At the end of the day, the guy caught holding the evidence is smacked a lot harder than the one caught looking at the evidence, and our punishment would include getting kicked off of the server that runs our architecture. It's a grey area, but we're not liable for making the content available if the content is coming from another source.
As for CC, our notice pretty much covers the best case scenario. Content provided by our users is automatically assumed to be the sole property of the original artist unless otherwise stated by the user. The likelihood of someone giving their work to the community is much less than someone wanting to make money from their idea. We are a bunch of dirty capitalists after all. For as much as it happens, having someone ask permission to repost another user's content is probably still the cleanest way to go about it, plus you make a new friend in the process.
I like rule number 1.. I like it a lot.