I try to help people here within the ethical boundaries inherent in a public forum. I assume that's your goal as well. How would your (non-)advice do that? Was there some way to read it other than "give up"?
Perhaps we define "help" differently. It is not my intent to help posters find a way to do what they want to do. It is my intent to provide information relevant to the subjects of their posts. I believe that to be helpful because it (hopefully) educates them about the applicable law (and, occasionally, about the practical realities of their situations). If the conclusion to be drawn from the information I provide is that there is no way in holy hell that they can do what they want to do, so be it.
In the case of this particular thread, you drew the conclusion that I was suggesting that the poster give up. I believe that's an unreasonable conclusion (if for no other reason than that I neither expicitly nor implicitly suggested any course of action).
I believe it is very helpful to understand, in a situation like this, that the legalities of the situation are beside the point because the decision is entirely within the discretion of someone (or several someones) whose discretion is not constrained by the law (do you honestly disagree that this is the case?). Recognizing this reality may help the poster frame her argument that the committee should exercise its discretion in her favor.
My goal here is not to recommend a course of action (except that I frequently will recommend that a poster consult with counsel), but to arm the posters with as much accurate information as possible so that they can make their own decisions.
Author
Topic: Copyright? (Read 4108 times)
