Sciencemadness Discussion Board

ATN: Original post deleted by stoichiometric_steve because it made him look bad

DavidJR - 19-11-2018 at 09:05

This thread was started by stoichiometric_steve with the original title "Sodium Borohydride 0.50€/g (NaBH4) for sale (from Germany)". He has since deleted the post and apparently, with the way the forum software works, the rest of the thread remains unchanged. I do not have a copy of the original post.


My initial reply:
Limac.lv is quite a bit cheaper: https://www.limac.lv/catalog/params/category/92374/item/3795...

[Edited on 19-11-2018 by DavidJR]

Melgar - 19-11-2018 at 09:17

For anyone in the US, @Loptr has been selling it for a similar price. IIRC, packets of white powder mailed across oceans don't have a very good success rate, so better to order from someone in your own country/union.

Tsjerk - 19-11-2018 at 09:48

I ordered from stoichio before and wasn't disappointed. I'm definitely thinking about this one but I don't have spare cash until Friday, well I guess he won't be out of stock by then.

DavidJR - 19-11-2018 at 10:05

[file]71841[/file]
Sorry but pointing out better pricing elsewhere isn't "shitting all over your threads". If I was in the same situation I'd take the opportunity to reevaluate my pricing.

Capture.PNG - 10kB

DavidJR - 19-11-2018 at 11:53

[file]71847[/file]

Go right ahead, sue me. Good luck!

Of course it'd help if you were able to point to the exact bit of legislation which says I can't publish messages you send to me. But you can't, because it doesn't exist.

Screenshot 2018-11-19 at 19.43.54.png - 72kB

stoichiometric_steve - 19-11-2018 at 12:04

Private messages are copyrighted and privacy laws prohibit publication of such communication without consent. Just because you're too dumb to look it up doesn't make it nonexistent.

JJay - 19-11-2018 at 12:09

Now children, be nice.

(C) 2018 JJay. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution of this message carries a $5 penalty per view, payable to JJay.

DavidJR - 19-11-2018 at 12:12

Quote: Originally posted by stoichiometric_steve  
Private messages are copyrighted and privacy laws prohibit publication of such communication without consent. Just because you're too dumb to look it up doesn't make it nonexistent.


I'm quite familiar with both copyright laws and privacy/data protection laws in my country of residence - largely because I need to know a lot about these in order to be able to meet my legal and professional obligations in the course of my career. I work on a police information system, by the way.

You're right, private messages, like any other work, are automatically the intellectual property of their author. However, this alone does not prohibit me from publishing them.

I asked you to point to a specific bit of legislation and you've responded with a vague "privacy laws" answer. I will interpret this to mean that "you're too dumb to look it up". You are the one stating that I'm breaking the law, so you have the burden of justifying that statement.

Quote: Originally posted by JJay  
Now children, be nice.

(C) 2018 JJay. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution of this message carries a $5 penalty per view, payable to JJay.

sue me ;)

[Edited on 19-11-2018 by DavidJR]

stoichiometric_steve - 19-11-2018 at 12:15

Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  
He has since deleted the post

yup, so it will go to detritus :)

Actually, according to § 107 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988), you commit a criminal offence if, without the licence of the copyright owner, you communicate copyright work to the public in the course of a business, or otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner where you know or have reason to believe that, by doing so, you are infringing copyright in that work


JJay - 19-11-2018 at 12:18

Woohoo! I'm rich!

stoichiometric_steve - 19-11-2018 at 12:24

Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  

I'm quite familiar with both copyright laws and privacy/data protection laws in my country of residence - largely because I need to know a lot about these in order to be able to meet my legal and professional obligations in the course of my career


That's quite fortunate since thus you cannot claim being unaware of your infringement. Screenshot saved :)

TheIdeanator - 19-11-2018 at 12:31

You children need a better hobby than excessive litigation. Might I suggest chemistry?

DavidJR - 19-11-2018 at 12:32

Quote: Originally posted by stoichiometric_steve  

Actually, according to § 107 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988), you commit a criminal offence if, without the licence of the copyright owner, you communicate copyright work to the public in the course of a business, or otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner where you know or have reason to believe that, by doing so, you are infringing copyright in that work

Pulling a random sentence from the books without bothering to check the context is intellectually lazy at the very least.
You'll note that i did not publish your 'work' in the course of business nor have I prejudicially affected you within the meaning of the act.


Here's some more text:

A person (“P”) who infringes copyright in a work by communicating the work to the public commits an offence if P—
(a)knows or has reason to believe that P is infringing copyright in the work, and
(b)either—
(i)intends to make a gain for P or another person, or
(ii)knows or has reason to believe that communicating the work to the public will cause loss to the owner of the copyright, or will expose the owner of the copyright to a risk of loss.
(2B)For the purposes of subsection (2A)—
(a)“gain” and “loss”—
(i)extend only to gain or loss in money, and
(ii)include any such gain or loss whether temporary or permanent, and
(b)“loss” includes a loss by not getting what one might get.

Now, that doesn't apply, does it?

Quote: Originally posted by TheIdeanator  
You children need a better hobby than excessive litigation. Might I suggest chemistry?

But Miss, he started it!


Anyway, I'm 110% done with this thread and stoichiometric_steve's aggro. If you want to discuss further then go right ahead and sue me. Better not hold my breath...


[Edited on 19-11-2018 by DavidJR]

TheIdeanator - 19-11-2018 at 12:40

Quote: Originally posted by DavidJR  

But Miss, he started it!
[Edited on 19-11-2018 by DavidJR]


*Mister.

gdflp - 19-11-2018 at 12:46

Seeing as the original post was deleted, this thread is going nowhere productive. Detritus it is.